ATI Radeon 6000 seriers rumor to be released in october

[blackpanther26]

http://vr-zone.com/articles/-rumour...schedule-first-iteration-in-october/9688.html

Popular Turkish website Donanimhaber has released an expected schedule for the release of ATI's Radeon HD 6000 series. The first HD 6000 GPU to be released will be the Radeon HD 6700 series, codenamed Barts. The HD 6700 is scheduled for a release as early as October. As suggested by the nomenclature, the HD 6700 will directly replace the HD 5700 series.

The HD 6700 release will be followed up by Cayman in November, expected to be branded as the ATI Radeon HD 6800 series, replacing the current HD 5800 series.

The flagship will be Antilles, and branded as the ATI Radeon HD 6970. Antilles, as expected, will be a dual-GPU Cayman. While the HD 5970 lowers clock speeds from the HD 5870, HD 6970 is expected to feature the same clock speeds as the HD 6870 - basically a HD 6870 in CF. This will be much like the HD 4870 X2. The Radeon HD 6970 is scheduled for December.

 

[Mousemonkey]

I wonder, is it harder to tweak your drivers to games made for other HW, or to pay 2 million and claim better drivers?

I can't say that I've ever been in that position myself. :lol:

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Actually, I dont think nVidia has a hard time doing so.
I admire this if true, tho the game may be a bust, since a good portion of sales was more a comparison/challenge, than the real demand FOR the game itself.
Hope this isnt another Jenson dream

 

[ares1214]

This should be interesting as Nvidia, who is undisputably behind and getting farther back is paying this money to have the game optimized for it. If ATI continues to beat them, they might have to do this more often, and even then might not win. Crysis 2 also isnt even suppose to be as demanding as the original wasnt on xbox, and the 2nd one is, so even if it works better on nvidia, i doubt we will see it at unplayable frame rates on ATI.

 

[wh3resmycar]

i have a hunch (just a hunch), that engineering samples of these 6000s might be doing something incredible.

i mean why would the 460s go down in prices bringing it more closer to the 450s, when the demand is still high.

i wouldve gotten a 768mb 460 by now if it werent out of stock locally.

something's cooking and i think it's amd's "Boeuf Bourginone".

 

[mactronix]

I personally think these(welcome) price drops could be Nvidia making some room at the top for the full fat GF 104 chip based cards.
Where the 450 is said to be priced at the moment is too much for its performance (based on UK prices) so i can see that coming down as well. Also the 455 has to have somewhere to go unless that card is going to replace the 768 version of the 460 ?
To me dropping down the 460's now gives then room to move at the top end in reply to what ATI do with the launch of their cards.

Mactronix

 

[mactronix]

Where do you get that from? And i heard 10% between 6750 and 6770, so that might be the basic difference for all of them. And at Mac. If that is the 6700 series card, then im very much so assuming it will beat the 58xx series. If it looks like that, has a PCB that length, and everything else, that either looks like a 68xx card or that 67xx will beat 58xx. That does go along with ATI naming scheme, add 900 to previous generation for performance. 5870+900=6770 maybe? In any event, if it has the power, i dont mind the 2 6 pin connectors. Like i said, it will likely be at, around, or slightly above gtx 460 performance, unless they really hit this one out of the park, and therefore im not terribly surprised it needs 2. Im sure the 6750 wont need 2, and likely get somewhere around gtx 460 768mb version performance.

Beating the 58xx series is one hell of a performance jump though, considering we have been told not to expect much, that could have been to keep expectations in check though i guess.
I think its easy to get confused when trying to equate the numbers to what has come before, it seems to me that every time we go up a number the cards themselves move up a segment performance and pricewise as well.
Im not saying its not justified across the board, the 5850 for example came out at a very good price for its performance. When you get to the midrange however it seems like they are reluctant to pass on the same sort of price/performance value.
Its a bit annoying as well because they seem to be holding onto the idea that a card that can run at 1920x1080 is somehow special and deserves a price premium when in truth this level of performance is much more prevalent now thanks to the recent low cost of monitors.just seems to me that the bar needs moving now we have larger screen and multi monitors becoming the highend option.

Mactronix

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

The market and competition will determine this pricing.
The supply also has to be taken into consideration as well. How much is TSMC costs, partner costs, who are dropping like flies and switching allegencies to stay afloat, as in some cases, the MSRP from the red and the green side are exceeded

 

[mactronix]

The market and competition will determine this pricing.
The supply also has to be taken into consideration as well. How much is TSMC costs, partner costs, who are dropping like flies and switching allegencies to stay afloat, as in some cases, the MSRP from the red and the green side are exceeded

To a large extent JD yes, but also no. Its erroneous to suggest the market will decide prices when its down to the released MSRP or MRRP which ever you use, as to where the card starts.
Market forces are as you no doubt know a very slippery beast to try and pin down and explain as there is a myriad of things that can make a difference right from the company deciding for what ever reason to up or lower the price all the way to you or me flat refusing to pay X price for something. Cant remember the last time a price came down because of that off the top of my head though.
Supply, partners etc are all really none of my concern. And easily manipulated. If ATI or Nvidia didn't do the homework right and budgeted incorrectly for the product line then thats down to them.
At the end of the day as you suggest people will either buy the cards or not because thats the decision put to them, as much as the idea sounds sounds nice that the price would lower if X amount were not sold, the price they ask more or less is what consumers will end up paying. Its very mucha case of buy it ( In which case we will raise the price due to demand) or lump it.
I'm just saying that where the mid range is performance wise has changed but the companies have yet to follow and its about time they did.
Nvidia seem to have realised this with the 460, or its a one of like the 4770 was, time will tell i guess


Mactronix

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

I think part of this problem we see now is the pressure coming from the bottom up, or gpu on/in package, where we will soon see IGPs perf jump dramatically.
This is obviously going to put pressure on the next higher discrete solution, just for the sake of legitimacy.
Now, speculating here, knowing this, both nVidia and ATI may be priming the markets for this change, and as yet, havnt set their lineups for it, as this too could be a driving factor, large or small in the pricing structure

 

[mactronix]

Funny that i was going to mention the IGP situation, It seems that sooner or later there wont be discrete solution under £/$ 100.
The thing is while i know they will try, they cant have it both ways. I don't know what the market share of low end cards is worth but thats not going to be just thrown away. The money will be clawed back by pricing on either the new solutions or by the continued what i personally see a hiking of the mainstream solutions.
make no mistake its all coming from inside the companies and i dont for on eminuite beleive that the pricing we are seeing is in anyway being forced onto them.
Yes i know they are a company and are trying to make money but it just seems unbalanced to me.
And no i wouldnt be happy if they started charging more for the higher end to balance it out before some clever whit decides to post it

Mactronix

 

[ares1214]

While i doubt IGP will ever really catch up with dedicated, you have to wonder. Llano was rumored to have 5770 like performance, which isnt entirely unreasonable. If we take the 5770 and down of what we have now, and get rid of it, there goes most of the sub $200 market. Granted, by the time its released, it will likely be 6670 performance. And @ Mac, im not so sure this will be as small a bump as they lead on to be. Almost every leak said the exact same thing about what is almost definitely the 6870, and they almost were all exactly at 30-35% increase over the 5870. Maybe this is 3870 to 4870 like. The 3870 gave pretty lame performance. Decent temps and power though. The 4870 comes along, and beats it in almost every game by a 2 to 1 ratio. Sometimes more. However, it also ran a LOT hotter, and needed a lot more energy. I personally dont see how they can get a 35% increase without changing the arch much, and the arch change was really suppose to be 7xxx NI. SO, perhaps its the exact opposite of intels tick tock thing, where they make a new arch, then shrink it. Perhaps this is make a new arch, then make it perform way better, but also run a lot hotter and take more energy. Perhaps they make 5xxx series run nice and cool, then they want to suck all the performance out of it they can, and therefore release 15" cards that run a 90 C and consume 300 watts :lol: While that is an overstatement, and would still make thermi look like a solar flare, its possible thats what they do. 7xxx would be the arch change, 8xxx would be optimization.

 

[mactronix]

Basically clocking the arse off of the old arch while making some small tweaks as definatly an option i guess and to be honest its difficult to see where else performance can be gained. Unless the SP count is upped of course.

Mactronix

 

[ares1214]

I thought that too. Although, the core clock was left alone, and the memory clock was upped by 33% from 1200 MHz, to 1600 MHz. The bandwidth was upped from 153.6 GB/s to 205 GB/s, for a 34% increase. Now, while this isnt perfect math as i generally see upping the core clock does a lot more than memory clock does a lot more good, which makes sense, that means that overall, the clocks were upped 16.5%, and the performance was 34%. This means at least 18% of this increase is coming via other means of clock rate increase, and likely more as the memory clock generally does less in my experiences.

 

[wh3resmycar]

Funny that i was going to mention the IGP situation, It seems that sooner or later there wont be discrete solution under £/$ 100.

not so much. imo, the longevity of an igp will rest on it's dx11 capabilities unless the industry will stick to dx9 for another 5 years or so.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

If they go from 5 to 4, the residual benefit of size can be thrown in without power and thermals changing alot.
Add to that that this solution may actually improve certain scenarios, add some tweaking in both older to newer, plus new arrangement, and thats where rumors become either just that rumors only, or fact.
Add into the matured process of 40nm, which usually allows for higher clocks/same thermal power draw, I can see some of these rumors coming to fruition

PS What wed really need is to have Toms and various sites redo a power test, comparing launch parts to most current hot off the line parts of current chips, to see what improvements the 40nm process has already yielded

 

[notty22]

Or the change won't work, but they were committed. So here it comes. It is definitely going to be hotter with a bigger die. IMO, they probably agreed that as long as the reviewers can still say not as hot as the gtx 480, they can get away with it. That the fanboys will keep spreading non facts like the 5970 (a 300 watt) card , is cool running. lol

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Look at the improvements nVidia has made with the 460
The 6 series is supposed to have much more dramatic changes in it, plus a power perf change (shader design) that will help immensely
So, taking these things into consideration, seeing the proofs of nVidias 460 better power/thermals, it may not be that severe, the new 6 series heat thermals vs perf/improvements

 

[ares1214]

I agree with Jay. If they have matured the process at all, and put any new features into it, i dont think it will really run too much hotter, or use that much more energy. It might, but not an outrageous amount like thermi. I mean after all, the 480 runs 20-25% hotter than a 5870 at load, so they have some working room :lol:

 

[ares1214]

[Donanimhaber reports that AMD's first HD 6000 release - the Radeon HD 6700 - will feature a 256-bit memory interface, doubling up on the HD 5700 series' 128-bit. Recent GPU-Z leaks suggest the Radeon HD 6800 series will feature a 256-bit bus as well. For the Radeon HD 5000 series, one of the criticisms was a massive performance gap between the HD 5700 and the HD 5800 series, with the weakest Evergreen product (HD 5830) filling the gap somewhat unsuccessfully. It is possible that AMD has decided to boost the mainstream x700 series, bringing it closer to the performance x800 series.

The HD 6700 could use (relatively) slower memory - perhaps 1200 MHz, or the same as the HD 5800 series, and the HD 6800 with super-fast 1600 MHz - nearly double the speed as typical Nvidia Geforce 400 series cards.

A faster HD 6700 series could have implications throughout the entire HD 6000 family. For example, it could leave room open for the crowded $70-$100 market, which currently serves the HD 5400, HD 5500 and HD 5600 series. We could even see the HD 6600 series replacing the low-end of the HD 5700 series, with the HD 6700 series replacing the HD 5770 and the HD 5830. AMD would not like to leave a massive gap between $150 and $300 products filled in by a single relatively weak product, as in the HD 5000 generation. If the HD 6700 features a 256-bit bus, it may suggest the HD 6700 would offer more options in the $180-$250 sweet spot than the HD 5000 series.

The Radeon HD 6700 cards release in just over a month's time, with a scheduled release date of October 13th./quote]

http://vr-zone.com/articles/-rumour-amd-radeon-hd-6700-series-to-feature-256-bit-memory/9733.html

Like i said, looks like 67xx will at the very least tie or beat 58xx. If this is the case, 2 6 pins REALLY doesnt matter. Granted it is just a rumour apparently, but it seems pretty accurate to me. With the same clock speeds, a 256 bit bus, and same arch more or less, 6770 should at LEAST beat the 5850, and likely the 5870 be more of a tie.

 

[ares1214]

Also, apparently rumors at the ATI forum and other places have said the 6770 to be just over the 150 watt mark. Kinda like the GTX 460, 160 watts, and just barely needs 2 6 pins. The current 5770 takes about 110 watts, so i dont really think thats a terrible jump to 150-160w considering it seems to be getting 58xx like performance, 256 bit and all. Once again, most rumours from ATI forum and places, but still, rumors come from somewhere.

http://www.thinq.co.uk/2010/8/25/rumour-radeon-hd-6000-specs-revealed/

 

[notty22]

ATI cards are not selling exactly cheap right now, rumours of the 67xx series being priced up to 250 dollars, how much do you think the new 5870 replacement is going to be ? I've seen 450.00 thrown around. Of course Charlie will keep telling everyone that ATI could halve its prices if they wanted to, like he has been saying about the 5 series.
Don't you think its strange that they never have ? lol
Maybe the fanboys have the pricing mechanics all wrong.

 

[ares1214]

Considering the 6770 will have specs very similar to a 5850/5870, power consumption of a GTX 460, and price a little below a 5850 is we are believing everything we are being told, which this close to the release, they all seem quite reasonable, then $250 is a steal if ya ask me! They all say $180-250, so any where in that price range, and i wouldnt be angry at all. $300+ and we have a serious problem, maybe even if it beats the 5870. And no, they arent selling DiRT cheap right now, but think of this. Lets take Crysis at HD for example, thats a pretty fair playing field. anandtech, which even gives an extra little bit of performance to the 480 than say Tom's gives it a 6 FPS, or 16% lead over the 5870. The cheapest 5870 is $350 with MIR, and the cheapest worth buying is $380 with MIR:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102883&cm_re=5870-_-14-102-883-_-Product

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121374&cm_re=5870-_-14-121-374-_-Product

The cheapest 480 is $439, and the only one i recommend buying due to heat and such is $520 (zotac amp):

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814187109&cm_re=480-_-14-187-109-_-Product

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814500166&cm_re=480-_-14-500-166-_-Product

As far as cheapest worth buying, the 5870 is 26% cheaper. As far as the ones worth buying due to way better cooling, overclocking, sound, voltage control and so on, the 5870 is 37% cheaper. I mean, the way i see it, Nvidia is overcharging if you ask me. Not to mention energy savings (YES, they do add up). Although maybe thats cancelled out by the 480 saving you money on your heating bill :lol:

 

[Tamz_msc]

After reading the posts on this thread, I'm more interested in how Nvidia is going to reply to the HD 6000 series.THe Fermi architecture was a major change from the G80 that powered the 8800 GTX when it was released four years ago.The only notable change was the GT200, which was two years ag😵n the other hand, AMD has to make major changes whenever it brings something new, and it looks that it is going to be the same with the 6000 series.But the Fermi architecture is more flexible as Nvidia has prove with the GF104.The major drawback is the die size - the GF104 has the same die size as Cypress.Hence the power consumption is high.But another important thing that is to be considered is that none of the Fermi cards have fully unlocked cores.So, if NVIDIA can make optimizations in the Fermi architecture, the battle is not yet over.

 

[ares1214]

Nvidia has locked themselves out of a GTX 465 as they already have one, and therefore fully unlocked GTX 460 would be GTX 475. Unfortunately, A fully unlocked 460 might not beat a 470, and if it does, by a tiny margin. Other problem is the 480 is already running outrageously hot and using enormous amounts of energy. The 485, most of what they would do is up shader count from 480 to 512, and maybe up something else, likely clock. This will make a card that would just eat crazy kW and produce insane heat, as well as overclocking be limited. The 455 would likely interfere with the GTX 460 768 MB. In my opinion, their arch change has confused a lot of people, screwed up the lineups naming system, and stagered a full launch many times. NV is getting the GT430 out in mid october. The battle is over when ATI launches their next lineup before NV can finish their previous one :lol:

 

[Tamz_msc]

I believe that the Fermi architecture is like an unfinished sculpture, it only needs some chiseling and polishing before it can shine.It will take time to do that.I just wish that they figure it out quickly before AMD takes the lead with the next generation.