Some Initial Thoughts on AMD's HD 6800 Cards

My opinions.

1\ Dont like its naming.
2\ The performance may be better, or worse, but its the right direction, the ratio between rops shaders tmu and everything have been bang on for quite some time with ati's cards.
but with 5870 we saw we needed more tesselation power.
3.\ ati... why name it 6870 if its not more powerfull ? just release it as 6770 and if a 6870 isnt comming, dont sell a 6870 at all, cause your naming scheme worked perfectly as it was....

I already hate ati for naming 5770 for laptops 5870!... soon they'll name 5770 6870 mobile..
 
I have to agree with those who point out that anyone paying the kind of money the top tier cards cost are educated enough to know exactly what they're getting,the naming scheme isn't going to make a difference. If they can surpass or even match Nvidia's latest cards without being flame throwing power hogs,I'll seriously consider them. Those two factors,and the way they've been acting lately,have pretty much soured me on Nvidia.
 
Gonna do everyone a favor and post the real stuff so you can stop being jerked around by websites making shit up or that don't bother looking for the truth.

25771228.jpg

35802415.jpg

83317390.jpg

30926972.jpg

99531953.jpg

68987273.jpg
 
Well, it's not as ridiculous as Nvidias "name of the month" with their G80/G92-based GPUs, but it's close. It seems every time people get used to a certain naming scheme, GPU makers feel compelled to screw it up for no reason. Maybe they've found that the confusion itself actually improves sales.

Makes you wonder what the equivalent of the 5970 will be... if 6970 is already reserved for the fastest single-GPU card. Unless they're not planning on releasing a dual-GPU card this time.

I guess the naming scheme will change yet again for the next generation. There is already a Radeon 7500. We've gone full circle, which shows how pointless and arbitrary GPU naming schemes are. Back then, the first digit stood for the DirectX version (DX7, 8 and 9), which made sense. Too bad they jumped the gun on the ten (X), so their second-gen DX9 card became the Radeon 10800. From there, it kind of got out of hand until the "reset" with the 2900XT.
 
AtkinS said:
2\ The performance may be better, or worse, but its the right direction, the ratio between rops shaders tmu and everything have been bang on for quite some time with ati's cards.
but with 5870 we saw we needed more tesselation power.
.
Click to expand...

Explain more Tessellation power? Are you seriously suggesting that because it is the only "flaw" in the 5870 but yet hardly any games use it to the point that it cripples the card?

These cards maybe named differently but still it is a small step forward. Not sure that many people need to get upset by the naming since even before "they" are released everyone here knows what they are aiming to be replacing in last series cards.

Cayman on the other hand is something to get excited about :)
 
Why the fuck did ATI/AMD had to change the name scheme? 6770 was perfect, but to rename it 6870 is just pathetic and doesn't make any sense. I guess its too late for them to reconsider?
 
It probably has more to do with sales than anything. Maybe they've found by doing this the "less informed" meaning the majority of people will say "Hey my buddy has a 5870!". Then buy it for $200 thinking he got a steal and pump up his e-wiener, not realizing he didn't get the super card he thought.

My conspiracy theory anyway.
 
I'm still scratching my head over their DX11 claims when the controversial Unigine leak from a while back (which was reposted by Atomic PC) shows nearly 2x increase. I don't expect a full 2x increase in games since benches aren't perfectly reflective of game conditions but there should be a good improvement.

http://www.atomicmpc.com.au/News/23...-show-performance-improvement---and-loss.aspx

I'm also scratching my head over the 900MHz and 850 MHz anomaly in the leaks from the past weeks... 900 MHz seems to be from the more recent rumours in case you're wondering.
 
I wonder why HardOCP even links to this article, as many of the 'thoughts' form the article seems to have been debunked by Beyond3D and Rage3D (and by some people in the know as well)
Fortunately, we have the forums. What Lorien posted is about as much as we know for sure (more or less). About the naming scheme - AMD left more than a few numbers unused in the HD5xxx series, I think this is a way 'fill out' the blanks. It may be a bit more confusing, but if the price/performance ratio is right (and the HD6850/6870 GPUs could be a very good deal), I think AMD will be forgiven.
 
I'm disappointed that AMD did this, but it makes sense. This will reduce the gigantic price difference between the HD x800 and HD x900 series cards and will explain the associated price increase between Barts and Juniper (HD 57xx). Barts is getting nearly double the shader processors (up 320x4 from 160x5), a 256 bit memory interface (which will allow twice as much bandwidth per clock and allow vendors to potentially make a 2GB version without getting into the more expensive memory densities), and twice the ROPs.

According to the leaked benchmarks, it's not quite the same performance of the HD 5870, but it'll have significantly better yields (by merit of it not having as many transistors and AMD sticking with the 40nm process) out of the door. As a result they might be able to keep this card in stock at vendors and thus closer to MSRP (unlike the HD 5870 launch).

With the Cayman chips in the HD 6900s we won't see a near doubling in price, as is the case with the HD 5870 to HD 5970. This also means a return to the non-confusing "X2" moniker on double-GPU cards (e.g. HD 6870 X2)

Furthermore, this card might actually be able to launch around the same price as the HD 4870 (~$250-299), which is very reasonable to me for a card within a few % of the ~$360 HD 5870.

Bottom line: I'm a little annoyed at the name change, but I'm hopeful AMD will provide us consumers with yet another enticing piece of reasonably priced hardware this holiday season.
 
Its not so hard.

Nvidia had its 2XX series that then logically jumped to the...oh hang on..4XX series.

What I hate is the use of totally pointless monikers of XT/GTS/GTE/GTX/PRO. They have zero technical or performance rating applicable to them.
 
The fact that the new chips are pin compatible with their cypress brethren is very interesting to me.

Hopefully we get some good boards fast. Guess i'm holding out for Cayman Pro, lets hope it overclocks well :)
 
TheBlueChanell said:
Thank You. It's a name change, get over it. It's not to deceive anyone and if someone gets burned it's soley their own fault for uneducated buying.
Click to expand...

Of course it's to deceive. There is no other reason to do this. It's leveraging AMD's built up understanding of and trust in it's naming convention to make people think they're getting a REALLY REALLY INCREDIBLE deal buying a 68xx card below 58xx prices.

It's a cynical one off, and deceptive, adjustment to an unforeseen developed competitive situation to gain market share and increase the PERCEIVED value of it's cards.

It would only faceplant if Nvidia brought the hammer down on them.

I personally think it SUX, I HATE when a company does this shit, but that doesn't mean it's not going to work with Nvidia wanking off somewhere in the bushes.
 
Naming conventioins are important, despite what some of you here think.

Not necessarily for us. We live and breathe this shit. We read every article about a new video card and CPU when it hits the market.

We are the excetion.

The market as a whole wants to be able to quickly look at a number. They want a larger number to mean a better card. They don't care about the tech at all. They just want to be able to play their games and not worry about anything else.

I can't tell you how many: "It says minimum spec is an 8800GT so I bought a 9400GT specifically for this game, why isn't it working?" threads there are on the Civ 5 forums.

The nonsensical and idiotic naming schemes are a major pain in the ass for software developers and cause people to be pissed off at the developers, not the hardware manufacturers.

it's very annoying.
 
TheBlueChanell said:
Thank You. It's a name change, get over it. It's not to deceive anyone and if someone gets burned it's soley their own fault for uneducated buying.
Click to expand...

^ ^ You're not very bright.

Zarathustra[H];1036295267 said:
Naming conventions are important, despite what some of you here think.

Not necessarily for us. We live and breathe this shit. We read every article about a new video card and CPU when it hits the market.

We are the exception.

The market as a whole wants to be able to quickly look at a number. They want a larger number to mean a better card. They don't care about the tech at all. They just want to be able to play their games and not worry about anything else.

I can't tell you how many: "It says minimum spec is an 8800GT so I bought a 9400GT specifically for this game, why isn't it working?" threads there are on the Civ 5 forums.

The nonsensical and idiotic naming schemes are a major pain in the ass for software developers and cause people to be pissed off at the developers, not the hardware manufacturers.

it's very annoying.
Click to expand...

^ ^ Pretty much hits the nail on the head of the scenario of the average fairweather user walking into bestbuy looking for an off the shelf upgrade.
 
The slides show Barts establishing a new 'niche', Cayman replacing Cypress, Antilles replacing Hemlock and ... ... Juniper not being replaced!!

That would explain the renaming, if the Juniper 'refresh' is going to consist of a digit change and be renamed as the 6750 and 6850.

Going to be some howls if that's the way they decide to go.
 
Kaldskryke said:
I don't know where Josh Walrath gets his rumors, but a lot of his speculation doesn't quite fit what I've been hearing...

For example, every rumor I've heard about moving away from 4+1 VLIW-5 has been indicating dropping the T-unit and incorporating its functionality into one or two of the other SPs. Josh says it's simply dropped one of the narrow ALUs for a 3+1 arrangement which frankly doesn't make any sense to me since it's the t-unit that apparently is underutilized.
Click to expand...

I know! i think the same, that was what it was said about the ALUs, dropping de T-unit and make 2 units a super unit that could do the same work of the other 2 and some of the T-unit work as well.
 
TheMadHatterXxX said:
^ ^ You're not very bright.



^ ^ Pretty much hits the nail on the head of the scenario of the average fairweather user walking into bestbuy looking for an off the shelf upgrade.
Click to expand...

I dont agree and the HD *8** nomenclature was always a midrange until this generation because the 5800 product line was so strong. The first *770 card was an ~$100 card at launch and lower end.

4850~GTS250
4870~GTX260
4890~GTX275
4870x2~GTX285
GTX295 was cream of the crop

You guys are like a bunch conspiracy theorists. It's a re-adjustment of a product line and by HD7000 it will be the norm and nobody will give a shit about the name change because they'll have accepted it.

If someone is spending a large amount of money on a GPU, wether it's one of us or your average layman who walks into best buy and they buy without researching and get burned it's noone's fault but their own. If I'm spending a large sum of money outside of the computer realm, I do my fucking research.

It is not any different than the people who would walk into best buy and pay $300 for a 9600GT, it sucks but such is life.

The 5870 and the 6870 are in completely different price points now, falling back in line with 38** and 48** pricing. It has a completely new feature set which warrants a 6 in the name and the 800 part is because of the adjusted product line.

I'm not very bright though so what the fuck do I know.
 
daglesj said:
Its not so hard.

Nvidia had its 2XX series that then logically jumped to the...oh hang on..4XX series.

What I hate is the use of totally pointless monikers of XT/GTS/GTE/GTX/PRO. They have zero technical or performance rating applicable to them.
Click to expand...

They do when it comes to codename's or anything pre-3800 for ATi. You have a a series aka Cypress, Xt would be the faster Cypress model and Pro would be the slower model. Internally they technically have a performance rating applicable to them. I.E XT > Pro in a given series.
 
TheBlueChanell said:
You guys are like a bunch conspiracy theorists. .
Click to expand...

I'm not claiming conspiracy.

I'm just saying that their hapless naming schemes confuse all but the biggest tha enthusiasts, and make it very difficult for grandmothers to pick a ame off the shelf that will run on little johhny's PC, cause the system specs are jibberish to them.

They would probably have a difficult time anyway, but using a simple "larger number is better" system would have at least limited this some.

yes, the 2xx series was followed by the 4xx series, but the GT430 sucks ass compared to the GTX295 (unless, like in Civ 5, performance really hinges on DX11 compatibility)

To limit confusion everything 4xx should have been faster than everything 2x, cause 430 is much higher than 295...
 
Zarathustra[H];1036295478 said:
I'm not claiming conspiracy.

I'm just saying that their hapless naming schemes confuse all but the biggest tha enthusiasts, and make it very difficult for grandmothers to pick a ame off the shelf that will run on little johhny's PC, cause the system specs are jibberish to them.

They would probably have a difficult time anyway, but using a simple "larger number is better" system would have at least limited this some.

yes, the 2xx series was followed by the 4xx series, but the GT430 sucks ass compared to the GTX295 (unless, like in Civ 5, performance really hinges on DX11 compatibility)

To limit confusion everything 4xx should have been faster than everything 2x, cause 430 is much higher than 295...
Click to expand...

It's never really worked like that though, at least as long as I can remember. The low end of a new product line was never faster than the last flagship. The mid-range is usually faster or nipping on the hells but never a low end.

The "higher number is better" system is still in place how is that not abundantly clear?
 
TheBlueChanell said:
The "higher number is better" system is still in place how is that not abundantly clear?
Click to expand...

The problem is that to the layman it is not abundantly clear that the first digit is the generation of the card, and the following digits speak to its performance.

If this could somehow be clarified, and made easier to understand, it would solve like 95% of the "why is my game not working" threads on game forums.

The average non-hardocp:er walks in to Best Buy because someone told him his integrated graphics suck for games. He doesn't know that the 9400GT is no better. Nor does the sales person, usually. Judging by the box, it should be good for games. It has pictures of games on it, and uually a slogan like "Nvidia's advanced technology lets you experience the latest in games".

They just left out the "like a slideshow" part.

So I am not saying that the likes of ATI or Nvidia or even their board partners are intentionally misleading their customers in some sort of conspiracy, but what I am saying is that they are absolutely failing to name their products in a way that the layman will understand.

heck. I got out of games for about 5 years (I had just bought a 6800GT, but then never really used it for 5 or 6 years). When I got into ngames again, I had to spend HOURS reading to catch up on what the state of the video card market was to understand what was going on, and I have been building computers for 20 years...

How is it we expect a layman who just wants to play games to be able to "just do some research" and figure it out?
 
Zarathustra[H];1036295547 said:
The problem is that to the layman it is not abundantly clear that the first digit is the generation of the card, and the following digits speak to its performance.

If this could somehow be clarified, and made easier to understand, it would solve like 95% of the "why is my game not working" threads on game forums.

The average non-hardocp:er walks in to Best Buy because someone told him his integrated graphics suck for games. He doesn't know that the 9400GT is no better. Nor does the sales person, usually. Judging by the box, it should be good for games. It has pictures of games on it, and uually a slogan like "Nvidia's advanced technology lets you experience the latest in games".

They just left out the "like a slideshow" part.

So I am not saying that the likes of ATI or Nvidia or even their board partners are intentionally misleading their customers in some sort of conspiracy, but what I am saying is that they are absolutely failing to name their products in a way that the layman will understand.

heck. I got out of games for about 5 years (I had just bought a 6800GT, but then never really used it for 5 or 6 years). When I got into ngames again, I had to spend HOURS reading to catch up on what the state of the video card market was to understand what was going on, and I have been building computers for 20 years...

How is it we expect a layman who just wants to play games to be able to "just do some research" and figure it out?
Click to expand...

Again, if your layman goes out and spends $400 on a videocard and gets burned it's their fault. Be resourceful I'm sure every layman knows somebody who is tech savvy, and they could at least ask for help before spending a large amount of money on something they know absolutely nothing about. That sucks but that's just how the cookie crumbles.
 
Sigh. I was thinking how they should better do the naming scheme and I wonder why the following hasn't been tried...

1st digit = Generation. 6, 7, 8, 9 etc... That's easy to understand. Bigger numbers mean it was designed and built later.
2nd = Performance based on chip codename. LETTER GRADES. A will be the top-of-the-line performance chip (Cayman/Cypress), B will be the "Mid-High Gaming", C will be "Mainstream demi-gaming", D and below will be the x500/x400 "You're only buying this for 2D acceleration, really" crowd and integrated. People should be able to get that a 6A will be more powerful than a 7D. Japanese style "S" can be reserved for "over the top" options that include at least 2 chips of "A" quality, like the 4870x2, 5970, or that recent Asus 4gb custom monstrosity (which in my opinion is how a dual GPU should go, 2x 5870 instead of 5850s).
3rd/4th = Variations based on clock speed, cooling hardware, and amount of RAM. R for "Regular", P for "Professional", and X for "Xtreme" Or you can write the words out on the box. These 3 would be spec'd on the website (ie. you can look up that nomatter the vendor the regular edtion is going to have 1gb of RAM and XXX/XXXX clocks and the X edition is going to have 2gb of RAM, the "enhanced" reference or better cooler, and XXX/XXXX clocks). I can also think of putting an "S" at the end as well, for vendors that want to go above the "Xtreme" offering significantly, to offer some flexibility.

Its not perfect, but you could easily put up a chart in a Best Buy "The New 7000 series are here! Choose a C rank card for occasional gaming on a budget or home theater use, choose a B rank card for gaming power without cracking your wallet, choose an A rank card for best-of-breed performance running modern games at highest settings, or choose an S rank for the ultimate graphical experience" and some details on what the specs of each are, and a similar chart for the trailing R, P, X, and S. right next to it. So when little jimmy picks up an Asus 7SS Ultimate Wargod Edition for $699 his mother can say "You don't need all that, but I'm willing to buy you whatever you want from the B-grade", where he can scamper off and grab a 7BR or 7BX .

I can't think of a perfect way to make numbering 100% clear and still allow manufacturers any leeway to design off reference, but I think this would be much more easy to grasp than the current system where there is nothing to tell joe consumer that a 5550 is worse than a 4890.
 
Krieger91 said:
Companies always do this!!! They make everything nice and easy at first..

3870=4870/5870 You should THINK that the next in line would be the 6870.. but you're wrong. Now the 6870=the 5770. What the hell??

Example. Rocky movies.

Rocky I
Rocky II
Rocky III
Rocky IV
Rocky V

Oh you would think the next one would be Rocky VI right? Nope. Rocky Balboa. What the fuck?
Click to expand...

So the 6800 Series are actually Prequels?
 
They're pushing the numbers up to make everything seem better.

You can't even buy a 5000, 5100, 5200, or 5300. The first, completely low-end bargain basement 5xxx is a 5450. Even the terrible IGP is now like a 4290. Back in the day, the low-end card would end in -000 or -200, and the IGP would end in -100. -400 or -500 used to be solidly midrange, now they are low-end.

They're going to start running out of room. 5xxx had a cool idea by adding the 900 to be dual 800s. Now we're going to have a HD 6970 with a single GPU, and go back to the 6970x2 moniker for the dual ones.

I have to say, I think the naming convention with the x2 is a little more straightforward than the 5970 one.
 
killerbobjr said:
It's not the same series cards. The 6870 and 6850 replace the 5770 and 5750 respectively. What's "weak" is the confusion instigated by AMD marketing to change the numbering scheme yet again.
Click to expand...

this, didn't they learn anything from Nvidia?
 
you all put way too much into naming schemes.. it can only confuse less then avid hardware junkies, not joe public. it will only confuse the junkies for a few days, as they do the typical research and review reading when new gen product emerges.

joe public does not upgrade his video card every 3 months and will only see the price point, not model numbers, numbers mostly get washed out, like anything else electronic. is 650 better then 630? is a 1385 better then a 1865? every maker uses model labeling schemes that they set up on their own. unless you make an effort to understand each manufacturers labeling policy, it is meaningless, and you only then see features and price.

features are silly in video cards (for joe public) since features are gpu, pipelines, frequency etc. (ever read a low end video card box?) unless you are interested and follow that product market, you just rely on price. hence a 4870 is better then a 5250, but isn't a higher number better?

yeah, they could make it simple, but misinformation and confusion is part of every single retail market. its at the core of grocery marketing. think anyone else is above it?

be glad you have websites to help you make the right decision when purchasing products.
 
Cerulean said:
Not much competition, hence the lack of horsepower UNF! in the 6G series.
Click to expand...

I disagree. The GTX 260 is providing more performance than a HD5850 for less $$$, so there is competition, but IMHO the lack of large performance increases this iteration is not due to any competition issues at all.

The main reason why performance has not increased much is because TSMC has not been able to move to a manufacturing process smaller than 40nm, so to get a huge performance increase would require a proportional increase in transistor count, and therefore die size... resulting in dismal yields, power hungry chips and lower profits. Remember that the 48xx series chips were manufactured using the 55nm process, so when the 58xx series used the 40nm process, performance could be increased significantly without increasing power consumption or die size by much.

BTW I hate the naming scheme as well, but the lack of a huge performance increase is definitely not due to lack of competition.
 
Wow people are complaining about a simple name change. I don't remember people whining that Nvidia skipped GTX3xx.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top