Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,063
- Location
- In a house
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
HD 4870/4850 actually have 900 stream processors
- Thread starter LoadsaMoney
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2008
- Posts
- 12,751
I wonder if anyone will unlock them? maybe it was for future driver and bios updates?
Even if possible it would have to be able to dynamically activate possible extra stream processors assuming that they are not all working & cards may have more or less working than others.
Last edited:
Well yea it says that in the article. It does not mean they CANNOT work and are all damaged...
Yes it does, they are disabled from the plant, and there probably wouldn't be many left over anyhow.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
is it just me or, firstly did Guru3d not link the site they supposedly got the info from and, as is usual this is just an educated guess from a look at the silicon under microscope. However in this case it seems miseducated, the line they've decided is the 9th row of SP's looks nothing like the others, whatever it is its by no means identical to the other rows so is very unlikely to be another row of SP's, but some other part of the core logic. 1 through 8 look identical, 9 does not.
As for redundancy, theres nothing to say there is or isn't any. Anandtech talked about redundancy in their article, I don't think they claimed they knew there was any. Infact they hinted that you had to have redundancy on a core the size of Nvidia's latest as if you can't get a core working you lose a lot of the waifer each failed core. While AMD have gone for a tiny core, losing one doesn't lose you anywhere near as much cash as Nvidia cores failing. The smaller you go the less need for redundancy, the less redundancy the smaller the size, the smaller the size the cheaper they get and more per waifer etc.
As for redundancy, theres nothing to say there is or isn't any. Anandtech talked about redundancy in their article, I don't think they claimed they knew there was any. Infact they hinted that you had to have redundancy on a core the size of Nvidia's latest as if you can't get a core working you lose a lot of the waifer each failed core. While AMD have gone for a tiny core, losing one doesn't lose you anywhere near as much cash as Nvidia cores failing. The smaller you go the less need for redundancy, the less redundancy the smaller the size, the smaller the size the cheaper they get and more per waifer etc.
If they are there, it means they are disabled according to the article.
well i doubt ati engineers wrote the article only they know the truth
And didn't one of them actually reply when this was news some months ago?
It's to help improve yields.
There probably would have been a shortage of 4870's available at launch if all 900 streams had to be fully functional and cost would have been much higher.