AMD 69XX delayed officially ?

[TNA]

its about time a new gpu came out with significant gains
we need a new '8800gtx' and i personally doubt that ati can deliver on that

Surprised to read that you would even expect such gpu right now considering it's going to be on 40nm process again. Won't see the gains you are talking about until 28nm is out next year.

Look at nvidia, they could not improve their top gpu by 50% let alone the gains your talking about. With that said I think it's a bit obvious ati will at best beat the 580 gtx by a small margin, which by the way would be a much bigger improvement from the 5870.

Don't see why someone who has a 5850/70 or 470/480 would get all exited about the 580 or 6970. If anything maybe the 6990. The real gains will come next year. Will likely be getting cards that will be double the speed of 580/6970. Then one can get all exited.

As I said before, the 7970/780 will be great cards and be worth upgrading for

 

[Emlyn_Dewar]

I do find it amusing that AMD are a few weeks late and everyone is going on and on about it and slating AMD yet those same people seem to forget that Fermi was 6 months late..

Posters in the graphics card forum have a memory span of ~1 month.
The past means nothing.

 

[Jokester]

I do find it amusing that AMD are a few weeks late and everyone is going on and on about it and slating AMD yet those same people seem to forget that Fermi was 6 months late..

The real Fermi was one year late to be honest.

 

[kylew]

the simple facts are that ATI never anticipated this.

nvidia caught them off guard and they have had to have a rethink

we havent seen this happen before because nvidia used to just be always better as a rule of thumb. since ati stepped up the game and started releasing more appealing cards, we have seen them dominate both performance tables and market share.

the fact of the matter is that there was nothing stopping ATI from getting the 69s out

they have been first to market in every sector of gpus since as far back as the 5870 launch [maybe a little before that] but directX11 has certainly been their most prominent time within the market in recent memory.

its about time we had healthy competition again.
too long we have all sat there watching lauch after lauch of 2-10% increases in performance from new cards

its about time a new gpu came out with significant gains
we need a new '8800gtx' and i personally doubt that ati can deliver on that

You keep saying facts, but I don't see any. You're guessing like the rest of us. What I don't understand is the way you're acting like the GTX580 is some revolutionary card that AMD couldn't have anticipated when that's really not the case. What is a fact is that the GTX580 really isn't anything special compared to the GTX480. Surely you'd expect AMD to have at least some idea that nVidia would try to get something like this out, right? Everything about the GTX580 says panic release because if it wasn't a panic release they wouldn't have had to call it a 580 as it's just so seriously undeserving of that name.

 

[Jokester]

rjkoneill likely knows more about it than the rest of us mere plebs do

 

[kylew]

Maybe so, but it doesn't look like anything more than guess work to me especially considering how it seems like he thinks the 580 is some sort of revolution that AMD wouldn't expect. Like some one else said, it's not like AMD would seriously expect nVidia to sit around doing nothing for 6 months. nVidia's "MO" is all about looking the best by having the fastest GPU and AMD should know this best. They know eachother better than any of us know them individually after all.

If the GTX580 truly was something special with a nice big lead on the GTX480, I'd completely get it, there are a select few members of this forum who are claiming the 580 really is something special with a nice big lead on the 480, but come on any one can see it's not true. A few percent at the same clockspeed is hardly an improvement, for a higher pricepoint too.

All it takes is to look at the 6800s and compare them to the 5800s and you can see that with the 40% improvement in efficiency, they'd be allowed to make a chip at around 20% larger than a 5870 with quite a significant performance boost. With the rumours saying it'll be a 480x4 shader chip (or 1920 4 way clusters) that's a 50% increase on the 6870 alone, with the 4way improvements they should be able to yield more performance from the shader increase at 4 way than they could with 5 way shader clusters, and with who knows what else they've changed, I really don't understand why people are concluding they've been caught off guard by the GTX580, come on they've had over a year to work on these, there's really no reason to expect anything otherwise. It's not like it's some wild assumption to expect it to be at least 580 performance, that's the minimum it should be really.

 

[kylew]

Posters in the graphics card forum have a memory span of ~1 month.
The past means nothing.

So true. It gets tiresome when people completely forget the last gen of cards when some new ones come out, and in a few days last gen cards suddenly go from "being fine on the latest games at 1920x1200 maxed with AA" to "it'll struggle at that res and settings with the latest games, you'll need one of the new releases".

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

So basically the GTX580 is a fully functional GTX480 with can run at higher clockspeeds , has better FP16 performance and lower power draw. I really don't see the big deal TBH especially when both cards at the same clockspeeds have only a very small performance difference.

It is most likely that the GF110 was in the pipe-line anyway as the GF100 was meant to be released 6 months before it was eventually was and the GF110 was the 12 month refresh but was not delayed.

Hence,it is likely AMD had an idea that Nvidia was going to release such parts anyway IMHO.

The HD6870 is less than 10% slower than an HD5870,has better tessellation performance and uses less transistors. The GTX460 OTH is still a bigger GPU.

So true. It gets tiresome when people completely forget the last gen of cards when some new ones come out, and in a few days last gen cards suddenly go from "being fine on the latest games at 1920x1200 maxed with AA" to "it'll struggle at that res and settings with the latest games, you'll need one of the new releases".

It is called e-peen.

 

[TNA]

It is called e-peen.

Yep.

When the one in RL is too small to bother flexing, there is always e-peen

 

[kylew]

Yep.

When the one in RL is to small to bother flexing, there is always e-peen

Or long-cars.

 

[rjk]

@kylew

i never said the 580 was something special and totally recognise it as a speedbumped 480.
if it is deserving of its name or not, well... nvidias previous naming schemes are nothing but laughable, with no consistancy. perhaps GTX485 would have been more appropriate.

looking back and taking the 280/285 example. the 285 was very marginal over the 280
more so at launch.

its almost like some posters here are against the idea of nvidia getting the initiative for once?
personally i can only see this as a good thing as it will drive the market forward a bit
they covered all bases and got it spot on, its enough of a speed bump to charge £50 more and for an nvidia card, its quite a reasonable price too

i predict driver updates will increase the capabilities of the card but nothing more.
i certainly wont be MMing my 480 just yet.
obviously i cant openly discuss more than i have, so i will leave it at that.

 

[muppet]

how fast is the 580 over the 480 in games . about 15% ish . surely amd would have at least anticipated this and planned for it . or perhaps there not bothered about the fastest gpu and just let 6990 do the talking .

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

So basically Nvidia still have the fastest single GPU card just like they had with the GTX480 and the GTX285 before. TBH,I really don't see the big deal here. If the GTX580 was priced at £250 it would be a bid deal but it is well over £300.

What will be more interesting is to see how well the sub £200 Nvidia 500 series cards perform when compared to their AMD competition. Also,if they could do so with better peak power consumption it would be great.

 

[Broken Hope]

Even if the 6970 isn't the same speed as the GTX 580, as long as it's within 10% and also around £300-£350 then it's good news for AMD and us.

But chances are with AMD's efficiency gains lately they shouldn't have much trouble at least matching the GTX 580.

 

[GJ02]

obviously i cant openly discuss more than i have, so i will leave it at that.

hmm ??

 

[Jokester]

hmm ??

I would hazard a guess that rjkoneill might be under NDA, given that he works for OcUK and they would have been taking delivery of cards next week if it was going to launch at the original date.

 

[queamin]

To say Nvidia caught them off guard with a chip who specs is about 12 months late makes no sense, to say Amd never thought that 12 months later Nvidia have anything better come on,when they started 69** they would have thought they be up against the refresh of the 480 give or take a month or two

 

[Jokester]

To say Nvidia caught them off guard with a chip who specs is about 12 months late makes no sense, to say Amd never thought that 12 months later Nvidia have anything better come on,when they started 69** they would have thought they be up against the refresh of the 480give or take a month or two

Well, 580GTX was originally rumoured to be out Q1 2011, by which point AMD were releasing the 6990 which will presumably beat it hands down, so by Nvidia bringing it forward by at least three months they've found themselves needing to compete with the 6970 instead. So not only will there be a performance issue, it's likely that AMD won't now have free reign to charge as much as they like for it.

 

[RavenXXX2]

^^+1

Yeah the 580 was only a rumour in the middle of October, less than a month later the 580 is on the streets lol, AMD got caught out big time IMO and are off reevaluating things.

 

[queamin]

Well, 580GTX was originally rumoured to be out Q1 2011, by which point AMD were releasing the 6990 which will presumably beat it hands down, so by Nvidia bringing it forward by at least three months they've found themselves needing to compete with the 6970 instead. So not only will there be a performance issue, it's likely that AMD won't now have free reign to charge as much as they like for it.

What gets me if they got barts at certain speed per mm what is the point of cayman unless it is a lot bigger and a monster if it is only a bit faster over a bart, why not just do two barts, i am not really sure it is worth the R&D unless the getting 4 shader design ready for 28nm.

edit. it seams to me cayman a lot of hassle and R&D for a small speed bump over a bart,that what i find hard to belive