• 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.

ATI cuts 6950 allocation

The way I see the pricing is going to be the following.

£250 for a 6950 1GB
£300 for a 6950 2GB
£350 for a 6970 2GB

That way, and performance permitting AMD will have a card to fill the gaps that nVidia is not currently filling. I am sure, as Duff-Man says, its all much more complicated than that but my guess is those will be the optimum prices.
 
555BUK said:
Of course it did. The GTX 280 was from the previous gen and 5870 was tageted at the GTX 480.

4850 & 4870 vs GTX260 & GTX280
5850 & 5870 vs GTX470 & GTX480

Both of these previous gen ATI cards lost out in performance to their NVidia counterparts, but nobody will argue that ATI offered better release value.
Click to expand...

Yes and look at the size of each company chips I think after 2900 Amd changed tactics, nvidia problems comes from such a large chip and maybe not doing their research into 40nm as well as Amd, they must have learnt a lot from 4770
 
350 big ones for a 6970 and i'm gonna be all over it, anything more and i can see my head telling me how good value those last few 5870s are, especially given their performance in BC2
 
555BUK said:
Of course it did. The GTX 280 was from the previous gen and 5870 was tageted at the GTX 480.

4850 & 4870 vs GTX260 & GTX280
5850 & 5870 vs GTX470 & GTX480

Both of these previous gen ATI cards lost out in performance to their NVidia counterparts, but nobody will argue that ATI offered better release value.
Click to expand...

Not really.

HD4850's - GTX9800+ GTX250

HD4870's - GTX260 GTX280 and HD4890 - GTX285

HD4850x2 - SLY Something ? GTX260 192sp ?

HD4870x2 - GTX295


ATI had Nvidia on the run with the 4000's and the 5000's had no competition for 6 months, apart from £400 GTX295 and £300 GTX285, it was probably more to 9 months before Fermi cards become readily available.
 
Nobody is agruing whether ATI makes the most efficient, well designed or cost effective GPU's. The simple truth is that NVidia cannot compete on a transistior vs transistor level, so they continue to produce the fastest cards by making HUGE GPU's. The 8800, 200 & 400 series have all outperformed ATI's top cards, but they have done so by using larger dies. NVidia have "just about" managed to hang in there because their top GPU have demanded a premium due to being the fastest.

If (and it is an if) ATI can squeeze more performance out of 6900 than NVidia can from a 30% bigger Fermi, NVidia will have huge problems. They will no longer be able to charge a premium for a lesser, but much more expensive product. It may well end NVidia's participation in th top end GPU wars, and believe me, ATI will no longer release bargain top end cards if they have no competition.

In the medium to long term it is better for everyone (ATI and NVidia fanboys alike) that 6900 performs worse or just about equal to Fermi. Nobody wants and Intel like domination of the GPU world.
 
Last edited:
555BUK said:
The more I hear about Cayman, the more I doubt ATI's ability to beat the 580 performance wise. I know that core design and optimisations are very important, and that ATI are current ahead in this area, but can they really overcome a ~30% transistor deficit and ~20% memory bandwidth deficit?

My opinion is that the 6970 will only match or slightly exceed the GTX580 if the cores are pushed very close to their limits. 875-900MHz seems the probable default clock range and overclocking is unlikely to yield more than 1000MHz on a core which is larger than 5800. This leaves NVidia room to release an Ultra version of the 580 with clocks north of 850core. All 580's seem to reach 900MHz+ on stock coolers with a little voltage bump.

So there you go, +1 person for 6900 being ultimately slower than GTX5x0.
Click to expand...

bertlol.jpg


  • can't beat
  • only match
  • slightly exceed

Lolwut :eek:, you're confusing :D

555BUK said:
Of course it did. The GTX 280 was from the previous gen and 5870 was tageted at the GTX 480.

4850 & 4870 vs GTX260 & GTX280
5850 & 5870 vs GTX470 & GTX480

Both of these previous gen ATI cards lost out in performance to their NVidia counterparts, but nobody will argue that ATI offered better release value.
Click to expand...

Fermi came out a good few months (half a year?) after HD5800. It was Nvidia that targeted ATI's cards performance-wise.
 
555BUK said:
If (and it is an if) ATI can squeeze more performance out of 6900 than NVidia can from a 30% bigger Fermi, NVidia will have huge problems. They will no longer be able to charge a premium for a lesser, but much more expensive product. It may well end NVidia's participation in th top end GPU wars, and believe me, ATI will no longer release bargain top end cards if they have no competition.

In the medium to long term it is better for everyone (ATI and NVidia fanboys alike) that 6900 performs worse or just about equal to Fermi. Nobody wants and Intel like domination of the GPU world.
Click to expand...

If you didn't already know Nvidia have already got themselves in massive trouble all by themselves. ATI don't need to release the 6000 cards. If they wanted to turn gangster they could just milk the 5000 cards until Nvidia gets Fermi to the point it can compete.

ATI releasing the 6000 cards has actually helped them as it aloud them to increase prices to the point of not making a loss on everything they sell.
 
Last edited:
Mr Krugga said:
bertlol.jpg


  • can't beat
  • only match
  • slightly exceed

Lolwut :eek:, you're confusing :D



Fermi came out a good few months (half a year?) after HD5800. It was Nvidia that targeted ATI's cards performance-wise.
Click to expand...
Dude, I am German and my English is poor:).

edit: Fermi and 5800 were designed for similar launch dates but NVidia showed up late to the party. Partly NVidia's design problem and partly TSMC's poor fab process meant yields were too low and respin was needed. If 512sp Fermi was released on schedule (Q4 2009), 5800 would have seemed almost mid-range.
 
Last edited:
555BUK said:
Wasn't the 4870 pretty much equal to a GTX260 and 15-20% slower than the 280? The 4870 was a superb value proposition (4850 was better), but it was not the top dog. The same also applied to 5870 and 5850.
Click to expand...

Exactly me point. Wasn;t it almost £100 cheaper than the gtx260 at launch yet almost matched it? That certainly caught Nvidia by surprise.
 
RavenXXX2 said:
The 5870 spanked the 280 and was on par with Nvidia's top dual GPU at the time the 295. I was not expecting the performance the 5870 gave.
Click to expand...

Hmm considering you said this afew weeks back

See what happens when you buy cheap AMD DX10 cards with DX11 tacked on, you become all bitter and twisted that you bought AMD instead of Nvidia and DX11 done right, so you you troll Nvidia vids defending your POS purchase ROFL
Click to expand...

Seems like that fiddle is already jigging to a new Tune. ;):p
 
Well I'm hoping the 6970 will give me a good enough reason to move off my 4870x2

I've paid for a u2711 (Still waiting for UPS to deliver!) for my main screen, so I want Eyefinity but the 6870 was still a slower card than my 4870x2. So chapping at the bit for this card and in the hope that hes going to be a good boost in performance.

Best is that I paid under £400 for my 4870x2, real shame you cant get dual GPU cards for that price no more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom