-
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
- Thread starter An Exception
- Start date
iHopes
Good to know there will be plenty stock of the 6970. For those thinking will the 6970 be faster than a 580, I got news for you, how does 30-40% faster at stock sound.
LOL
Many leaks from B3D, Xtreme, 3Dcenter, etc report that 570 up to 2% faster than 6970 in 90% games
6970 performance = 5870 OC
think about it guys, gibbos word were " its bloody fast "
raven and magicroundabouts contacts say pretty much the same
what were are seeing here isnt that, something is drastically wrong.
i for one think that come wednesday we will be looking back at this thread agreeing never to take leaked benchies seriously again
raven and magicroundabouts contacts say pretty much the same
what were are seeing here isnt that, something is drastically wrong.
i for one think that come wednesday we will be looking back at this thread agreeing never to take leaked benchies seriously again
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Jun 2010
- Posts
- 12,495
- Location
- London
To quote the Gib, just because I have nothing better to do on this Saturday evening and I have nothing else to offer the graphics card forum:
Here's some stone giant results, 45 FPS, that's the same as what I got with a 1000 core 5870, I call bull.
http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=6970stonegiant0n1s.jpg
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=17074149&postcount=1
http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=6970stonegiant0n1s.jpg
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=17074149&postcount=1
Associate
- Joined
- 23 May 2005
- Posts
- 812
- Location
- Hove
There is so much misinformation at the moment it's impossible to know where the cards actually stand, without being in the know. You have to hand it to AMD for the secrecy and misinformation, but this is so annoying!
It appears that these benchies are being done at HQ in CCC btw.
It appears that these benchies are being done at HQ in CCC btw.
What have they brought out ?
that guy "Ducati750ss" has pretty much proven to have the card.
not quite sure he has it set up correctly though , drivers must be bad.
you can follow pretty much everything he has posted here
http://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/15863940-post170.html
Since no-one else has posted these yet...
Leaked benchmarks are starting to trickle in from various sources. As always seems to be the case with early leaks from East Asian sources, the focus is on synthetic benchmarks rather than on games (though there is a crysis bench).
3D mark 11
"performance" preset:
"Xtreme"
... and a chart for reference: According to this it slips in just above a GTX570:
Heaven Bench
... and a stock GTX480 for comparison:
So certainly a large improvement over Cayman in tessellation. As a relative increase, not too far off what is expected from the "dual tessellator" we saw in Barts. Ignore the poor minimum frame score - that's almost certainly due to instantaneous paging (happens a lot in heaven if the demo has not been allowed to run through fully before benchmarking is started).
Crysis
Some crysis results to give a frame to the above:
Here the card comes in well ahead of the GTX480, but still a little behind the GTX580. I have to say I'm a little surprised at this... I expected that Crysis would be the AMD trump card. But getting very close to the 580 isn't too bad really.
... and finally a couple more card pictures:
Card length:
Of course, we should give far more weight to real game performance than artificial benchmarks like these. But still, if these results do hold true then we can expect slightly above GTX480 / GTX570 performance. If the card is 1536 shaders, that's more or less in line with what I've been expecting (~10% behind the GTX580). I'm sure we'll see it perform well in certain configurations though. Driver updates may improve performance also, but it's not looking anything like a GTX580 killer.
Also interesting that GPU-Z is reporting 1600 shaders... That could be the true shader count of the card, or could be just that GPU-Z does not recognise the card and so can't get accurate information.
Leaked benchmarks are starting to trickle in from various sources. As always seems to be the case with early leaks from East Asian sources, the focus is on synthetic benchmarks rather than on games (though there is a crysis bench).
3D mark 11
"performance" preset:
"Xtreme"
... and a chart for reference: According to this it slips in just above a GTX570:
Heaven Bench
... and a stock GTX480 for comparison:
So certainly a large improvement over Cayman in tessellation. As a relative increase, not too far off what is expected from the "dual tessellator" we saw in Barts. Ignore the poor minimum frame score - that's almost certainly due to instantaneous paging (happens a lot in heaven if the demo has not been allowed to run through fully before benchmarking is started).
Crysis
Some crysis results to give a frame to the above:
Here the card comes in well ahead of the GTX480, but still a little behind the GTX580. I have to say I'm a little surprised at this... I expected that Crysis would be the AMD trump card. But getting very close to the 580 isn't too bad really.
... and finally a couple more card pictures:
Card length:
Of course, we should give far more weight to real game performance than artificial benchmarks like these. But still, if these results do hold true then we can expect slightly above GTX480 / GTX570 performance. If the card is 1536 shaders, that's more or less in line with what I've been expecting (~10% behind the GTX580). I'm sure we'll see it perform well in certain configurations though. Driver updates may improve performance also, but it's not looking anything like a GTX580 killer.
Also interesting that GPU-Z is reporting 1600 shaders... That could be the true shader count of the card, or could be just that GPU-Z does not recognise the card and so can't get accurate information.
Last edited:
I've flip flopped ATI/Nvidia for yearsSomething weird there - will recheck my results but did a quick run with one of my GTX470 at stock and got higher heaven 2.1 fps than that stock 480 result.
it is possible I had 800MHz dialed in by accident but I thought I'd reset the overclock before testing (I am also on newer drivers which do have an fps gain over 260.99 in heaven but I wouldn't have thought it was that big a gain).
it is possible I had 800MHz dialed in by accident but I thought I'd reset the overclock before testing (I am also on newer drivers which do have an fps gain over 260.99 in heaven but I wouldn't have thought it was that big a gain).
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 31,179
Wow, if true then the 570@£250ish (and mad 6970 pricing if true) is looking like a good deal!
Well, I'm sure that AMD will price it competitively. It's been a long time since an AMD product was priced above its nvidia performance-equivalent, and I don't see any reason that this would change now. If the 6970 is truly only slightly above GTX570 performance, I'm sure we will see it priced similarly or lower.
If that's the case, AMD will have had a major step backwards in efficiency. A 20% performance increase over a 5870 makes so little sense when you compare the efficiency improvements they made with the 6800s.