• 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.

'Final' 6990 specs

Much bigger tha 1920sp's would start to get big to the detriment of yields though so its unlikely.

Charlie has posted TWO rumours on Cayman so far, 4d MONTHS before anyone else posted slides to confirm this, he was the ONLY source on that, the only other thing he said which again no one else has come close to suggesting, is a just under 400mm2 core, meaning around 20% bigger than Cypress, and considering the new 4d shader group is bigger than 4 old shaders, but smaller than the whole 5d cluster it means shader for shader its actually slightly bigger(but then savings in core logic and seemingly less rops/other bits per shader, so probably evens out so a 1920 cypress/cayman wouldn't be noticeably different in size).

It would pretty much at a minimum be 10% more shaders if 1920 were only a 6950, which means you're now pushing up to 430mm2 and getting dangerously close to very expensive cores.

I would be pretty surprised if they went "that" big.

Also, I'll just mention again disabling parts of the core doesn't scale power down perfectly, its FAR better to have 2x top cores at say 750Mhz, than the same performance but 2x partially disabled cores at a higher clock speed. For any performance combination they could go for two fully enabled cores with lower clock speeds and lower voltage to get that clock speed will always be a better power option two cores with less shaders but higher clock speed and more voltage.

Hence the 4870x2, 5970, remember the 285gtx was a power whore yet the 295gtx had two "full" cores with lowered clock speeds and disabled part of the bus and reduced memory size slightly to reduce the power.

Theres almost no chance at all of the 6990 using anything but 6970 cores at the lowest voltage possible. The bandwidth numbers for the 6990 were also, underwhelming, I'd expect final 6970 numbers to be increased for bandwidth and to use higher voltage and higher speed memory while the 6990 will be underclocked.

Hopefully memory voltage will be adjustable, I mean remember end of the day the 5970 was released as an overclocking card from the get go, every review basically focused on how AMD meant the thing to be overclocked. 300W for the point, for real use you buy it and whack it WAY up in performance.
 
But using a pair of 1920sp cores even if they are to be limited 300 watt max, will more than likely hurt sales of single HD6970 1920sp cards.

Edit yes a meant Cayman of course. Also in my reply to Duff Man I meant the the HD6950 could be made to use 150 watts or so, or be made to look that way. I'm was not saying that will be the case, just pointing out that its not impossible.
 
Last edited:
Jigger the 6990 and the 6970 will be aimed at two different markets. Their pricing should almost differentiate that (USD399 vs USD599??). The 6990 will be aimed at the extreme enthusiast whilst the 6970 will appeal to the mere mortal "budget" enthusiast.

I don't have numbers, but i'm sure that all X2 (3870x2, 4870x2, 5970) will have been outsold by their fastest single card compatriots (3870, 4870, 5870)
 
A pair of HD6970's have to somehow beat a single HD6990 by a fair margin, or the xfire sales go down the pan.
Either that or ATI will at some point, have to make a massive price adjustment to make sales.
 
Seems like a clever way to get round the TDP cap.

By default card comes with 300W TDP cap, OEMs use it and can maybe lock it etc.

However the power system is overdesigned, can maybe handle 400W and with the software you can easily unlock so the enthusiasts can unlock it.
 
jigger said:
A pair of HD6970's have to somehow beat a single HD6990 by a fair margin, or the xfire sales go down the pan.
Either that or ATI will at some point, have to make a massive price adjustment to make sales.
Click to expand...
The 6970 must have faster clocks for it to be worthwhile, but that much is obvious. I'd say 850mhz - 900mhz on the core would be sufficient for a lead over the 6990.
This would bump up the TDP of the 6970 a fair way, but I'm guessing they have a lot of headroom.
 
jigger said:
A pair of HD6970's have to somehow beat a single HD6990 by a fair margin, or the xfire sales go down the pan.
Either that or ATI will at some point, have to make a massive price adjustment to make sales.
Click to expand...

AMD sell the cores(after an early batch of full cards) to their partners, 2 full 6970 cores, or 2x 6990, they can sell the cores themselves to whoever wants to stick them on cards, for however much they want.

A good 6990 won't cut sales of 6970's, AMD sell 2 6970 cores in both situations, they lose no sales.

The difference is, Sapphire can appeal to two different types of customers, those who want a single card, those who want xfire setups and those that want the simplicity of xfire on one card.

If there was a person who wanted the single fastest CARD available but didn't want to xfire, without the 6990(for arguments sake lets say the 580gtx is faster than a 6970) that buyer would get a 580gtx, thats two cores lost because there wasn't an option. Sapphire lose a sale and buy 2 less 6970 cores off AMD.

They sell a 6990 for £500 and a 6970 for £300, a customer can afford £300 now and £300 later and his card has died, for convinience and better overclocking he decides to pay a little more and get xfire'd 6970's but months apart, he buys two cores.

Theres entirely no reason at all that 2x6970 has to beat 6990, not a single tiny reason as to AMD its the same number of cores.

The can sell each 6970 core for £150 to partners, and every pair of cores for a 6990 card at for £200, or £350, they can set pricing however they choose.

The key thing here is to fill every option, so everyone that has their own preference has a choice. In reality even if the 6990 had identical core specs, same clocks, same tdp, same everything as the 6970 it wouldn't matter, 2x pci-e slots, and more power connectors, less heat on one heatsink all lead to better overclocking potential and lower sound, there will always be reasons to choose one over the other.
 
drunkenmaster said:
AMD sell the cores(after an early batch of full cards) to their partners, 2 full 6970 cores, or 2x 6990, they can sell the cores themselves to whoever wants to stick them on cards, for however much they want.

A good 6990 won't cut sales of 6970's, AMD sell 2 6970 cores in both situations, they lose no sales.

The difference is, Sapphire can appeal to two different types of customers, those who want a single card, those who want xfire setups and those that want the simplicity of xfire on one card.

If there was a person who wanted the single fastest CARD available but didn't want to xfire, without the 6990(for arguments sake lets say the 580gtx is faster than a 6970) that buyer would get a 580gtx, thats two cores lost because there wasn't an option. Sapphire lose a sale and buy 2 less 6970 cores off AMD.

They sell a 6990 for £500 and a 6970 for £300, a customer can afford £300 now and £300 later and his card has died, for convinience and better overclocking he decides to pay a little more and get xfire'd 6970's but months apart, he buys two cores.

Theres entirely no reason at all that 2x6970 has to beat 6990, not a single tiny reason as to AMD its the same number of cores.

The can sell each 6970 core for £150 to partners, and every pair of cores for a 6990 card at for £200, or £350, they can set pricing however they choose.

The key thing here is to fill every option, so everyone that has their own preference has a choice. In reality even if the 6990 had identical core specs, same clocks, same tdp, same everything as the 6970 it wouldn't matter, 2x pci-e slots, and more power connectors, less heat on one heatsink all lead to better overclocking potential and lower sound, there will always be reasons to choose one over the other.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but thats not how it works DM. ATI will sell x amount of cores on order. If they sell slow then Sapphire will buy less, ATI lose money and have to keep stock, or kill production until the order is re placed, or price a adjustment gets us mere mortals buying cards.

A very strong HD6990 will hurt sales of the HD6970, the cores don't just fall into a black hole that spits money out :p
 
Last edited:
jigger said:
I'm sorry but thats not how it works DM. ATI will sell x amount of cores on order. If they sell slow then Sapphire will buy less, ATI lose money and have to keep stock, or kill production until the order is re placed, or price a adjustment gets us mere mortals buying cards.

A very strong HD6990 will hurt sales of the HD6970, the cores don't just fall into a black hole that spits money out :p
Click to expand...

What you're saying makes no sense, they sell 1million 6970 cores to be built into 6970 cards, or they sell 1 million 6970 cores to be built into 6990 cards.

If 6990 sales are great and 6970's move slow, AMD sell more 6970 cores for use in the 6990 cards that are selling like hotcakes, it makes no difference.

Likewise, 6990 sales and people with 6970 xfire will make up 3-4% of all 6970 sales, because thats life.

Not entirely accurate numbers because its an example, but of the 25mil 5xxx cards AMD sold, 8-9mil will be 5570's or below, 5mil will be 5670's, 7mil will be 5770's and 3mil will be 5850-5970's. Of those cards 2mil will be the 5850, 800k will be 5870, and 200k will be 5970's.

THe more expensive the cards, the less people buy them, xfire/dual gpu cards are miniscule sales compared to the "value" high end card, 5850/470gtx/275gtx/4850 sales DWARF sales of things like 295gtx/4870x2/5970/6990's.

The 5970 was NOT underclocked to make sure it didn't perform close to 5870xf, it was underclocked to get voltage low enough to sit just under 300W at load, considering unlike the 5870, the entire 5970 launch and official slides and info from AMD was "clock this bad boy up".

a 6990 with identical clock speed, memory speed, shader count etc, will be slower than 2x 6870's put in two different slots with a little more bandwidth, more overclocking headroom, better temps, etc, etc. People who buy a 5970 or 5870xf make a choice some want better performance at a much increased price, some want a single card, thats life.
 
drunkenmaster said:
What you're saying makes no sense, they sell 1million 6970 cores to be built into 6970 cards, or they sell 1 million 6970 cores to be built into 6990 cards.

If 6990 sales are great and 6970's move slow, AMD sell more 6970 cores for use in the 6990 cards that are selling like hotcakes, it makes no difference.

Likewise, 6990 sales and people with 6970 xfire will make up 3-4% of all 6970 sales, because thats life.

Not entirely accurate numbers because its an example, but of the 25mil 5xxx cards AMD sold, 8-9mil will be 5570's or below, 5mil will be 5670's, 7mil will be 5770's and 3mil will be 5850-5970's. Of those cards 2mil will be the 5850, 800k will be 5870, and 200k will be 5970's.

THe more expensive the cards, the less people buy them, xfire/dual gpu cards are miniscule sales compared to the "value" high end card, 5850/470gtx/275gtx/4850 sales DWARF sales of things like 295gtx/4870x2/5970/6990's.

The 5970 was NOT underclocked to make sure it didn't perform close to 5870xf, it was underclocked to get voltage low enough to sit just under 300W at load, considering unlike the 5870, the entire 5970 launch and official slides and info from AMD was "clock this bad boy up".

a 6990 with identical clock speed, memory speed, shader count etc, will be slower than 2x 6870's put in two different slots with a little more bandwidth, more overclocking headroom, better temps, etc, etc. People who buy a 5970 or 5870xf make a choice some want better performance at a much increased price, some want a single card, thats life.
Click to expand...

What I'm saying make perfect sense. Why would you pay £550~ for a pair HD6970 when a HD6990 will give the same performance for £100~ less ?

People want raw performance, and that's what sells cards. Everything after that is secondary.

Your thinking that Sapphire will just swallow up the same number of cores regardless is wrong I'm afraid.
 
RavenXXX2 said:
5970 is 2x5870 cores clocked way down, betting the 6990 will be 2x6970 cores clocked down as well.
Click to expand...
I think you're right when you say the 6970 is going to be a slower clock speed, but I guess now one know how downclocking is going to take place util it hits the shops.

When you say 'clocked way down' which would be faster out of a single 5970 or 2x5850's in CF? Or are they a pretty even match?

A single 5970 is about the same price as 2 x 5850's, so I'd hope that the 6990 is going to be a similar price to 2 x 6950's...
 
jigger said:
What I'm saying make perfect sense. Why would you pay £550~ for a pair HD6970 when a HD6990 will give the same performance for £100~ less ?

People want raw performance, and that's what sells cards. Everything after that is secondary.

Your thinking that Sapphire will just swallow up the same number of cores regardless is wrong I'm afraid.
Click to expand...

You seem to again be ignoring the fact that, buyer A buys 2 6970 cards, Sapphire bought two 6970 cores from AMD, AMD couldn't give a monkeys what card they end up in.

Buyer B buys a single 6990 card, it has 2x 6970 cores in it, Sapphire bought two 6970 cores from AMD, AMD couldn't give a monkeys what card they end up in.

You seem to be missing the point that, AMD do not make PCB's, they don't make memory chips, they don't supply the outputs or the copper for the circuitry, they supply the cores, buying either setup requires two cores.

As for why would anyone buy 2x 6870 cores if they perform the same as 1x6990 card, well, 99.999% of AMD buyers won't be spending more than £350 full stop, so will buy neither a 6990 nor a 6970, its almost entirely irrelevant to their bottom line. Secondly, AMD sells two cores either way, thirdly, LOTS of people buy one card then add a second card later, thirdly, 2x6970's WILL always outperform 2x6990 if the cores have the same spec, more bandwidth, more cooling, more overclocking, same clocks will make them close, but not identical.

Others, despite the fact tha 2x5870's are faster, AND despite the fact that a 5970 was heavily price gouged in the UK(RRP was £440, exceptional value, UK retail price, £550+) so really wasn't as good value and overclocked worse STILL bought 5970's. SImple fact is some people want two card xfire, and some people will buy a single card regardless, you keep ignoring these points.

Did everyone buy a 5850 because it was insanely better value than a 5870, no, because some people wanted the extra 10% performance it inherantly had, did some people buy a pre-overclocked £500 + 480gtx for no real reason, yes, because some people are nuts.

Options = more sales, less options = less sales.

This all started because you made this statement

A pair of HD6970's have to somehow beat a single HD6990 by a fair margin, or the xfire sales go down the pan.
Either that or ATI will at some point, have to make a massive price adjustment to make sales.
Click to expand...

While ignoring the fact that in BOTH situations AMD sells 2 gpu's, and you still seem to miss that fundamental point.
 
I thought of one last way to try and point out where Jigger's wrong, then I'm giving up.

Jigger, do you realise that you are trying to argue that somehow 2x1 > 1x2.

AMD sell Sapphire 100 cores, if they end up in 50 6990 cards, or 100 6970 cards, its still 100 cores sold. The 6990 is 6970 Xf on one card, thats all, your argument, was that if the 6990 was too good, it would eat into 6970 xf sales, can you really not see the flaw in your argument, essentially too many 6970xf(one card) sales, will eat into 6970xf(two card version) sales.

Ok, thats it, I'm out, my brain can't take any more and if Jiggers correct the entire mathematical system we've used for millenia will need to be thrown out of the window.

EDIT:- The ONLY issue I have with the rejigged AMD naming scheme, is I'm so damn used to typing 5870 that I keep typing 6870 when I mean 6970 :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom