• 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.

The first "proper" Kepler news Fri 17th Feb?

psychodil said:
I think its amd who cant believe their luck that they have been able to charge what they like and still dominate high end for 2+ months.hurry up kepler!
Click to expand...

And a quick revision and Kepler will be insignificant.


xsistor said:
AMD might manage to beat GK104 but I doubt they will beat GK110 and GK112 when they launch.
Click to expand...

They won't need to. 6 months at the top is long enough to make some nice money.
 
Tenerife is what the 7970 _should_ have been and while a nice boost over the 580, etc. its nothing that special in terms of extra performance over the 7970 - AMD appear to have pretty much done what nVidia appear to be doing - what would have been the 7870 turned out a lot better than they anticipated and got rebranded the 7970 (their leaked roadmaps showed the 7870 due to come out when the 7970 did until quite close to launch).

If the clock boosted GK104 parts are as good as the information seems to suggest (the original mid-range designation would have put them between the 7950 and 7970) then tbh AMD have no answer to the real high end kepler parts when they come out as they are quite a lot higher spec than GK104.
 
Duff-Man said:
There isn't any "locked-out" logic on the 7970 chip:




e.g: here, here.
Click to expand...

Have they released any die shots yet proving otherwise? you can't deny that the 7970 has a lot of headroom for overclocking and great yields (possibly due to redundant cores).

AMD sources said that Bulldozer would be faster than Phenom core for core so they aren't exactly a trustworthy source. At the end of the day they are not going to easily admit to charging customers £450 for a part they've under-specced with a look to the future.
 
Last edited:
mmj_uk said:
Have they released any die shots yet proving otherwise? you can't deny that the 7970 has a lot of headroom for overclocking and great yields (possibly due to redundant cores).

AMD sources said that Bulldozer would be faster than Phenom core for core so they aren't exactly a trustworthy source. At the end of the day they are not going to easily admit to charging customers £450 for a part they've under-specced with a look to the future.
Click to expand...

I haven't seen any die shots.

I'm sure that Bulldozer IS faster than phenom, core-for-core, in certain applications, so such a statement is qualified truth.

However there would be no such qualification if AMD were to reveal that the Tahiti die has hidden / disabled cores. It would make their previous statement, by a top PR exec no less, a flat-out lie - and one made with full knowledge that it was entirely untrue. This is certainly not something AMD would want to be associated with.
 
opethdisciple said:
Any of this new info?

40% faster according to Nvidia.
Click to expand...

No, afraid not :(

The first is a repost of this chart, which was discussed earlier in the thread (see here for my take on it). I can't believe that people are still reposting the "6.0Gbps" figure for "memory speed". Surely this should be "6.0Ghz quad pumped"... 6Gbps would make no sense whatsoever, as the bandwidth of the GTX580 was 194GB/s.

The second link seems to be based on the other chart that has been doing the rounds for a few weeks (see here).
 
Duff-Man said:
No, afraid not :(

The first is a repost of this chart, which was discussed earlier in the thread (see here for my take on it). I can't believe that people are still reposting the "6.0Gbps" figure for "memory speed". Surely this should be "6.0Ghz quad pumped"... 6Gbps would make no sense whatsoever, as the bandwidth of the GTX580 was 194GB/s.

The second link seems to be based on the other chart that has been doing the rounds for a few weeks (see here).
Click to expand...

xsistor said:
I don't think that chart is from NVIDIA. Whoever made it is now laughing his head-off to see it linked around the web.
Click to expand...

I agree. That chart is fred in the sheds effort of fame.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom