AMD Radeon 7000-Series 28nm (Southern Islands) | 7990 7970 7870 7770 | Discussion

[NIGELG]

That's the correct answer and what I expect from a predator and aggressor mind-set. Thank you!

I'll ask again....which company in your view should be the predator?One of them only[Nvidia]?

580 IS the top end single GPU at 500 TO 549 bucks.Do you think that is a fair ''performance per dollar'' value?

 

[Lonyo]

Roughly estimation/calculation

At 365mm2 we could have ~156 dies per wafer with 100% yields.
Cayman will produce roughly the same number per wafer.

With $5000 per wafer each die will cost 5000/156 = ~$32.00
Lets assume TSMC asks 6000 per wafer, that will translate to 6000/156 = ~$38,5

I will assume Tahiti has at least 60% yields now, that will make ~94 dies per wafer. 6000/94 = ~64 per die

Let’s assume Cayman has 85% yields and at 389mm2 will produce ~133 dies per wafer. 5000/133 = ~$38.00 per die.

64-38 = $26 die price difference between Cayman and Tahiti
Now lets assume 1GB GDDR-5 is $25 more,

26+ 25 = $51.00

Well, even with low yields Tahiti 3GB only costs ~$50 more than Cayman

Edit: Just to add, AMD will purchase 1GB mach cheaper than $25, but wanted to inflate the price a little bit.

PCB costs will be higher due to the added complexity of the 384-bit memory bus.

 

[Skurge]

I think this might be my 1st high end video card purchase in a long time. It's the fastest single GPU card at the moment (for gaming and compute) and I have a feeling it will be for a while.

It's overclocks by over 20% with a non-existent increase in temps and a small increase in power use which brings it very close to 6990/590 speeds while using 100W less power.

As far as I can see it superior to every card around it in all areas if you expect to not pay a lot to get the best of everything then you are naive. Yes, I wish it was cheaper, but AMD need to make money and i will gladly pay more NOW so AMD can stay afloat and keep bringing us good products.

I'm perfectly OK with the $550 price tag. I don't know how much I'm going to pay for one. But as long as it isn't over $600 I'm going to get one and OC it.

As for the Architecture itself. I'll wait to see what kepler has in store, but GCN looks like it gives you best of both worlds from AMD's older archs and Fermi. It's still really fast for hashing like the 6900 series and it's 50-100% faster than the 6900 in other compute orientated benchmarks.

As for the small die thing. The 7970 has the same die size as a GTX560Ti and sells for nearly 3x more.

 

[Vesku]

If raw costs go up let's say $50 and your gross profit margin is 60% then the costs to your GPU board makers has gone up by $80. Then add in GPU makers margin then retailers margin, granted it's not always 1:1 but don't expect to avoid having to pay for the chain of hands that finally sees the GPU reach your desk.

For the record, I hope NVIDIA does well in executing 28nm because it is troubling from the pocketbook perspective to have to rely on NVIDIA for lower GPU prices. If they have extra trouble with 28nm then deal seekers, such as myself, will have to rely on fond memories to get us through this generation.

 

[SirPauly]

The best part about this whole argument is that all the nvidia fanboys are comparing the 7970 to the THIRD best nvidia GPU and saying that it's crap the 7970 costs $549 at launch.

The 3gb gtx 580 which is the second best nvidia GPU costs $600. The 7970 blows this thing to kingdom come in terms of price/performance. Now overclock the 7970 and it's comparable in performance to the $749 gtx590.

Anyways, long story short, anyone arguing that this card is priced to high is an idiot. They undercut nvidia by $50 on the single GPU high end with a 24% faster (more like 40% when oc'ed) GPU and that's a problem?

All I see in this thread is a bunch of people secretly in love with the 7970 that don't have the cheddar to shell out for one, so they are throwing a tantrum like a 5 year old that didn't get what he wanted for christmas.

If you desire to compare a year old GPU still premium priced as an objective barometer to define value -- that's fine. To me, best bang-for-the-buck are not these premium priced sku's -- let's find out the value then when more information is released.

It's nice to see AMD take the crown, have execution advantages, really don't care which side wins, never did. What I do desire is for them to compete, innovate the gaming experience and provide choice across many price-points.

 

[SirPauly]

I'll ask again....which company in your view should be the predator?One of them only[Nvidia]?

580 IS the top end single GPU at 500 TO 549 bucks.Do you think that is a fair ''performance per dollar'' value?

IF I had an ideal choice, would ideally like to see both offer 399 MSRP high-end cards and trickle down the performance from there.

I think a company has to be predator and aggressor to survive and flourish and believe both have to be. Gamers may complain and whine but if the IHV fails and don't have solid revenues, profits and margins, there would be no choice to complain and whine about. The bottom line comes first.

 

[AtenRa]

PCB costs will be higher due to the added complexity of the 384-bit memory bus.

True, but i dont believe PCB cost will add that much to the overall cost, not to mention the argument was that the die would cost mach more because of TSMC and the added 1GB ram.

As for the price,
My only concern is that prices for both companies will rise across all segments. I dont have any problem with 7970 costing $500+ now that it is the fastest card, as long as it will fall down when the next higher performance card will be released at the same or less price point and each lower segment will give us higher performance at the same price point of last year

 

[tweakboy]

Let me guess proper drivers and CCC to go along with that red pcb. Go Red!

 

[SirPauly]

EXACTLY. Nvidia sets the price of the 7970 just as much as AMD does. If the GTX580 all the sudden gets reduced to like $300 guess what AMD has to do to keep selling GPU'S? They have to cut prices. It's not rocket science people.

The nvidia fan boys are pretty much pissed that at $549 the 7970 isn't going to force the gtx580 price down as much as they would probably like to see.

Imho,

AMD has to force nVidia to reduce pricing based on the GTX 580 is still premium priced and there is no movement from nVidia as of yet.

I would wager a cookie that the HD 7950 would force nVidia to reduce their premium price of the GTX 580. There is not too much nVidia can do to reduce the 7970, they don't have the ammunition to do this. The HD 7950 is AMD's answer to the GTX 580 to me, and the HD 7970 is by itself really and has the crown -- should help with AMD's mindshare, brand names, halo effect, and bring in revenue and nice margins.

Wonder what nVidia insiders think of AMD's new strategy?

 

[biostud]

I'm wondering at what price point you will be able to get a 7950 w/1.5Gb memory. It should be faster than a 580GTX with same amount of memory. $350-400?

 

[hclarkjr]

I'm wondering at what price point you will be able to get a 7950 w/1.5Gb memory. It should be faster than a 580GTX with same amount of memory. $350-400?

this sis what i am anxious to see, where the 7950's fit in on the benchmark charts.

 

[AnandThenMan]

AMD is pricing this card too high from the start. And judging AMD's pricing history, they won't adjust prices until AFTER Kepler comes out, which I think will be a dumb move. They will have missed out on many, many potential sales if they would have presented a better value from the start.

AMD will price their products in the range where they feel they can maximize profits. If that means selling fewer cards but with higher profit/unit, then that is how the pricing will be set.

But, for me, the nit-pick is still there about performance/dollar considering it is a new arch and a new node.

Cheese and rice man, how many times are you going to repeat this? We get it, you think a new node should bring untold increases in performance. But that is NOT AMD's strategy, they aim for a certain die size on a given node, and stick to it. That yields the kind of performance increases we are seeing with the 7970. If AMD wanted to, they would bump up the die size and make a wider chip. It would cost more, would suck back more power, but it would have higher performance. What part of that don't you understand?

You are incessantly beating the node shrink drum, we get it you don't agree with AMD's strategy. Why do you care anyway, you have no intention of buying an AMD GPU in the first place. Wait another ~6 months and hope Nvidia offers a node shrink/performance bump that will satisfy you.

 

[SirPauly]

AMD will price their products in the range where they feel they can maximize profits. If that means selling fewer cards but with higher profit/unit, then that is how the pricing will be set.

Okay.

You are incessantly beating the node shrink drum, we get it you don't agree with AMD's strategy. Why do you care anyway, you have no intention of buying an AMD GPU in the first place. Wait another ~6 months and hope Nvidia offers a node shrink/performance bump that will satisfy you.

You don't know that and nVidia extremists said the identical thing you're offering now, I would never buy an nVidia chip when I gamed on ATI hardware for many years. You wanna know why? Companies change and go in a different direction. What you see from AMD last year may not be the same this year -- see price increases -- and the next year -- could be more performance per dollar, a feature that may raise the bar of immersion, improvements for the quality of the pixel. It is unwise to underestimate AMD or nVidia and pay attention real close on both of them because they're both very talented.

 

[badb0y]

How dare AMD charge me $550 for the fastest GPU on the planet.

 

[RussianSensation]

A fair point was the 5870 was well balanced and offered strong performance, while being cooler and more power efficient.

and cheaper by $150.

 

[tviceman]

Roughly estimation/calculation

At 365mm2 we could have ~156 dies per wafer with 100% yields.
Cayman will produce roughly the same number per wafer.

With $5000 per wafer each die will cost 5000/156 = ~$32.00
Lets assume TSMC asks 6000 per wafer, that will translate to 6000/156 = ~$38,5

I will assume Tahiti has at least 60% yields now, that will make ~94 dies per wafer. 6000/94 = ~64 per die

Let’s assume Cayman has 85% yields and at 389mm2 will produce ~133 dies per wafer. 5000/133 = ~$38.00 per die.

64-38 = $26 die price difference between Cayman and Tahiti
Now lets assume 1GB GDDR-5 is $25 more,

26+ 25 = $51.00

Well, even with low yields Tahiti 3GB only costs ~$50 more than Cayman

Edit: Just to add, AMD will purchase 1GB mach cheaper than $25, but wanted to inflate the price a little bit.

I don't pretend to know what yields are for each part, and how much vram costs. I don't think they are getting 60% yields of fully functional Tahiti parts, probably. That would only leave 40% of the wafer to split up between completely unusable dies and two other sku's that will each probably sell significantly higher volume than hd7970. So I'm estimating they are getting around 40% right now, but will trend upward and eventually release an hd7980 of sorts. But if the rest of your calculations are close to accurate (and they look reasonable to me), AMD could charge $450 per hd7970, still be making more money than they did per hd6970, and at the same time completely eliminate the gtx580 from even being a consideration to informed consumers. It's too bad for AMD that they don't do this, and luckily for Nvidia it gives them some breathing room until they can get Kepler out.

 

[krumme]

and cheaper by $150.

Hehe. Give it up. You like that 7970. Its love, and you need it.

 

[Smartazz]

I don't pretend to know what yields are for each part, and how much vram costs. But if your calculations are close to accurate, AMD could charge $450 per hd7970, still be making more money than they did of the hd6970, and at the same time completely eliminate the gtx580 from even being a consideration. It's too bad for AMD that they don't do this, and it gives Nvidia some breathing room until they can get Kepler out.

Perhaps AMD expects the card to sell out anyway at $550. It is undeniably the better buy vs the 3GB GTX 580. If I were in the market for a top end GPU, the 7970 would be my choice. If Kepler turns out to be significantly better, just sell it and buy the 680.

 

[tviceman]

AMD will price their products in the range where they feel they can maximize profits. If that means selling fewer cards but with higher profit/unit, then that is how the pricing will be set.

Yeah I think AMD believes that, but the actions and decisions a company makes does not always mean that it is ultimately the best thing to do. There are plenty of people that sit in a conference room and come up with all sorts of asinine ideas that ultimately end up selling companies short.

 

[SirPauly]

Perhaps AMD expects the card to sell out anyway at $550.

They will probably sell every one they create, imho.

 

[notty22]

It will sell out. There is no doubt in my mind. That does not really effect the over-all business model for the new launch. Intel even sold out briefly recently, with SB-E. We have a limited number of fabs, VS potential customers some who are buyers regardless of value/circumstances.

 

[krumme]

The value of a brand and a professional technical marketing team that can "inform" and keep good relations with say fx anandtech, is that you can define what is important and what is in focus and thereby what is not in focus. You have strategically the option to decide if fx single gpu or single gfx card performance is what is weighted most. Read the anandtech article again, and notice the small hints. Anandtech have a shitty relationsship with AMD graphfics devisions, and it creeps into every article. Thats the reason you pay for technical marketing. It works when its good. I guess AMD only gives Anandtech cards because they know that they would get it otherwise. Man, the relationsship,- its like most marriages

Now what i dont understand is, why AMD dont shut down the option for the fastest gpu focus, that carries so much consumer enthusiasm. AMD clearly had the efficiency lead since the 4 series. They should just design a huge 650mm2 card for branding purposes and NV would not have the option to counter attact it.

 

[RussianSensation]

Secondly my point stands that cards in this price bracket are for buyers who are not looking for the best bang for their buck. ....In short, best card on the market has a big price tag on it, what a surprise.

Considering the previous best, the 580 is $500, and the new best, the 7970, is $550. I think you're getting a pretty good deal all told for 30% more performance @ $50, especially considering there is nothing else on the market that competes. You want the best, you pay for it.

I see that side of your point. People who want the best single-GPU don't really care how long it took to get there, they'll upgrade to it anyway. I just hope this isn't a start to constantly rising prices (i.e., GTX680 20% faster for $599, then HD8970 25-30% faster than Kepler for $649, etc. etc.)

The best part about this whole argument is that all the nvidia fanboys are comparing the 7970 to the THIRD best nvidia GPU and saying that it's crap the 7970 costs $549 at launch. The 3gb gtx 580 which is the second best nvidia GPU costs $600.

The reason nobody cares to talk about GTX580 3GB is because it adds no additional playability at 2560x1600 4AA when you might want > 1.5GB of VRAM since the GPU runs out of power before it runs out of VRAM. If you find a single benchmark where 3GB of VRAM actually benefits the GTX580 (and we aren't talking about going from 28 to 32 fps), then your comment can be taken seriously. If you are going to be gaming on 3x 1080P monitors with 2x HD7970s, then we can start talking about 3GB of VRAM adding value. Even AMD is going to launch a $400 HD7950 with 'only' 1.5GB of VRAM.

But I suppose it's way easier to just toss all the logical arguments you don't agree with as "NV fanboys". It's working well so far.

Anyways, long story short, anyone arguing that this card is priced to high is an idiot. They undercut nvidia by $50 on the single GPU high end with a 24% faster (more like 40% when oc'ed) GPU and that's a problem? All I see in this thread is a bunch of people secretly in love with the 7970 that don't have the cheddar to shell out for one, so they are throwing a tantrum like a 5 year old that didn't get what he wanted for christmas.

"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." ~ F. Scott Fitzgerald

Idea #1: HD7970 is an excellent card compared to the GTX580. It gives you 25% more performance for only a 10% higher price over the GTX580, while functioning at a lower level of power consumption, and providing industry leading features such as multi-monitor support, ZeroCore Power and unmatched overclocking abilities.

Idea #2: HD7970's 25% higher performance over the previous best card is not what is normally expected from a new generation given the length of time to release, coupled with a node shrink.

Both of these can make sense, depending on how you look at it.

I suppose if someone disagrees with your opinion, "they must be an idiot"? Sound logical argument with a lot of thought put into it.

 

[Vesku]

Idea #2: HD7970's 25% higher performance over the previous best card is not what is normally expected from a new generation given the length of time to release, coupled with a node shrink.

Idea #3: A medium die 28nm GPU with pre-launch drivers beats a near physical limits 40nm GPU with mature drivers by 25%. Disregard performance improvement over same companies medium die mature 2nd gen 40nm GPU. Make lots of posts about the pricing seeming off while alluding to fears that NVIDIA will use this opportunity to drive the price brackets upwards.

 

[Arkadrel]

The best part about this whole argument is that all the nvidia fanboys are comparing the 7970 to the THIRD best nvidia GPU and saying that it's crap the 7970 costs $549 at launch.

The 3gb gtx 580 which is the second best nvidia GPU costs $600. The 7970 blows this thing to kingdom come in terms of price/performance. Now overclock the 7970 and it's comparable in performance to the $749 gtx590.

Anyways, long story short, anyone arguing that this card is priced to high is an idiot. They undercut nvidia by $50 on the single GPU high end with a 24% faster (more like 40% when oc'ed) GPU and that's a problem?

All I see in this thread is a bunch of people secretly in love with the 7970 that don't have the cheddar to shell out for one, so they are throwing a tantrum like a 5 year old that didn't get what he wanted for christmas.

+1 for this post, basically how I feel about it.

Notice how the only people vocal about the price, are the nvidia users.... weird.... Im pretty sure they expect their 680 to be priced lower than the 7970? right?


and this:

A Big LOL from some of the members above me. I would expect nothing different; and, so the tune plays on... Whether you like it or not, Groove is right. What I find downright hilarious is these vocal members who keep spouting about paying a price premium...let me see, do they own Nvidia cards...yep..check on that...Give me a break..I didn't hear anyone complaining about the price of the 480 and 580 when they held the top crown..However, now that AMD has the fastest card, we should all cry about price on a TOP TIER card. Whatever floats your boat.

Basically this thread has become nvidia user whine fest.

Imho,

AMD has to force nVidia to reduce pricing based on the GTX 580 is still premium priced and there is no movement from nVidia as of yet.

Nvidias turn to force AMD to lower.... nvidia can do it too, its not like its limited to AMD to keep prices down.
They have 6-7months where they can lower their prices, and try and force amd to lower theirs if they want too.