Amd Renames 57xx to 67xx

[MangoX]

This is getting blown out of proportion. You guys can complain all you want. I don't care if they rename these low end stuff.

 

[taltamir]

3 possible viewpoints:

1.) It's a rebrand, plain and simple. Rebrands are always an attempt to dupe consumers into thinking something old is something new, so it's deceptive and kind of pointless.


2.) 6870 is slower than 5870 (by about 5-10%), 6850 is slower than 5850, so, hey, a 6770 at equal performance to 5770 is progress .


3.) AMD has traditionally tested a new node with a lower ~$100 card, so with TSMC's 32nm and 28nm nodes not ready, the 6770 may have been an early axe on the chopping block when AMD found out that 32nm and 28nm was not ready, so that they could focus on Barts and Cayman.

--------------
I personally find rebrands to be annoying, but I suspect viewpoint #3 may have some merit to why the 6770 is a rebrand too. AMD doesn't usually do this with any x7xx or x8xx series cards.

I honestly don't see why those 3 views should be considered mutually exclusive...
Nor are they they only possible views on the issue

 

[badb0y]

Naming convention changed with AMD.

The replacements of each card are below:

5970 - 6990
5870 - 6970
5850 - 6950
5830 - 6930~ Maybe
5770 - 6870
5750 - 6850
5670 - 6770
etc.

 

[dust]

Naming convention changed with AMD.

The replacements of each card are below:

5970 - 6990
5870 - 6970
5850 - 6950
5830 - 6930~ Maybe
5770 - 6870
5750 - 6850
5670 - 6770
etc.

Was the MSRP for the 6870 similar to the 5770 one? Top three make sense, unlike the last three.

 

[badb0y]

MSRP for 5850 was 259 vs MSRP for 6950 at 299$

EDIT:
To clarify, The HD 5870 was 379$, the HD 5850 was 269$, the 5770 was 159$ and the 5750 was 109/129. The problem was AMD had trouble filling in the the gaps so there were holes in their line ups. Considering this, the HD 68xx was born - a mid range contender.

The line up now is:
6990
6970
6950
6870
6850.

The problem NOW is that 6870/6850 are really close to the 6950. Check http://www.anandtech.com/show/4061/amds-radeon-hd-6970-radeon-hd-6950/13 for exact numbers. Everyone knows the prices of these cards so basically it boils down to this. They would need to make a card faster than 5770 but slower than 6850 which doesn't make any sense from a business point of view, it would be easier to re-brand it and sell it for a lower price. Would you rather have them waste money to make another chip that would marginally beat the current 5770 just so we can say "hey here's a pat on the back for not just re-badging the 5770, thanks." The fact of the matter is if they re-brand it and sell it at the regular 5770 MSRP than I would be mad at them for tricking customers but for now we don't know this so let's see where these cards land in MSRP before we crucify AMD next to nVidia lol.

Apart from this change they also changes the naming scheme of their lineup. If they used a regular naming scheme things would look like this:

5870 - 6870>Cayman
5850 - 6850>Cayman
5770 - 6770> Barts OR Half a Cayman
5750 - 6750> Barts OR Half a Cayman
5670 - 6770> Juniper XT re-badge OR Some new chip
5570 - 6750> Juniper PRO re-badge OR some new chip.

 

[evolucion8]

I don't understand why people still stating that the HD 6870 is slower than the HD 5870, they're virtually tied, they trade blows depending of the scene load. The higher the eye candy like shaders and Tessellation, the better the HD 6800 series perform, while in texture/ROP bound games the HD 5870 tends to distance itself a bit. The HD 6870 is a very efficient design, performing like a 1600 SP design while it has far less than that.

I don't like rebranding, but considering that usually their mainstream part is half slower than their higher end offerings, I see the HD 6770 as a replacement for the lower end market for the likes of the HD 5670 and HD 5650, after all the numbers has been shifted up. So in reality, having a low end midrange card like the HD 6770 performing like a mainstream card in previous generations is astonishing, twice faster than the previous HD 5670.

 

[RavenSEAL]

I don't understand why people still stating that the HD 6870 is slower than the HD 5870, they're virtually tied, they trade blows depending of the scene load. The higher the eye candy like shaders and Tessellation, the better the HD 6800 series perform, while in texture/ROP bound games the HD 5870 tends to distance itself a bit. The HD 6870 is a very efficient design, performing like a 1600 SP design while it has far less than that.

I don't like rebranding, but considering that usually their mainstream part is half slower than their higher end offerings, I see the HD 6770 as a replacement for the lower end market for the likes of the HD 5670 and HD 5650, after all the numbers has been shifted up. So in reality, having a low end midrange card like the HD 6770 performing like a mainstream card in previous generations is astonishing, twice faster than the previous HD 5670.

This is true, AMD did a very smart thing considering the majority of their consumer base are dedicated gamers, therefore, no one would really settle for low ress monitors. The 68xx and 69xx series perform extremely well @ high resolution. As a matter of fact, the nvidia cards beat the AMD at lower resolutions by several frames, but at 1080/1200, the AMDs takes off on by a few FPS.

 

[RavenSEAL]

Naming convention changed with AMD.

The replacements of each card are below:

5970 - 6990
5870 - 6970
5850 - 6950
5830 - 6930~ Maybe
5770 - 6870
5750 - 6850
5670 - 6770
etc.

How can you compare the 5750 to the HD6850? The 6850 has about 60% better performance. Makes no sense to me, and the pricing is WAY OFF.

 

[RavenSEAL]

5970>6990
5870>6970/6950(6950 being a lower tier of the same card)
5850>6870
5830>6850
5770>6770? 6830?
5750>6750? 6770?

 

[happy medium]

I don't understand why people still stating that the HD 6870 is slower than the HD 5870,

because it is? The 5870 often trades blows with a 6950. A 6870 trades blows with a gtx470.

 

[evolucion8]

because it is? The 5870 often trades blows with a 6950. A 6870 trades blows with a gtx470.

Those pictures are from the HD 6970 launch. Well, if 6fps in the best case scenario is makes the HD 5870 much faster than the HD 6870 then good for you. But certainly it is interesting how driver improvements moved the HD 5870 past the GTX 470, it may happen again with the HD 6970. Plus the HD 5870 only matched the HD 6950 in one of those tests, the HD 6950 was slightly faster overall.

 

[happy medium]

I rest my case,this is with 16 games and 3 synthetics benchmarks........I don't wanna go to far off topic.

and at all resolutions......................

 

[evolucion8]

Anandtech is far more reputable site than Techpowerup, so I don't see the point of posting reviews of different sites, after all, the results won't change much. So, if you believe that 6fps will do a difference fine, for me it won't. The HD 6870 is a better buy than the HD 5870 even if both costed the same, better Tesselation performance, lower power draw and better performance scalability with newer games due to its improved architecture.

{It also proved my point again and again that AMD cards tends to age better, the HD 5870 used to perform the same as the GTX 470 and look now, it is faster indeed.} So probably with newer drivers, the HD 6950 might even rival the GTX 570 at some point.

 

[blanketyblank]

On the bright side if they aren't going to change anything this means my 5770 is going to continue getting driver updates and support since it's going to be in their lineup for at least another year. Should also be possible to CF a 5770 and 6770 right?

 

[Wreckage]

So now AMD is re-branding cards and price gouging customers. As if they did not lose enough of their fans by killing off the ATI name and screwing up the 6900 launch.

The more things change, the more they stay the same. Maybe they have a hotfix for this situation?


Flame-bait is not acceptable. Stop and desist the needless baiting.

Moderator Idontcare

 

[Gloomy]

So now AMD is re-branding cards and price gouging customers. As if they did not lose enough of their fans by killing off the ATI name and screwing up the 6900 launch.

The more things change, the more they stay the same. Maybe they have a hotfix for this situation?

Did you react this violently in the past, when Nvidia did the same?

 

[Wreckage]

Did you react this violently in the past, when Nvidia did the same?

I just love the irony that's all.

 

[taltamir]

Did you react this violently in the past, when Nvidia did the same?

I could see his reaction being called inflammatory or a few other things... but violent?

 

[Gloomy]

I don't see any irony. Well, I do, but none that you would delight in.

Making disparaging remarks about AMD, implying ATi made the same mistakes and the company has not improved since the merger. Saying that customers are being gouged when the price for the card in question has not even been set yet, and despite the fact that the card in question will not even be available for retail, and finally, bringing into the conversation a completely unrelated matter in the form of a tongue-in-cheek jab at the company. Yes, this meets the definition of violent in more ways than one.

:|

Wait, how did AMD screw up the 69xx launch?

 

[badb0y]

I don't see any irony. Well, I do, but none that you would delight in.

Making disparaging remarks about AMD, implying ATi made the same mistakes and the company has not improved since the merger. Saying that customers are being gouged when the price for the card in question has not even been set yet, and despite the fact that the card in question will not even be available for retail, and finally, bringing into the conversation a completely unrelated matter in the form of a tongue-in-cheek jab at the company. Yes, this meets the definition of violent in more ways than one.

:|

Wait, how did AMD screw up the 69xx launch?

Did you forget? They said it would beat a GTX 580! Oh wait...

 

[-Slacker-]

I don't see the problem with this. Normally you would redesign a gpu of a new generation to fill in the performance range of a another gpu form a previous generation while bringing in better ergonomy (eg. less power consumption, less heat and noise, smaller size etc). Just like the hd 5770 replaced the hd 4870 and so on. The reasoning is that older, higher end performance ranges become mid range performance with the arrival of a new series of products, and so the new gpu must correspond to a mid range level of ergonomy.

But the 5770 is already a very efficient, ergonomic card, which fills in the performance range of what will be the hd 6770, so why would you go to the trouble of redesigning it? Are you concerned that the card will run on 80 watts tdp and not 70?

In contrast, the rebadging of the 9800gtx+ to gts 250 wasn't such an inspired move, because nvidia tried to market a card with high end/enthusiast power consumption, heat output and noise as a low end/mid range card under a different name.

These two situations are not the same.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

But the 5770 is already a very efficient, ergonomic card, which fills in the performance range of what will be the hd 6770, so why would you go to the trouble of redesigning it? Are you concerned that the card will run on 80 watts tdp and not 70?

And it's quite possible the manufacturing refinements at TSMC could have already lowered the general TDP of these chips. Juniper is just a very efficient chip. Although I am curious to see how the VLIW4 design translates into slower chips, especially versus VLIW5 midrange and low end chips.

And to add, there is no new DX standard the new generation brings. 5000 and 6000 are DX11. DisplayPort 2.0 would be nice, but I can see how they wouldn't justify this on a lower end part. UVD3 would be nice, but is it a big enough advantage over UVD2 to warrant a new chip design for Juniper? At least they are being thoughtful by including HDMI 1.4a, which is probably a more useful change than UVD3 and DP 2.0, especially for the OEM market.

 

[SirPauly]

I don't understand why people still stating that the HD 6870 is slower than the HD 5870, they're virtually tied, they trade blows depending of the scene load. The higher the eye candy like shaders and Tessellation, the better the HD 6800 series perform, while in texture/ROP bound games the HD 5870 tends to distance itself a bit. The HD 6870 is a very efficient design, performing like a 1600 SP design while it has far less than that.

I don't like rebranding, but considering that usually their mainstream part is half slower than their higher end offerings, I see the HD 6770 as a replacement for the lower end market for the likes of the HD 5670 and HD 5650, after all the numbers has been shifted up. So in reality, having a low end midrange card like the HD 6770 performing like a mainstream card in previous generations is astonishing, twice faster than the previous HD 5670.

The 6870 over-all, based on Computerbase.de's findings, is slower than a 5870.

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/...sli/23/#abschnitt_performancerating_ohne_aaaf

Even with DirectX 11 content:

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/...-sli/24/#abschnitt_performancerating_nach_api

 

[SirPauly]

Considering market and competition aspects, name changes are a reality to me. Ideally, one would like a crystal clear and concise naming convention for all but since when is anything really ideal?

 

[evolucion8]

Off course that it is slower, but by a slim margin. Look on any of my posts that I ever said that the HD 6870 was consistently faster than the HD 5870?