ATI RV740 to become 4730 & 4750

[thilanliyan]

http://www.techpowerup.com/835...730_HD_4750_SKUs?.html

 

[AstroManLuca]

Wow, do they really need more low-mid SKUs? They've already got the 4650 and 4670 bringing up the low end (but still adequate for gaming) segment, and the 4830 and 4850 are already occupying the $100-$150 segment.

 

[thilanliyan]

It'll be manufactured on the 40nm process so should be cheaper to make for ATI.

 

[SunnyD]

hmm... 640 SPU = 4830... however 128-bit bus = 4670... but GDDR5 = ... ?

I have a feeling this thing might be underwhelming, with little reason to buy it over a 4830. Pricewise, it's hard to see this fitting in competitively with the 4850 and 4830 occupying the $80-$130 range.

 

[BernardP]

And, according tu Fudzilla, NVidia should have 40nm GT216 to fight it. Rumored to be in the same performance class as 9600GT, but with lower power consumption:

GT216 in April?

 

[SlowSpyder]

DDR5 over 128bit and 640 stream processors... are they going to replace the 4830? Not sure it makes sense to have them both, I bet the performance is pretty close assuming clock speeds are in the same ballpark.

 

[AzN]

Makes sense. This will be cheaper to produce than 4830. Should be equal to 4830.

 

[SunnyD]

Originally posted by: Azn
Makes sense. This will be cheaper to produce than 4830. Should be equal to 4830.

But is the GDDR5 going to be enough to counter the castrated bus? I wonder how much of an impact it is going to have on things like AA. I have a feeling overall it will perform a bit worse than a 4830, unless it's clocked higher and there's other improvements.

Granted it's not apples to apples, but look what happened with the 9600GSO.

 

[AzN]

Gddr5 does 2x the clock gddr3 can. This equates same amount of bandwidth as 4830. 128 bit bus means lower transistors and cost while gddr5 equates same amount of bandwidth.

Overall 4730 will be somewhere in between 4670 and 4830 because it uses gddr3. 4750 will be somewhere between 4830 and 4850.

4750:
640 shaders
32 tmus (22.4 gt/s)
16 ROP (11.2 gp/s)
128-bit
700/3600 (900 Gflops, 57.6gbps)
50-60W

4730?:
640 shaders
32 tmus (18.4 gt/s)
16 ROP (9.2 gp/s)
128-bit
575/2000 (736Gflops, 32 gbps)

compared to:

4850:
800 shaders
40 tmus (25 gt/s)
16 ROP (10 gp/s)
256-bit
625/2000 (1000 gflops, 64gbps)
110W

4830:
640 shaders
32 tmus (18.4 gt/s)
16 ROPs (9.2 gp/s)
256-bit
575/1800 (736 Gflops, 57.6gbps)
110W

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: SunnyD

Originally posted by: Azn
Makes sense. This will be cheaper to produce than 4830. Should be equal to 4830.

But is the GDDR5 going to be enough to counter the castrated bus? I wonder how much of an impact it is going to have on things like AA. I have a feeling overall it will perform a bit worse than a 4830, unless it's clocked higher and there's other improvements.

Granted it's not apples to apples, but look what happened with the 9600GSO.

its simple math. the bandwidth on 256-bit with 1800 gddr3 is the same as 128-bit with 3600 gddr5.

 

[MrK6]

Sounds like it's all cost-cutting moves for ATI. They'll sell out the current stock of low-end/mid-range cards and move to the 40nm process. If they move all their cards to GDDR5, they can then order massive quantities of it to drive down the price, and meanwhile sticking to the 128-bit bus will make boards much cheaper to produce. Sounds like they did some really great brain-storming.

 

[idiotekniQues]

Originally posted by: MrK6
Sounds like it's all cost-cutting moves for ATI. They'll sell out the current stock of low-end/mid-range cards and move to the 40nm process. If they move all their cards to GDDR5, they can then order massive quantities of it to drive down the price, and meanwhile sticking to the 128-bit bus will make boards much cheaper to produce. Sounds like they did some really great brain-storming.

maybe they just got lucky and you did the brain-storming