Grooveriding
Diamond Member
grooveriding: any way you can redo your crysis bench from earlier in this thread on a single 480 with 64bit checked? Thanks
Here is a single 480 on 64 bit
Leaked 6870 for the same settings
Last edited:
grooveriding: any way you can redo your crysis bench from earlier in this thread on a single 480 with 64bit checked? Thanks
I Don't see it. Could you put another pic of legit heaven benches to compare.
If this leaked bench was accurate the 6870 is faster than a 480 in tesselation as you predict.
![]()
I Don't see it. Could you put another pic of legit heaven benches to compare.
I believe he is referring to the top section where the "2" in the Scores: field looks different than the "2" in the Min FPS: and Max FPS: field. He's partially correct - they do in fact look different. What he doesn't realize is that the top 2 fields are in bold and that the numbers are, in fact, using the exact same font. 🙂
Here is a single GTX 480 in Heaven
![]()
Here is the 6870 in Heaven
![]()
Looks like tesseletion performance is also superior. I also forgot to downclock the 480 so this is with a 480 running at 800/2000.
As for the tin foil conspiracies about the image itself. The benchmark spits out an html format file to give you the results when you save them. Differences in appearance could be as simple as having different display and format settings in your browser.
I'm referring to big yellow numbers. Specifically, the SCORES: 922 compared to min FPS: 22.0 and max FPS: 70.2
The "922" font is clearly different from the "22.0" and "70.2" font. Look at the 2's. Does this screen always use different fonts between the scores line and the min and max FPS lines?
Ah I see. That could be it. I'm being to lazy to look, but is that how Unigine always outputs the fonts on that screen?
EDIT: I did I search, found this page and correct me if I am wrong, but the fonts and type are identical between the min, max, and scores lines. http://www.overclock.net/benchmarki...-official-top-30-heaven-benchmark-2-a-11.html
If this is how the Heaven benchmark normally outputs it, then why would the leaked 6870 benchmark have some lines bolded and others not?
Checking your link, maybe my job is blocking stuff, but I only see Uni 2.0 scores, not 2.1.
I know 2.1 doesn't output the results into your browser as one of the pictures there - could just be my short experience with it.
EDIT:
Towards the end of the thread you see some 2.1 scores:
http://www.overclock.net/benchmarki...-official-top-30-heaven-benchmark-2-a-65.html
The top numbers look "bolder" than the lower numbers in that first screen shot versus the 2.0 exmaples in the other pages of the same thread.
I have a question, not sure if it was asked/answered. I know currently ATI uses the 5 instruction counter for their shader count (1600 SP == 320x5) does that mean the count will change with this new architecture since it's shifting to a 4? Or did I miss the memo?
To keep size & TDP practical, 'Cayman' is only 3/4ths of the full 28nm design in many ways. 3 of 4 SIMD groups, 3 of 4 Tessellating units. 3x out of a possible 4x higher Tessellation power over cypress. Contrastingly, IMO, Barts is a full 1/2 of the original NI flagship design: 1280SP. As a result, the performance gap between 'Barts' XT (360alu) and 'Cayman' XT (480alu) should be smaller than gap between 5770 Juniper XT (160alu) and 5870 Cypress XT (320alu). 3rd gen video decoding UVD3, Eyefinity4 (+). The stream processor redesign is there. Vector 5d > 2+2 incorporated t-unit.
![]()
![]()
Rumor has it that Cayman is 1920 SP (480x4); but that hasn't been substantiated by AMD, so who knows?
Silverforce11, by all current rumors, 6870/90 won't launch until 2011. Looks like there is nothing to get excited about for 3 months.
Cayman XT is 256bit with high speed GDDR5, rated for 7Gbps. The rest is fud, ATI is trying to crack down on leaks by giving fake numbers and specs to AIBs and see who is leaking. They have told their partners not to leak anymore until the official paper launch (its not helping the demand for 5800 GPUs).
Cayman Pro is not going to be as fast as the gtx480.. but it doesn't need to be, its aimed at 5870 performance, but for cheap.
http://translate.google.ca/translate?hl=en&sl=tr&u=http://www.donanimhaber.com/ekran-karti/haberleri/AMD-Radeon-HD-6800-serisi-Kasim-ayinda-lanse-edilecek.htm&ei=oiWJTICHO8y1nAe-0ZXBCw&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBcQ7gEwAA&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhttp://www.donanimhaber.com/ekran-karti/haberleri/AMD-Radeon-HD-6800-serisi-Kasim-ayinda-lanse-edilecek.htm%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26hs%3Dj76%26sa%3DG%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US😱fficial%26channel%3Ds
Most recent rumors point to 6870 next month in October.
6970 in November.
6990 in December.
AMD likely wants to capitalize on the holiday season the same way they did with 58XX series last year.
AMD likely wants to capitalize on the holiday season the same way they did with 58XX series last year.
Well, wouldn't they want to make a better effort this year?Did they really capitalize on the holiday season last year? Honest question. I seem to recall there being little to no stock of the things until early 2010 on account of TSMC issues.
Did they really capitalize on the holiday season last year? Honest question. I seem to recall there being little to no stock of the things until early 2010 on account of TSMC issues.
I'd say they capitalized as best as possible as the 5XXX series cards were selling out at e-tailors within minutes of coming into stock for months. I'm sure they could of done better but considering the huge demand for the 5XXX series and the TSMC issues. It is safe to say, they sold every last card that they could produce in that period.
When 6870 comes next month we'll likely see the same of course, they'll sell out as fast as they come into stock and 6970 and 6990 through November and December will be the same.
Most recent rumors point to 6870 next month in October.