RV770: Too good to be true?

[judasmachine]

I was about to go buy a HD 3870, should I wait, or will the prices be kind of high at launch? All this is assuming that it does make it to market this quarter.

 

[dennilfloss]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Aside from Crysis, (which no computer can run outside of NASA) there is nothing on the PC that looks nicer than something that the Xbox 360 can produce. I find it frustrating personally. I paid about as much for my 8800GTS 320mb as I would have paid for an Xbox and really I somewhat regret not going the console route.

Try playing PC Oblivion with a few dozen decent mods and you'll find the XBox version pukeworthy by comparison.

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: taltamir
isn't the R770 a dual-core chip GPU? with two cores on one die?
So all those figures can be cut in half and then considered as Xfire. Because it WILL STILL need to xfire. IT will just be a much much more efficient xfire since it will have a direct link between the two (that is, probably shared ram and shared bandwidth and so on...)

r700 is supposedly going to be the the 4870x2 or whatever they end up calling it, rv770 is the rv670 replacement. based on the earlier rumored clocks I was expecting 50-75% improvement over 3870, now I'm thinking 30-50% instead.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: dennilfloss

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Aside from Crysis, (which no computer can run outside of NASA) there is nothing on the PC that looks nicer than something that the Xbox 360 can produce. I find it frustrating personally. I paid about as much for my 8800GTS 320mb as I would have paid for an Xbox and really I somewhat regret not going the console route.

Try playing PC Oblivion with a few dozen decent mods and you'll find the XBox version pukeworthy by comparison.

I find it hard to believe, especially on a card like mine that only has 320mb of texture memory.

AFAIK the Xbox 360 can run all games at 1080P w/ 4XAA on by default. My card can do the same but w/o AA, and in GOW I had to turn textures to medium (although I don't know what 'setting' is equivalent to the Xbox version.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995

Originally posted by: taltamir
isn't the R770 a dual-core chip GPU? with two cores on one die?
So all those figures can be cut in half and then considered as Xfire. Because it WILL STILL need to xfire. IT will just be a much much more efficient xfire since it will have a direct link between the two (that is, probably shared ram and shared bandwidth and so on...)

r700 is supposedly going to be the the 4870x2 or whatever they end up calling it, rv770 is the rv670 replacement. based on the earlier rumored clocks I was expecting 50-75% improvement over 3870, now I'm thinking 30-50% instead.

The last thing that this new AMD card needs is more shaders. If BFG's data carries forward, then there is the chance that more shaders will only have a 5% impact. The TMUs will help. I can't help feel, however, that this card will simply be a 9600GT with more shading power. Some games will benefit a fair bit from that (maybe up to 50%) but others will benefit very little (maybe 5% overall).

It's also a huge disappointment to hear that AA will still be processed by the shaders. You'd think we were still using VooDoo1 cards with no dedicated AA hardware. Welcome to the 1990's. :thumbsdown:

 

[dennilfloss]

One specification I do not see mentioned and which is extremely important to me in a question whether to upgrade my 3870 is the amount of memory. My Oblivion sometimes uses over 900MB of texture memory and my current card has only 512MB onboard memory so some must be using the hard disk and that would lower performance. A jump to 1GB or 2GB would be so nice.

http://img340.imageshack.us/im...1/screenshot314jr7.jpg

http://img340.imageshack.us/im.../screenshot303aih2.jpg

http://img340.imageshack.us/im.../screenshot302agu3.jpg

http://img340.imageshack.us/im.../screenshot304adf1.jpg

http://img340.imageshack.us/im...2/screenshot305ea6.jpg

http://img340.imageshack.us/im...6/screenshot306ym0.jpg

http://img340.imageshack.us/im.../screenshot301aph6.jpg

http://img340.imageshack.us/im...3/screenshot309kj8.jpg

http://img340.imageshack.us/im...1/screenshot310oi9.jpg

 

[schneiderguy]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

AFAIK the Xbox 360 can run all games at 1080P w/ 4XAA on by default.

No, most xbox 360 games run at 720p (or less) with 0x or 2x AA

 

[Piuc2020]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: dennilfloss

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Aside from Crysis, (which no computer can run outside of NASA) there is nothing on the PC that looks nicer than something that the Xbox 360 can produce. I find it frustrating personally. I paid about as much for my 8800GTS 320mb as I would have paid for an Xbox and really I somewhat regret not going the console route.

Try playing PC Oblivion with a few dozen decent mods and you'll find the XBox version pukeworthy by comparison.

I find it hard to believe, especially on a card like mine that only has 320mb of texture memory.

AFAIK the Xbox 360 can run all games at 1080P w/ 4XAA on by default. My card can do the same but w/o AA, and in GOW I had to turn textures to medium (although I don't know what 'setting' is equivalent to the Xbox version.

NO GAME runs at that resolution natively, the 360 supports 1080P TVs but that doesn't mean games are rendered at that resolution.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: bryanW1995

Originally posted by: taltamir
isn't the R770 a dual-core chip GPU? with two cores on one die?
So all those figures can be cut in half and then considered as Xfire. Because it WILL STILL need to xfire. IT will just be a much much more efficient xfire since it will have a direct link between the two (that is, probably shared ram and shared bandwidth and so on...)

r700 is supposedly going to be the the 4870x2 or whatever they end up calling it, rv770 is the rv670 replacement. based on the earlier rumored clocks I was expecting 50-75% improvement over 3870, now I'm thinking 30-50% instead.

The last thing that this new AMD card needs is more shaders. If BFG's data carries forward, then there is the chance that more shaders will only have a 5% impact. The TMUs will help. I can't help feel, however, that this card will simply be a 9600GT with more shading power. Some games will benefit a fair bit from that (maybe up to 50%) but others will benefit very little (maybe 5% overall).

It's also a huge disappointment to hear that AA will still be processed by the shaders. You'd think we were still using VooDoo1 cards with no dedicated AA hardware. Welcome to the 1990's. :thumbsdown:

It might help AMD's AA troubles with more shader. Who knows.

A 9600gt is close to 3870 performance wise. Having more TMU and more shader, ddr5 only adds to the equation. 50% faster than current 3870?

 

[BFG10K]

AFAIK the Xbox 360 can run all games at 1080P w/ 4XAA on by default.

No true; most run at 720p (or even lower, like Halo 3 IIRC), often with no AF or AA.

 

[panfist]

Nevermind.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: Azn
50% faster than current 3870?

IMO that's a best case scenario. To me, the upsetting thing about this new card is that it will probably struggle to beat the 9800GTX, if it can beat it at all.

They've upgraded the memory (DDR5), the core (32TMUs, 900mhz), and the shaders (480), but really what they needed to do was to re-engineer the whole lot based on a card like the X800 or X1900. The shaders on R600 suck and the lack of AA hardware is lunacy. To use R600 as the basis for two more generations is crazy. AMD has the tech to make a powerful card that runs relatively unhindered by AA/AF. Why they are engineering cards in this way is beyond me.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

AFAIK the Xbox 360 can run all games at 1080P w/ 4XAA on by default.

No true; most run at 720p (or even lower, like Halo 3 IIRC), often with no AF or AA.

Shockingly I must agree with BFG here. :Q

The 360 uses "upscaling" to attain 1080p.

As noted Halo3 runs at 600p with no AA (which is not a true HD resolution, but that would be the equivalent)

Halo also upscales and applies AA to screenshots to make them look better. (I'm not bashing Halo here as other games do this as well).

 

[unholy414]

Originally posted by: Piuc2020

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: dennilfloss

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Aside from Crysis, (which no computer can run outside of NASA) there is nothing on the PC that looks nicer than something that the Xbox 360 can produce. I find it frustrating personally. I paid about as much for my 8800GTS 320mb as I would have paid for an Xbox and really I somewhat regret not going the console route.

Try playing PC Oblivion with a few dozen decent mods and you'll find the XBox version pukeworthy by comparison.

I find it hard to believe, especially on a card like mine that only has 320mb of texture memory.

AFAIK the Xbox 360 can run all games at 1080P w/ 4XAA on by default. My card can do the same but w/o AA, and in GOW I had to turn textures to medium (although I don't know what 'setting' is equivalent to the Xbox version.

NO GAME runs at that resolution natively, the 360 supports 1080P TVs but that doesn't mean games are rendered at that resolution.

So the 360 renders at 720p, but it goes through some sort of conversion process to attain 1080p? What is the visual difference between native 1080p and converted 1080p?

 

[tuteja1986]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Its something more of a rehash of the RV670 then a new GPU core. There maybe other architectural tweaks, but this is the RV670 with more added units. Unlike the GT200 or whatever its called, where its truly the next gen from nVIDIA unlike what we see form the 9 series. Obviously this design saves alot of money on R&D and most notably ISNT the original R700 that was planned but rather being pushed back for another time.

Since a 8800Ultra is around 30~50% faster than the HD3870 overall, id guess this GPU could potential close that gap and maybe even faster. Also the R700 is probably going to be RV770 X2 but i keep hearing that ATi has managed to find out how to share the memory pool, instead of being limited to x Mb per GPU.

You better hope 4000 series beat the crap out of 8800U or we never going to GT200 for a long while. Because it makes no business sense to release the GT200 as nvidia would love to just do another rehash so it can make its shareholders happy by bigger profit due to low production , software and support cost.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: Azn
50% faster than current 3870?

IMO that's a best case scenario. To me, the upsetting thing about this new card is that it will probably struggle to beat the 9800GTX, if it can beat it at all.

They've upgraded the memory (DDR5), the core (32TMUs, 900mhz), and the shaders (480), but really what they needed to do was to re-engineer the whole lot based on a card like the X800 or X1900. The shaders on R600 suck and the lack of AA hardware is lunacy. To use R600 as the basis for two more generations is crazy. AMD has the tech to make a powerful card that runs relatively unhindered by AA/AF. Why they are engineering cards in this way is beyond me.

Erm from my knowledge shader AA is not as bad as you picture it to be. Plus shader AA is part of the DX10.1 specs, so why not get a head start on that compared to the competition? (nVIDIA cards still have obscene performance drop even with hardware AA).

The shaders dont suck on R600. What do you mean by suck anyway? unable to handle todays games?

If your comparing the R580 to RV670, id go with the RV670 because its superior in almost every single way. There is reasons why they are sticking with this architecture and ive already pointed out one. Not to mention lead designs can cost ALOT of money and time (2~3+ years). AMD isnt in a position to throw cash around if you haven't realised.

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: schneiderguy

Originally posted by: SickBeast

AFAIK the Xbox 360 can run all games at 1080P w/ 4XAA on by default.

No, most xbox 360 games run at 720p (or less) with 0x or 2x AA

yes, and ALL the games are written with the crippled graphics capabilities already taken into account. BTW, how many RROD's do you get on non-oc'd gpus these days?

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: unholy414

Originally posted by: Piuc2020

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: dennilfloss

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Aside from Crysis, (which no computer can run outside of NASA) there is nothing on the PC that looks nicer than something that the Xbox 360 can produce. I find it frustrating personally. I paid about as much for my 8800GTS 320mb as I would have paid for an Xbox and really I somewhat regret not going the console route.

Try playing PC Oblivion with a few dozen decent mods and you'll find the XBox version pukeworthy by comparison.

I find it hard to believe, especially on a card like mine that only has 320mb of texture memory.

AFAIK the Xbox 360 can run all games at 1080P w/ 4XAA on by default. My card can do the same but w/o AA, and in GOW I had to turn textures to medium (although I don't know what 'setting' is equivalent to the Xbox version.

NO GAME runs at that resolution natively, the 360 supports 1080P TVs but that doesn't mean games are rendered at that resolution.

So the 360 renders at 720p, but it goes through some sort of conversion process to attain 1080p? What is the visual difference between native 1080p and converted 1080p?

go watch planet earth on your 61" hdtv. First on a regular dvd in your upconverting dvd player, then watch it on your blu-ray player. report back with results.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: Azn
50% faster than current 3870?

IMO that's a best case scenario. To me, the upsetting thing about this new card is that it will probably struggle to beat the 9800GTX, if it can beat it at all.

They've upgraded the memory (DDR5), the core (32TMUs, 900mhz), and the shaders (480), but really what they needed to do was to re-engineer the whole lot based on a card like the X800 or X1900. The shaders on R600 suck and the lack of AA hardware is lunacy. To use R600 as the basis for two more generations is crazy. AMD has the tech to make a powerful card that runs relatively unhindered by AA/AF. Why they are engineering cards in this way is beyond me.

Erm from my knowledge shader AA is not as bad as you picture it to be. Plus shader AA is part of the DX10.1 specs, so why not get a head start on that compared to the competition? (nVIDIA cards still have obscene performance drop even with hardware AA).

The shaders dont suck on R600. What do you mean by suck anyway? unable to handle todays games?

If your comparing the R580 to RV670, id go with the RV670 because its superior in almost every single way. There is reasons why they are sticking with this architecture and ive already pointed out one. Not to mention lead designs can cost ALOT of money and time (2~3+ years). AMD isnt in a position to throw cash around if you haven't realised.

AMD shader definitely doesn't suck. It's just different than Nvidia SP that excel in somethings and weaker in others.

I just wonder what Nvidia will bring with dx10.1 card of their own and shader AA performance. Will it blow AMD out of the water or suck?

 

[Cookie Monster]

Definitely the next gen nVIDIA GPU is DX10.1 since DX11 is still way off. Id think its still based on some of the G80 concepts that has really succeeded like the use of scalar shaders. Its been awhile since weve heard about any rumour relating to anything else than G92. Hopefully this year will be more interesting than last year.