STICKY: ATi 5xxx pre-release thread

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Why are you putting ATI marketing with AMD marketing .

Uhm...because this happened in 2006?

AMD Completes ATI Acquisition and Creates Processing Powerhouse

ATI is a brand name, like Hummer or XEON, not a company, like GM or Intel.

wrong, ATI was a standalone company until 2006. Hummer was a standalone company, but gm purchased the rights to the BRAND ONLY and built a consumer brand based upon the brand of the company that made military offroad vehicles. XEON is likewise a brand and has always been such. Killing off a "brand" like hummer was much easier for gm than killing off saab, though that was also a "brand" of gm. Saab vs hummer is a much better analogy in fact because saab was a foreign company that gm purchased because they felt it would improve their company in the long run. When it didn't work out they looked at many options and considered closing it. A lot of jobs relied on saab and the company had created a nice niche for itself, however, so it ended up being saved. When hummer didn't work out they stopped marketing the brand and nobody cared. ATI, clearly, doesn't have nearly as big of a presence in canada as saab does in sweden, but it's still a very well recognized entity and is often used synonymously with "AMD graphics division". Also, do you think that ati would have a home if amd had gone out of business last year?

nemesis gives us plenty of reasons to criticize, but this is kind of a stretch. Do amd and ati even have integrated marketing depts, or did amd just pick a couple of people to run ati and let them do their job?

 

[Dribble]

deleted

 

[allies]

Originally posted by: Scholzpdx

Originally posted by: alyarb
he's looking at a normalized graph of inconsistent testing conditions and calling it right on the money while simultaneously indicting everyone's suspicion in marketing literature. so whatever he calls you is going to be completely off base as well.

no wait, no, that isn't it. you just don't want to see these improvements. that's what it is. you want the radeon to be slow, that's the only possible explanation to your response to marketing literature. you don't want to see improvement. your conscience won't allow it. i wonder if we could translate him into proper english it would make more sense.

Are you joking? MY last 3 GPU purchases have been ATI. This is probably the biggest and best launch by ATI ever. I'm excited as anyone and it will be my next purchase.

I am however, pointing out that you shouldn't bank on THOSE graphs. They are NOT official whatsoever. They are marred with an amateur mistake.

To be honest, didn't previous AMD slides have mistakes? IIRC, these slides are for INTERNAL use, and don't need to be "pristine". I think these ARE legit internal slides.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Why are you putting ATI marketing with AMD marketing .

Uhm...because this happened in 2006?

AMD Completes ATI Acquisition and Creates Processing Powerhouse

ATI is a brand name, like Hummer or XEON, not a company, like GM or Intel.

wrong, ATI was a standalone company until 2006. Hummer was a standalone company, but gm purchased the rights to the BRAND ONLY and built a consumer brand based upon the brand of the company that made military offroad vehicles. XEON is likewise a brand and has always been such. Killing off a "brand" like hummer was much easier for gm than killing off saab, though that was also a "brand" of gm. Saab vs hummer is a much better analogy in fact because saab was a foreign company that gm purchased because they felt it would improve their company in the long run. When it didn't work out they looked at many options and considered closing it. A lot of jobs relied on saab and the company had created a nice niche for itself, however, so it ended up being saved. When hummer didn't work out they stopped marketing the brand and nobody cared. ATI, clearly, doesn't have nearly as big of a presence in canada as saab does in sweden, but it's still a very well recognized entity and is often used synonymously with "AMD graphics division". Also, do you think that ati would have a home if amd had gone out of business last year?

nemesis gives us plenty of reasons to criticize, but this is kind of a stretch. Do amd and ati even have integrated marketing depts, or did amd just pick a couple of people to run ati and let them do their job?

The link goes directly to AMD, feel free to argue with them over their use of the word "acquisition" if you feel the term they should have used was "merger".

Last I checked ATI was not filing SEC forms any more.

 

[MODEL3]

You leave for one day and suddenly you are 5 pages behind, lol.

tweakers.net is doing a good job...

lltech4 posted most of the slides there, and he is less than a week member...

There was some comments in tweakers about photoshoping, but the numbers seems kinda legit.

The technical slides are also interesting, lots of info...

On a side note AMD has a very good strategy for pre launch promotion with such techniques...

The "AMD benchamarks" have some mistakes.


For example look at Devil may Cry results at 5870-285 & 5850-285 slides...

And anyway even if the benchmarks are real (we have no resolution info also...) , if you exclude 8XX AA tests and 10.1 codepaths vs 10.0 codepaths, the difference is not what a 850MHz 32ROPs/1600SPs design should have.

5870 is +10% / +60% faster than 285
and
5850 is -10% / +35% faster than 285

The designs must be bandwidth limited...

But again what conclusions can you make with such data?

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: bryanW1995

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Why are you putting ATI marketing with AMD marketing .

Uhm...because this happened in 2006?

AMD Completes ATI Acquisition and Creates Processing Powerhouse

ATI is a brand name, like Hummer or XEON, not a company, like GM or Intel.

wrong, ATI was a standalone company until 2006. Hummer was a standalone company, but gm purchased the rights to the BRAND ONLY and built a consumer brand based upon the brand of the company that made military offroad vehicles. XEON is likewise a brand and has always been such. Killing off a "brand" like hummer was much easier for gm than killing off saab, though that was also a "brand" of gm. Saab vs hummer is a much better analogy in fact because saab was a foreign company that gm purchased because they felt it would improve their company in the long run. When it didn't work out they looked at many options and considered closing it. A lot of jobs relied on saab and the company had created a nice niche for itself, however, so it ended up being saved. When hummer didn't work out they stopped marketing the brand and nobody cared. ATI, clearly, doesn't have nearly as big of a presence in canada as saab does in sweden, but it's still a very well recognized entity and is often used synonymously with "AMD graphics division". Also, do you think that ati would have a home if amd had gone out of business last year?

nemesis gives us plenty of reasons to criticize, but this is kind of a stretch. Do amd and ati even have integrated marketing depts, or did amd just pick a couple of people to run ati and let them do their job?

The link goes directly to AMD, feel free to argue with them over their use of the word "acquisition" if you feel the term they should have used was "merger".

Last I checked ATI was not filing SEC forms any more.

wow, real clever. was that a straw man? Did I say that ati or saab were filing sec forms while they were owned by another company? No, I have clearly agreed that they were acquired by somebody else. What I SAID was that ati (and saab) was more than just a brand like xeon or hummer. Your statement was wrong, and attacking my statement by trying to put words in my mouth does nothing for your point. In comparing saab to ati I thought that it was obvious that both were "acquired" by a much larger company. If that was unclear then please consider this a clarification.

My point was that ati is more than just a brand that amd manages. ATI was, and could very well be in the future, an independent company with a very large following. AMD has done a fantastic job with ati thus far and in my opinion ati is their sole bright spot at the moment, but that is secondary to my point. I don't believe that ati is sneaking behind amd's back and filing forms with the sec, btw, but if they were then the sleuth who tracked down jen hsun huang's recent stock sale could probably find out about it.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: bryanW1995

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Why are you putting ATI marketing with AMD marketing .

Uhm...because this happened in 2006?

AMD Completes ATI Acquisition and Creates Processing Powerhouse

ATI is a brand name, like Hummer or XEON, not a company, like GM or Intel.

wrong, ATI was a standalone company until 2006. Hummer was a standalone company, but gm purchased the rights to the BRAND ONLY and built a consumer brand based upon the brand of the company that made military offroad vehicles. XEON is likewise a brand and has always been such. Killing off a "brand" like hummer was much easier for gm than killing off saab, though that was also a "brand" of gm. Saab vs hummer is a much better analogy in fact because saab was a foreign company that gm purchased because they felt it would improve their company in the long run. When it didn't work out they looked at many options and considered closing it. A lot of jobs relied on saab and the company had created a nice niche for itself, however, so it ended up being saved. When hummer didn't work out they stopped marketing the brand and nobody cared. ATI, clearly, doesn't have nearly as big of a presence in canada as saab does in sweden, but it's still a very well recognized entity and is often used synonymously with "AMD graphics division". Also, do you think that ati would have a home if amd had gone out of business last year?

nemesis gives us plenty of reasons to criticize, but this is kind of a stretch. Do amd and ati even have integrated marketing depts, or did amd just pick a couple of people to run ati and let them do their job?

The link goes directly to AMD, feel free to argue with them over their use of the word "acquisition" if you feel the term they should have used was "merger".

Last I checked ATI was not filing SEC forms any more.

wow, real clever. was that a straw man? Did I say that ati or saab were filing sec forms while they were owned by another company? No, I have clearly agreed that they were acquired by somebody else. What I SAID was that ati (and saab) was more than just a brand like xeon or hummer. Your statement was wrong, and attacking my statement by trying to put words in my mouth does nothing for your point. In comparing saab to ati I thought that it was obvious that both were "acquired" by a much larger company. If that was unclear then please consider this a clarification.

My point was that ati is more than just a brand that amd manages. ATI was, and could very well be in the future, an independent company with a very large following. AMD has done a fantastic job with ati thus far and in my opinion ati is their sole bright spot at the moment, but that is secondary to my point. I don't believe that ati is sneaking behind amd's back and filing forms with the sec, btw, but if they were then the sleuth who tracked down jen hsun huang's recent stock sale could probably find out about it.

I have no idea what you are so heated about, but I'm not taking the bait here in your efforts to flamebait me.

You deciding one brand is somehow "more than a brand" relative to another brand doesn't make my statement incorrect.

ATI is a brand, Hummer is a brand, Xeon is a brand.

AMD owns the ATI brand. Intel owns the XEON brand. And some company based out of China owns the Hummer brand.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: alyarb

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
NV I don't like because of their fanbois.

Why hold a business entity accountable for the actions of people who are unaffiliated with the business entity?

There's some atypical cause-and-effect assignment going on there.

AEG was is real . Who to blame . I riddle u that.

so you compensate for this by your evangelist fervor? do you suppose that makes people want to agree with you? do you propose to divinate the meaning of bar graphs with no numbers on them? i'm sure AMD is very grateful to you. everyone would buy nvidia products if it weren't for people like you.

Ati has been silent the last 2 launches. Really no good info till recently . I never figured them to double the 4000 series . So until about a week ago I hadn't seen anything really reliable. But many got it right off of leaked info. But still ATI last 2 launches have been well played. NV fans been talking doubling last generation for along time . ATI has pulled it off with DX11. I don't care how many cards ATI sells . I only care about what they have to offer me . I haven't seen these cards yet which is unusual for me . But Bobs working on other project. SO he didn't take a card or wasn't offered one I don't know which.

But this close to launch to think ATI is hyping is in error . If anything they are understating the performance.

 

[alyarb]

If you didn't expect 1600 shaders and 80 TMU, you should be the most surprised person here. I highly doubt any truthful numbers/graphs/descriptions reflect understated performance, it goes against every other strategy on the slides.

I'm sure the card is going to demonstrate better than 200% performance over the 4890, but I'm not resting any case until I see someone reputable post a real bench.

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: alyarb
If you didn't expect 1600 shaders and 80 TMU, you should be the most surprised person here. I highly doubt any truthful numbers/graphs/descriptions reflect understated performance, it goes against every other strategy on the slides.

I'm sure the card is going to demonstrate better than 200% performance over the 4890, but I'm not resting any case until I see someone reputable post a real bench.

it should not be over twice as fast as the 4890. realistically, if its the same architecture then doubling most of the specs doesnt always double performance. also even if it did that would take a perfect situation where every bit of the load was on the gpu like 2560 max settings and 8x AA. in other words even in the best case scenario I would not think it would be possible for it to be MORE than twice as fast.

 

[Zstream]

Originally posted by: toyota

Originally posted by: alyarb
If you didn't expect 1600 shaders and 80 TMU, you should be the most surprised person here. I highly doubt any truthful numbers/graphs/descriptions reflect understated performance, it goes against every other strategy on the slides.

I'm sure the card is going to demonstrate better than 200% performance over the 4890, but I'm not resting any case until I see someone reputable post a real bench.

it should not be over twice as fast as the 4890. realistically, if its the same architecture then doubling most of the specs doesnt always double performance. also even if it did that would take a perfect situation where every bit of the load was on the gpu like 2560 max settings and 8x AA. in other words even in the best case scenario I would not think it would be possible for it to be MORE than twice as fast.

Not necessarily, the ATI architecture is under utilized in many aspects. Many new games can improve the performance by more then 200%.

 

[alyarb]

threading.

 

[firewolfsm]

The new architecture does have a noticeable memory bandwidth limit with 1600TMUs at 256-bit. I do not think we will ever see a situation with double or more than double the performance.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: alyarb
If you didn't expect 1600 shaders and 80 TMU, you should be the most surprised person here. I highly doubt any truthful numbers/graphs/descriptions reflect understated performance, it goes against every other strategy on the slides.

I'm sure the card is going to demonstrate better than 200% performance over the 4890, but I'm not resting any case until I see someone reputable post a real bench.

I was thinking 1200 / 40. Yes I was very pleased and happy. If its better effiency I way happy . and for the first time I am excited about maybe better looking graphics.

 

[dguy6789]

History has shown that you don't need double the memory bandwidth to have double the performance of the last gen.

 

[alcoholbob]

Those numbers aren't flattering, so on stock noAA/AF (the only playable) settings, the 5870 is going to be about 10% faster than a factory OC'ed GTX 285 in Crysis. And those are obviously not the highest stock settings, otherwise the game would be running around 23fps on a GTX285.

Maybe the 6870 will have a better chance at Crysis.

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: Astrallite
Those numbers aren't flattering, so on stock noAA/AF (the only playable) settings, the 5870 is going to be about 10% faster than a factory OC'ed GTX 285 in Crysis. And those are obviously not the highest stock settings, otherwise the game would be running around 23fps on a GTX285.

Maybe the 6870 will have a better chance at Crysis.

what are you looking at? this shows the 5870 being very close to the gtx295 in Warhead. http://i31.tinypic.com/oho6qa.png

 

[MODEL3]

If the AMD slides are true, i think that probably AMD used (mostly) the 2560X1600 resolution to highlight the performance difference with the GTX285
(i mean if you think at what resolution their eyefinity game demos was, I suppose the 5870 architecture probably takes less hit in relation with GTX285 if you go from 1920X1200 to 2560X1600)

I remembered that Derek made a very good article regarding the performance of an overclocked 4890 GPU. He managed to increase the GPU core and memory to 1GHz/1,2GHz level.

So i checked the performance data and the games in that review and for those games that i could find same quality settings i took Derek's data and i compared them with "AMDs" data.

I suppose the systems are not the same and this is not valid comparison but also i suspect that AMD did everything in order to present the 5870 in the best possible light in relation with GTX285 while Derek had to be objective, correct?

I found 3 games that matched the criteria, so here are the results:

4890oc=1Ghz 4890 1,2GHz mem

CoD WaW 4XAA

4890oc 50.7fps 93,5%
GTX285 54,3fps 100%
5870 Xfps 119%

5870 27% faster than 4890oc.

FarCry 2 4XAA

4890oc 34fps 106,5%
GTX285 31,9fps 100%
5870 Xfps 128%

5870 20% faster than 4890oc.

Left For Dead 4XAA

4890oc 63,5fps 98%
GTX285 64,8fps 100%
5870 Xfps 134%

5870 37% faster than 4890oc.

Derek said in this article that if you overclock the 4890 at this level you achieve near GTX285 performance level (I saw the data and this is true in 2560X1200, in my opinion the 4890oc is a little bit better than GTX285 in 1920X1200 for the tested games)

Also in 2560X1600 the data in Derek's article is showing +17% average improvement for the 4890oc model in relation with the standard 850MHz model (and less than +17% for 1920X1200)

So for these 3 games in the best case scenario for 5870 we have:
4890=100%
4890oc=117%
5870=117% *1,37=160%

So 5870 is 1,6X faster than the standard 850MHz 4890 model in the best case scenario.

Certainly if we could find other games perf data at the same quality settings as AMDs slides maybe the 5870 would show more than 1,6X in relation with 4890.

For example if we compare 8X antialiasing performance with 2560X1600 resolution level, we can easily find examples that the 5870 will be more than 1,6X in relation with a 4890.

But i don't care for 8X AA comparisons, for me 4X is just fine and much more indicative for the majority of the gamers/games.

Although we can find these example, we also can find and +35% examples so i think that the 1,6X indicative figure is good for the difference of the 5870/4890 performance especially in the settings most of the gamers care (1920X1200 4X AA 16X AF)

 

[MrK6]

No one has considered that it's being run on beta drivers?

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: MrK6
No one has considered that it's being run on beta drivers?

in my experience all ATI drivers are beta. lol. it seems in many cases like its a year or two later before they come out with a driver that significantly increases performance. I gave up after 3 months of waiting to get the missing fences in Clear Sky and not being able to force vsync in Dead Space issues,among others, fixed.

 

[alcoholbob]

Originally posted by: toyota

Originally posted by: Astrallite
Those numbers aren't flattering, so on stock noAA/AF (the only playable) settings, the 5870 is going to be about 10% faster than a factory OC'ed GTX 285 in Crysis. And those are obviously not the highest stock settings, otherwise the game would be running around 23fps on a GTX285.

Maybe the 6870 will have a better chance at Crysis.

what are you looking at? this shows the 5870 being very close to the gtx295 in Warhead. http://i31.tinypic.com/oho6qa.png

I'm looking at the ATI performance slides:

http://i27.tinypic.com/1z23vyb.jpg

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: bryanW1995

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: bryanW1995

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Why are you putting ATI marketing with AMD marketing .

Uhm...because this happened in 2006?

AMD Completes ATI Acquisition and Creates Processing Powerhouse

ATI is a brand name, like Hummer or XEON, not a company, like GM or Intel.

wrong, ATI was a standalone company until 2006. Hummer was a standalone company, but gm purchased the rights to the BRAND ONLY and built a consumer brand based upon the brand of the company that made military offroad vehicles. XEON is likewise a brand and has always been such. Killing off a "brand" like hummer was much easier for gm than killing off saab, though that was also a "brand" of gm. Saab vs hummer is a much better analogy in fact because saab was a foreign company that gm purchased because they felt it would improve their company in the long run. When it didn't work out they looked at many options and considered closing it. A lot of jobs relied on saab and the company had created a nice niche for itself, however, so it ended up being saved. When hummer didn't work out they stopped marketing the brand and nobody cared. ATI, clearly, doesn't have nearly as big of a presence in canada as saab does in sweden, but it's still a very well recognized entity and is often used synonymously with "AMD graphics division". Also, do you think that ati would have a home if amd had gone out of business last year?

nemesis gives us plenty of reasons to criticize, but this is kind of a stretch. Do amd and ati even have integrated marketing depts, or did amd just pick a couple of people to run ati and let them do their job?

The link goes directly to AMD, feel free to argue with them over their use of the word "acquisition" if you feel the term they should have used was "merger".

Last I checked ATI was not filing SEC forms any more.

wow, real clever. was that a straw man? Did I say that ati or saab were filing sec forms while they were owned by another company? No, I have clearly agreed that they were acquired by somebody else. What I SAID was that ati (and saab) was more than just a brand like xeon or hummer. Your statement was wrong, and attacking my statement by trying to put words in my mouth does nothing for your point. In comparing saab to ati I thought that it was obvious that both were "acquired" by a much larger company. If that was unclear then please consider this a clarification.

My point was that ati is more than just a brand that amd manages. ATI was, and could very well be in the future, an independent company with a very large following. AMD has done a fantastic job with ati thus far and in my opinion ati is their sole bright spot at the moment, but that is secondary to my point. I don't believe that ati is sneaking behind amd's back and filing forms with the sec, btw, but if they were then the sleuth who tracked down jen hsun huang's recent stock sale could probably find out about it.

I have no idea what you are so heated about, but I'm not taking the bait here in your efforts to flamebait me.

You deciding one brand is somehow "more than a brand" relative to another brand doesn't make my statement incorrect.

ATI is a brand, Hummer is a brand, Xeon is a brand.

AMD owns the ATI brand. Intel owns the XEON brand. And some company based out of China owns the Hummer brand.

You're still wrong. In some cases a company gets swallowed up by another and disappears (think compaq/digital or intel/neteffect ); in others companies are bought out but retain their identity and often a brand image (saab, volvo, rover, chrysler, voodoo pc). Saab and chrysler are particularly interesting as they were bought out, retained their brand image, and were eventually spun back off. Do you see intel spinning xeon off any time soon?

 

[Tempered81]

Originally posted by: Astrallite

Originally posted by: toyota

Originally posted by: Astrallite
Those numbers aren't flattering, so on stock noAA/AF (the only playable) settings, the 5870 is going to be about 10% faster than a factory OC'ed GTX 285 in Crysis. And those are obviously not the highest stock settings, otherwise the game would be running around 23fps on a GTX285.

Maybe the 6870 will have a better chance at Crysis.

what are you looking at? this shows the 5870 being very close to the gtx295 in Warhead. http://i31.tinypic.com/oho6qa.png

I'm looking at the ATI performance slides:

http://i27.tinypic.com/1z23vyb.jpg

It looks to be 30% faster than a gtx285 in Warhead, and 38% faster than a gtx285 in crysis according to that ATI slide at stock noAA/AF

 

[TurtleCrusher]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
I am not interested in eyeinfinity. But The Apples open CL for pyphisics on the Cpu and GPU is great stuff. Now if AMD and Intel can figure out away to stop Havok Physics on Their CPUs when NV card is onboard, it would be a pertfect storm .
As it is the NV 300 had better be all NV is hyping as ATI isn't standing still GO ATI.

Aside of the random CaPitAl LetTErS I swear to God I'm trying hard to make something out of these words but they DO NOT COMPUTE...


...seriously, dude: WTF? :shocked:

Funny . neighbor kids were outside playing . So I called in one . He was 9 . He read it with zero problems . On the other hand he struggled with your comment because it didn't hold up to eyes that perfection as seen by 9 year old . He says you have a problem . LOL

Wait, you bring 9 year old boys into your home to read internet pages?

I'd love to be that kids dad.

 

[thilanliyan]

Originally posted by: Scholzpdx
Wait, you bring 9 year old boys into your home to read internet pages?

I'd love to be that kids dad.

He probably knows the kid...and the kid knows him?? I hope.