Techpowerup/Chiphell/3DCenter: AMD 6990 launches March 8th - uses two 6970 Cores

[Skurge]

I think the real question is will the 6970 in crossfire beat 2 gtx580's in sli?

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/298?vs=308

There's your answer.

 

[rronald1]

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/298?vs=308

There's your answer.

then its save to say GTX590 will be faster than 6990. AMD knows this.. so whats the point for them waiting for Nvidia to make the first move lol

 

[Skurge]

then its save to say GTX590 will be faster than 6990. AMD knows this.. so whats the point for them waiting for Nvidia to make the first move lol

If the 590 is too fully clocked 580 GPUs, also the 6990 will almost certainly be faster above 2560x1600.

 

[RaistlinZ]

I don't get the whole hub-bub over the 300w PCI-E spec. What happens exactly if they market a card that exceeds that spec? Are they not legally allowed to sell them? Do they get sued? Do they get fined? Why does anyone really care?

 

[Dark Shroud]

The card doesn't get ATX certification. In regards to the HD 6990, AMD's bios switch is a perfect solution to this until the spec is updated.

 

[Idontcare]

I don't get the whole hub-bub over the 300w PCI-E spec. What happens exactly if they market a card that exceeds that spec? Are they not legally allowed to sell them? Do they get sued? Do they get fined? Why does anyone really care?

I too don't get it.

To me this is no different than the situation where JEDEC only defined the DDR2 spec for speeds up to DDR2-800 but everyone under the sun was selling DDR2-900, DDR2-1000, etc kits...which by definition did not exist as a JEDEC spec. And yet the world did not smash into the sun then either.

Same with selling DDR2 and DDR3 kits that required higher Vdimm than the spec allowed maximum. Technically such sticks of memory were not conforming to the DDR2 and DDR3 specs, but they were marketed and labeled as such, and sold without problem.

So I'm not really sure what the big deal is with this PCIe power limitation in the spec. We do seem to make a lot of hay over it in VC&G though.

 

[Skurge]

So I'm not really sure what the big deal is with this PCIe power limitation in the spec. We do seem to make a lot of hay over it in VC&G though.

I guess it was because they were both trying so hard to stick to the limits or was it just a by product of inadequate cooling?

 

[Arkadrel]

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/298?vs=308

There's your answer.

6970 CF = 43watt idle, 601watt load. Noise=61 dB
580 SLI = 44watt idle, 850watt load. Noise=66 dB


Holy cows both these cards are massive power hogs, but I guess if the performance is good enough.


the only games with low-ish FPS at 2560x1200 are:
Crysis warhead, 580 SLI is about 3fps faster(50 vs 47)
Metro2033, 6970 CF is about 11fps faster (46 vs 35)
Civ5, 6970 CF is about 4fps faster(47 vs 43)
battlefield BC2, 580 SLI is about 10fps faster (34 vs 44)


If you like Civ5 or Metro2033, then go 6970's CF.... if you like Battlefield BC2 go 580 SLI.
(thats purely based on performance, more or less any other game, reguardless of which system you get you ll have 60+ fps no problem)

 

[Skurge]

6970 CF = 43watt idle, 601watt load. Noise=61 dB
580 SLI = 44watt idle, 850watt load. Noise=66 dB


Holy cows both these cards are massive power hogs, but I guess if the performance is good enough.


the only games with low-ish FPS at 2560x1200 are:
Crysis warhead, 580 SLI is about 3fps faster(50 vs 47)
Metro2033, 6970 CF is about 11fps faster (46 vs 35)
Civ5, 6970 CF is about 4fps faster(47 vs 43)
battlefield BC2, 580 SLI is about 10fps faster (34 vs 44)


If you like Civ5 or Metro2033, then go 6970's CF.... if you like Battlefield BC2 go 580 SLI.
(thats purely based on performance, more or less any other game, reguardless of which system you get you ll have 60+ fps no problem)

How soon do you think before AT adds eyefinity to their test suit? Probably when nV support it on a single card I guess.

 

[Creig]

I don't get the whole hub-bub over the 300w PCI-E spec. What happens exactly if they market a card that exceeds that spec? Are they not legally allowed to sell them? Do they get sued? Do they get fined? Why does anyone really care?

I too don't get it.

To me this is no different than the situation where JEDEC only defined the DDR2 spec for speeds up to DDR2-800 but everyone under the sun was selling DDR2-900, DDR2-1000, etc kits...which by definition did not exist as a JEDEC spec. And yet the world did not smash into the sun then either.

Same with selling DDR2 and DDR3 kits that required higher Vdimm than the spec allowed maximum. Technically such sticks of memory were not conforming to the DDR2 and DDR3 specs, but they were marketed and labeled as such, and sold without problem.

So I'm not really sure what the big deal is with this PCIe power limitation in the spec. We do seem to make a lot of hay over it in VC&G though.

Well, up until now, both Nvidia and AMD have been VERY careful to put together cards that did not violate PCI-SIG's 300W maximum. Or to measure them in such a way that they appeared not to violate it. But if AMD puts out a card that officially has a TDP of 375w in its default configuration, things could get sticky with PCI-SIG.

PCI-SIG, for those who don't know, is the organization that is charged with developing the PCI-E specification. In their specs, they spell out the exact configurations allowable for each PCI-E version. For example, in PCI-E 3.0:

• 150W-225W cards can occupy two slots while 225W-300W cards may take up to three.
• Total card mass <= 1.5 Kg
• The six pin 2x3 PCI-E power connector was designed so that it could plug into an eight pin 2x4 socket, but you cannot plug an eight-pin 2x4 power connector into a six pin 2x3 socket.
• A 300w card can be powered 75w (slot) + 150w (2x4) + 75w (2x3) OR 75w (slot) + 75w (2x3) + 75w (2x3) + 75w (2x3)

And so forth. And since PCI-SIG controls the PCI-E specification, I would imagine that they have the authority to deny a company the ability to produce a product that violates their specifications, if they so wish.

AMD's possible saving grace here (should this card have a >300w TDP) is that the 6990 is equipped with two 8 pin 2x4 power connectors. Thus, even if the card exceeds the 300w limit seen in the PCI-E 3.0 specification, it doesn't actually violate the power draw of the individual connectors (75w slot + 150w (2x4) + 150w (2x4)).

I have to believe that either the 6990 is at or under a 300w TDP or they cleared the twin 2x4 power connector setup with PCI-SIG prior to production.

 

[tincart]

I don't actually see any rules against >300W cards. I see rules about the plug configuration on 300W cards, but positive statements about one thing do not entail negative statements about another.

Does anyone know what the status of the Asus Ares was? Did PCI-SIG do anything about that?

 

[DrBoss]

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/298?vs=308

There's your answer.

wow, i didn't know anandtech let you compare cards like that. Thanks for the link.

 

[Creig]

I don't actually see any rules against >300W cards. I see rules about the plug configuration on 300W cards, but positive statements about one thing do not entail negative statements about another.

You're correct. I haven't read anything regarding consequences for violating their specs, either. But everything they have put forth has very specific wording regarding what they consider to be acceptable. Whether violating those specs would result in action being taken by PCI-SIG is anybody's guess. Maybe the worst that can happen is that a violators product doesn't make it on the PCI SIG Integrators List.

 

[Kenmitch]

I don't get the whole hub-bub over the 300w PCI-E spec. What happens exactly if they market a card that exceeds that spec? Are they not legally allowed to sell them? Do they get sued? Do they get fined? Why does anyone really care?

I too don't get it.

So I'm not really sure what the big deal is with this PCIe power limitation in the spec. We do seem to make a lot of hay over it in VC&G though.

Probably has more to do with the power supplies required to run power hungry cards....After all the OEM's are cheap bastards!

What was a good power supply when the spec was created anyways!

 

[Skurge]

I don't actually see any rules against >300W cards. I see rules about the plug configuration on 300W cards, but positive statements about one thing do not entail negative statements about another.

Does anyone know what the status of the Asus Ares was? Did PCI-SIG do anything about that?

I think it could lead to a dangerous precedent. (Always wanted to say that.) If AMD violates one of the PCI-E specs and PCI-SIG don't do anything about it, whats to stop them from violating the others? They could make a card that is over the weight limit that could damage motherboads. Or produce a card without a power connector that draws more than 75W from the PCI-E slot.

PCI-SIG have those specs in place so you know that if you have a PCI-E slot and one 6pin connector your 6850 or what have you will be compatible with your system.

 

[wahdangun]

i think the problem with gtx 590 was the capacity of the vram, if they choose 3 GB, then it will be useless for the market that this card will perform. Because surround view and 3D will choke this card to death. But if they increase the vram capacity to 6 Gb then it will add complexity to the pcb and increase the cost to already expensive card. So i think the only viable solution is to lowering the busswidth to 320 bit or even 256 bit and use faster gddr5 ram.

 

[Grooveriding]

i think the problem with gtx 590 was the capacity of the vram, if they choose 3 GB, then it will be useless for the market that this card will perform. Because surround view and 3D will choke this card to death. But if they increase the vram capacity to 6 Gb then it will add complexity to the pcb and increase the cost to already expensive card. So i think the only viable solution is to lowering the busswidth to 320 bit or even 256 bit and use faster gddr5 ram.

Good point. I agree with cost inhibiting the success of said card, it's why I also believe the rumors of the card using two 570 cores. Your thought of a 256bit bus is a good one, it will allow the card to have 2GB of vram rather than forcing them to 6GB.

The 6990 is staking out multi monitor territory with its huge horsepower, 4GB vram and ability to drive up to 5 monitors. Nv will finally get into the single card multi monitor area with this card and are going to need more than 1.5gb vram to be viable.

 

[Castiel]

Whats the percentage of owners on this forum who actually use 3 monitors for gaming? Has to be less then 5&#37;.

If i was designing a video card these days it would be for the 1920X1080 120hz guys

 

[Lonyo]

Whats the percentage of owners on this forum who actually use 3 monitors for gaming? Has to be less then 5%.

If i was designing a video card these days it would be for the 1920X1080 120hz guys

They have those cards already. They designed the single GPU versions for that sort of level.

 

[Skurge]

Whats the percentage of owners on this forum who actually use 3 monitors for gaming? Has to be less then 5%.

If i was designing a video card these days it would be for the 1920X1080 120hz guys

Every card on the market can do that.

 

[notty22]

Someone spending a healthy amount of money on extreme video hardware also might expect a elegant established 3d gaming option.
edit: If we are debating why someone would want AMD or Nvidia's solution. Assuming the Nvidia card is coming.

 

[Idontcare]

I think it could lead to a dangerous precedent. (Always wanted to say that.) If AMD violates one of the PCI-E specs and PCI-SIG don't do anything about it, whats to stop them from violating the others? They could make a card that is over the weight limit that could damage motherboads. Or produce a card without a power connector that draws more than 75W from the PCI-E slot.

PCI-SIG have those specs in place so you know that if you have a PCI-E slot and one 6pin connector your 6850 or what have you will be compatible with your system.

You kinda lost me at the "what's to stop them from violating others" rant.

What's to stop them? Their customers getting pissed and not buying their product.

What's to stop Crucial from selling you a memory stick that is nothing more than a metal shunt that fits into your memory slot and proceeds to become an electrical short that fuses your motherboard and PSU?

The same thing...its called common sense and everyone in the equation is expected to have some.

Do you really think AMD or Nvidia are interested developing a product that draws more than 75W from the PCIe interface and risk frying the mobo/PSU and video card? I refuse to believe you wrote that with any bit of seriousness.

I'll give you another real-world example...CPU HSF's. They have long exceeded the max weight spec for HSF's in the ATX standard. And guess who cared? No one. The market developed the backplate as a means to support the extra weight and moved on with themselves.

Personally I'm starting to wonder if this 300W limit has just been a point of debate in video forums such as this one but has not really been a matter of engineering concern in reality. I remember when those DDR2 sticks started requiring 2.2 and 2.3V to operate (well above the spec limit for DDR2 standard), no Jedec spec police showed up.

 

[Dkcode]

You kinda lost me at the "what's to stop them from violating others" rant.

What's to stop them? Their customers getting pissed and not buying their product.

What's to stop Crucial from selling you a memory stick that is nothing more than a metal shunt that fits into your memory slot and proceeds to become an electrical short that fuses your motherboard and PSU?

The same thing...its called common sense and everyone in the equation is expected to have some.

Do you really think AMD or Nvidia are interested developing a product that draws more than 75W from the PCIe interface and risk frying the mobo/PSU and video card? I refuse to believe you wrote that with any bit of seriousness.

I'll give you another real-world example...CPU HSF's. They have long exceeded the max weight spec for HSF's in the ATX standard. And guess who cared? No one. The market developed the backplate as a means to support the extra weight and moved on with themselves.

Personally I'm starting to wonder if this 300W limit has just been a point of debate in video forums such as this one but has not really been a matter of engineering concern in reality. I remember when those DDR2 sticks started requiring 2.2 and 2.3V to operate (well above the spec limit for DDR2 standard), no Jedec spec police showed up.

^^

 

[hdfxst]

Here's a video of the 6990 playing dirt 3.http://www.guruht.com/2011/03/radeon-hd-6990-tested-using-dirt-3-live.html it's hard to tell how loud the card is

 

[notty22]

Here's a video of the 6990 playing dirt 3.http://www.guruht.com/2011/03/radeon-hd-6990-tested-using-dirt-3-live.html it's hard to tell how loud the card is

Thanks for sharing !
Looks like 60+fps

That track setting looks cool. I did not play dirt 2 deep in to that many levels, was there any forest racing like that ?