The 6970 runs at 880 core, 1536sp's, 250watt TDP, launch date is the 14th in US

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Arkadrel

Diamond Member
Oct 19, 2010
3,681
2
0
What's so bad about reading faudzilla. In here I notice alot of users get all emotional when a faudzilla news us posted.

Hes not in the loop in any sense, he posts rumors off of forums, and hes almost always wrong about stuff.

Ontop of that, hes heavly nvidia biased... never says anything good about amd if he can twist it to look bad.


Semi-accurate atleast has inside sources... so its not just all forum rumors, and hes right alot more often than fud is. People here comment... oh but its charlie... yeah we ll... fud is like 10 times worse.



I would agree with this statment. AMD has such a large headstart, I would think they could not let Nvidia catch up so quickly.

A 6970 with only 1536 sp's though? That just does not seem to cut it.
It looks to me like another 4890 vs gtx 285 all over again.


Old cayman had 5D setup... problem was the 1 complex shader wasnt being used.
So 1600 shaders on the cayman, worked like 1600 shaders - (1600/4) = 1200 effective shaders.

Also look at barts, even with 5D setup, and ONLY 1120 shaders! yet its only like 5-10% slower than the 5870s at 1600.

Barts 6870's 1120 - (1120/4) = 840 effective shaders.

Now compair barts 840 effective shaders (what it has without the complex shader unit, thats never used) vs 1536 shaders of the 6950 or 6970, its almost a double up.



"The card runs at 880MHz and the card has the memory that runs at quite impressive 5.5GBps"
*IF* true, then the card (6950? 6970?) will run at:
5.5GB / 4 = 1375.
256x1.375 / 8 x 4 = 176 GB/s memory bandwidth.
 
Last edited:

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
Well it's Fuad, he usually does not get it right even if he have the whitepaper tattooed on his forehead...

But when was the last time ATI/AMD did pull out a single chip to fight the top nvidia chip? Why are we so sure they plan to do it now?

It's all about perf/price versus perf/cost and perf/mm2.

If GTX5xx is an improvement of this versus HD6xxx then it is a gain in part for nvidia. Will give them some well earned breathing room probably.


While I am not saying AMD's upcoming parts will definitely be faster than their Nvidia counterparts, I wouldn't be shocked if they were this go around. The difference this time is that Nvidia's new flagship is really just what they announced over a year ago. The GTX580 is a fully functional 512SP part. I think the rumor was that AMD expected a 750MHz 512SP part to compete with using the Radeon 5xxx parts. It didn't come during the 5xxx heyday. It came right before the Radeon 6xxx launch.

But the other side of the coin is that both companies might be held back by the cancellation of 32nm. The 69xx are likely not all that AMD wanted, they probably had to cut back some of the 'guts' to keep the die size in check on 40nm.

So, like I said, I don't think AMD's 69xx will certainly be faster, but I wouldn't be shocked either. This time around it's really a bit up in the air.

And regarding those charts. I wouldn't put too much faith in them. It seems like AMD has purposely put out false information before. The people who know are under NDA and aren't likely to help us very much there. :)
 

Arkadrel

Diamond Member
Oct 19, 2010
3,681
2
0
db199ce1c950b658ec2c7e370929f11f_performance.jpg


http://bbs.expreview.com/forum-26-1.html

1601174s9t28nw8pjw0ms4.jpg


162130v3prvi66tj9doiuz.jpg


http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1501587&postcount=5906


>_< crap noticed the 5970 is at the top and not the 6970.... /sigh

By those graphs 10-35&#37; more performance than the 570... does that mean its about equal to the 580?

Dare I say it?

5970 > 580 > 6970 > 570/480 > 6950 > 560/470 > 6870 > 460 > 6850 .....
 
Last edited:

Janooo

Golden Member
Aug 22, 2005
1,067
13
81
There is something really fishy going on.. i suspect we are in for a last minute "SURPRISE!" from AMD.

For the time being, i'll take released slides with a huge grain of salt.

Edit: To the above chiphell leak, guy says the 69xx series can't run with older cat 10.11. Crashes in a lot of games and poor performance.
It wouldn't be the first time. :)
 

ShadowOfMyself

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2006
4,227
2
0
Lol at the 5970 on top... Thats just wrong

If the average joe looked at that chart hed be like "what, are they going backwards?" LOL

I guess we can forget about AMD taking the single gpu crown ever again other than generational gaps like last year, they really are set on the small die strategy

Well, if it works for them, great, because it sure works for customers, and thats what matters
 

Arkadrel

Diamond Member
Oct 19, 2010
3,681
2
0
@ShadowOfMyself

Just because the 5970 is 1year+xmonths old doesnt mean its not a good card... card for card it being faster than the 580, is in itself impressive. It goes without saying that the 6990 will be the next top card (faster than the 580).

I still think though the 6970 and the 580 will be a close race.. so it might just be like ~2-5&#37; slower or something, but sell cheaper than the 580.
 

RaistlinZ

Diamond Member
Oct 15, 2001
7,470
9
91
The 5970 should be at the top considering it's dual GPU card. Unless there's some rediculously awesome CF scaling with the 69xx then this series is zzZZzZzZ for me.
 

Dribble

Platinum Member
Aug 9, 2005
2,076
611
136
Ah, fud has posted 6950 details:
http://www.fudzilla.com/graphics/item/21175-amd-hd-6950-works-at-800mhz

So according to fud we have:
6970: 1536 stream processors, 24 simds, 96 texture units, 880mhz
6950: 1408 stream processors, 22 simds, 88 texture units, 800mhz
And a 4D architecture

The 6950 seems a lot closer to the performance of the 6970 then earlier rumours suggested.

This is the first I have heard of these figures. Interesting to see if he's right or all the fud haters on page 1 (and tbh most of the comments at fud itself) are going to have to eat their words.
 
Last edited:

bryanW1995

Lifer
May 22, 2007
11,144
32
91
Interesting graphs. Assuming ati have boosted scores a bit too look good (v. likely they are using "default" IQ which is lower then nvidia's but boosts fps) then it looks like 6970 is about 10&#37; faster then the GTX 570, and about 10% slower then the GTX 580 (using fairer HQ settings).

One would assume the 6950 will be a fair amount slower then the GTX 570 as it has been more seriously cut back (570 has 94% of 580's shaders, 6950 is only meant to have 80% of 6970's shaders).

On the plus side for ati as this is a new architecture I'd expect ati to be able to improve performance more then nvidia in the future.

End result - 5970 will compete with GTX 580, but nvidia's going to have the edge with the GTX 570 vs 6950. Software (drivers and features) are going to be better with nvidia too as despite what the fan boys may claim they always are. Power usage similar. Not enough for ati to equal nvidia in sales, but enough to compete.

There's still the odd unknown - fan noise for example matters quite a bit, nvidia did a good job here. Ati not so sure as they probably had to raise clocks to the max to compete with the unexpectedly fast 580, so it's probably pushing cooling to the limit.

I still don't get this "unexpectedly fast" comment that I keep hearing in reference to gtx 580. 15-20% improvement over gtx 480 is "unexpectedly fast"??? REALLY??? how stupid do you think amd is. not their marketing team, I mean the people who actually design the cards. did they think it would only be an 8% improvement after 9 months? The only thing that might have caught amd by surprise is how quickly NV was able to release 580/570, but there is no way that they were expecting the actual refresh to be significantly slower than it ended up. Keep in mind that amd knew that fermi's issues mainly were in tsmc's court, and amd knows just how much better tsmc has gotten at 40nm. If anything, they should have expected a larger increase, not smaller. I think the delay is more likely due to supply/manufacturing issues than anything that nvidia did.

Ah, fud has posted 6950 details:
http://www.fudzilla.com/graphics/item/21175-amd-hd-6950-works-at-800mhz

So according to fud we have:
6970: 1536 stream processors, 24 simds, 96 texture units, 880mhz
6950: 1408 stream processors, 22 simds, 88 texture units, 800mhz
And a 4D architecture

The 6950 seems a lot closer to the performance of the 6970 then earlier rumours suggested.

This is the first I have heard of these figures. Interesting to see if he's right or all the fud haters on page 1 (and tbh most of the comments at fud itself) are going to have to eat their words.

6970: 1664 sp, 26 simds, 112 texture units, 873 mhz ~ gtx 580
6950: 1536 sp, 24 simds, 96 texture units, 788 mhz - slightly faster (5% or so) than gtx 570

This has been confirmed by a reliable source.
 
Last edited:

Dribble

Platinum Member
Aug 9, 2005
2,076
611
136
I still don't get this "unexpectedly fast" comment that I keep hearing in reference to gtx 580. 15-20% improvement over gtx 480 is "unexpectedly fast"??

Go back in time by 3 months and read these forums. Nvidia had a 480 which was already maxing power usage and running really hot. There next gen design wasn't due out for ages. All most thought they could do was unlock the last few processors to give the full 512 and up clocks very slightly to give an even hotter louder more power hungry card.

A bit further back and I remember the very respected Kyle of [H] saying nvidia was going to release nothing new this year (can't remember if this was pre/post 460 - think it might have been pre 460).

Turns out Kyle was wrong, and most on these forums were wrong, hence the word "unexpected" seems quite appropriate.
 

bryanW1995

Lifer
May 22, 2007
11,144
32
91
as I said, it's not that it was unexpectedly fast, but rather that it was unexpectedly early.

whoops, I didn't say that, but I meant to... if gtx 580 comes out in mar/apr then it's another letdown or, at best, competitive. it comes out in nov, 1-2 mos ahead of 6970, and it's a big winner. that's the way it goes. nvidia is winning this round, I don't want to say that they've already won, but I think that the magic 8 ball is pointing that direction.
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
What I found interesting in Fud's article was the power for the 6950...

"The TDP, something that has been quite a debatable topic recently, is set at 200W. Note that 200W is AMD's PowerTune Maximum Power whereas typical gaming power is set at 140W. Idle TDP is set at 20W, same as the HD 6970. The card needs two 6-pin PCI-Express power connectors and has two DVI, two mini-DP and an HDMI output."

That would probably make those doable on a dual GPU card. Typical gaming load of 140 watts is not bad at all. 10&#37; more clock and two more SIMDS, we can probably guess that the 6970 will still be well under 200 watts while gaming.

This is of course assuming Fud is right (and his track record isn't that great). As always, take these rumors with a block of salt.
 
Last edited:

Kenmitch

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,505
2,249
136
I still don't get this "unexpectedly fast" comment that I keep hearing in reference to gtx 580. 15-20&#37; improvement over gtx 480 is "unexpectedly fast"??? REALLY??? how stupid do you think amd is. not their marketing team, I mean the people who actually design the cards. did they think it would only be an 8% improvement after 9 months? The only thing that might have caught amd by surprise is how quickly NV was able to release 580/570, but there is no way that they were expecting the actual refresh to be significantly slower than it ended up. Keep in mind that amd knew that fermi's issues mainly were in tsmc's court, and amd knows just how much better tsmc has gotten at 40nm. If anything, they should have expected a larger increase, not smaller. I think the delay is more likely due to supply/manufacturing issues than anything that nvidia did.

New technology with beta drivers is my guess. Most likely we'll be seeing some jumps in performance once the driver team gets their shitz together! We see if from both camps with every new released line of GPU's.

If I had to make a guess I'd say the performance is currently being understated as like you said it makes no sense.
 

Unkle_Tar

Member
Dec 29, 2009
63
0
0
Go back in time by 3 months and read these forums. Nvidia had a 480 which was already maxing power usage and running really hot. There next gen design wasn't due out for ages. All most thought they could do was unlock the last few processors to give the full 512 and up clocks very slightly to give an even hotter louder more power hungry card.

A bit further back and I remember the very respected Kyle of [H] saying nvidia was going to release nothing new this year (can't remember if this was pre/post 460 - think it might have been pre 460).

Turns out Kyle was wrong, and most on these forums were wrong, hence the word "unexpected" seems quite appropriate.

I'll admit I wasn't expecting a refresh this year from Nvidia due to power and size issues. But since they announced they were releasing a replacement for the 480, you'd have to assume it would be a fair amount faster to warrant a new series name.
 

Wreckage

Banned
Jul 1, 2005
5,529
0
0
Well then AMD have officially admitted the 6970 is not as fast as the gtx580.

I would also expect AMD internal benchmarks to fudge on the side of AMD. Hopefully we get real benchmarks on Tuesday. But so far it sounds like reviewers don't have cards yet.
 

bryanW1995

Lifer
May 22, 2007
11,144
32
91
I think you are not serious on this one :p.

Why do people link articles from FUD? Its getting annoying. I am still hoping I get to see an Apocalypse XT post WW 3.

yes, I was speaking tongue in cheek since my link was clearly, um, BS. I was highlighting how fud was able to say one thing but imply something else entirely. make sure that you click the link for the full experience, it is something that we get from fud on a regular basis.

I would also expect AMD internal benchmarks to fudge on the side of AMD. Hopefully we get real benchmarks on Tuesday. But so far it sounds like reviewers don't have cards yet.

I don't know what's happened to you wreckage but you are making sense much more often these days. ;)

This whole launch screams "PROBLEM" for amd. it's clearly rushed, suffers from supplier issues, lots of excuses, etc etc. we can say whatever we want to about jhh, but he has clearly done a good job this year of righting the ship.
 
Last edited:

MrK6

Diamond Member
Aug 9, 2004
4,458
4
81
All very interesting.

As mentioned, the internal benchmarks put the 6970 as faster than both the GTX 570 and GTX 580. Even if they're fudged a bit, the 6970 should trade blows with the GTX 580. That begs the question, why are they comparing it to the GTX 570? Will the be offering GTX 580 performance at a GTX 570 price point? If history holds anything, they'll probably price it in between at $400-450.

A 6970 with 2GB of RAM for $400 and GTX 580-like performance seems like a great deal. A couple of things worry me though. TDP still seems low, but the clocks are high. This doesn't look good for overclockers, but then again 5870's will do 1.1GHz with proper cooling, so it might not be all for naught. The 3DMark11 scores are unimpressive - hell, the 6970 score is exactly what my 5850 scores, but is that due to a driver issue? The 6950 also looks interesting, if it's only $300 I might give CF another whirl at some point (especially if the 6970's don't end up clocking well).
 

x3sphere

Senior member
Jul 22, 2009
722
24
81
www.exophase.com
All very interesting.

As mentioned, the internal benchmarks put the 6970 as faster than both the GTX 570 and GTX 580. Even if they're fudged a bit, the 6970 should trade blows with the GTX 580. That begs the question, why are they comparing it to the GTX 570? Will the be offering GTX 580 performance at a GTX 570 price point? If history holds anything, they'll probably price it in between at $400-450.

A 6970 with 2GB of RAM for $400 and GTX 580-like performance seems like a great deal. A couple of things worry me though. TDP still seems low, but the clocks are high. This doesn't look good for overclockers, but then again 5870's will do 1.1GHz with proper cooling, so it might not be all for naught. The 3DMark11 scores are unimpressive - hell, the 6970 score is exactly what my 5850 scores, but is that due to a driver issue? The 6950 also looks interesting, if it's only $300 I might give CF another whirl at some point (especially if the 6970's don't end up clocking well).

Wouldn't surprise me if Nvidia ends up knocking down the 580's price in response and releasing a $500 585. Reminds me of the 280 to 285 situation..

If 6970 is slower but still within 95% of the 580 they'll be forced to cut prices.

This whole launch screams "PROBLEM" for amd. it's clearly rushed, suffers from supplier issues, lots of excuses, etc etc. we can say whatever we want to about jhh, but he has clearly done a good job this year of righting the ship.

I'm not so sure - OCUK says they already have stock to last through January, and that's assuming this launch meets the demand of the 5800 series.
 
Last edited:

happy medium

Lifer
Jun 8, 2003
14,387
480
126
That begs the question, why are they comparing it to the GTX 570?

Because it will be slower then the gtx580. AMd is doing the same thing Nvidia did last round, they are smacking cards right in the middle and pricing them like they should.

Example: price and performance

gtx580 500$
6970 450$
gtx570 360$
6950 329$

Come next week thats what we will see. NO price war ,we are screwed,just like in the spring when Nvidia released there cards.