[VC] AMD Radeon HD 9000 Series Launching in October?

[ICDP]

I just have to say, nice benchmark cherry picking

Of course, HardOCP did some overclocking comparisons as well using much more sober settings that didn't include vastly inflated levels of AA intended to make the Radeon look better than it really is, and found that even at 1240 MHz, the 770 could easily compete with the overclocked 7970 at 1275 and beat it in Metro Last Light, Crysis 3 and tie it in Far Cry 3.

Lolol. Your logic is amazing.

770 is 1.2 FPS faster in Metro Last Light, so that is a win for GTX770.
770 is 0.2 FPS (yes not even 1 FPS) faster in Crysis 3, so that is a win for GTX770.
HD 7970 is 0.8 FPS (again not even 1 FPS) faster in Far Cry 3, so that is a draw. By your own flawed logic this should have been a win for the 7970.

When GTX770 is ahead by a totally imperceptible amount, it's a GTX770 win.
When 7970 is ahead by a totally imperceptible amount, it's a draw.
When 7970 is ahead by such a massive amount in Tomb Raider that actually allows higher in game settings, lets not even mention it.

I never thought it would be possible to see more biased posting, but I was wrong. Adjust the overclocks by a few percent on either one of the three cards tested in that review and the results are not going to change by a perceptible amount.

GTX680, HD 7970 and GTX770 are all very evenly matched cards in performance. At the time of writing the cheapest GTX770 is now ~$90 (or around 30%) more expensive than the cheapest 7970. A card that gives similar performance and has 1GB extra VRAM is ~30% cheaper. If you are trying to make the GTX770 look like an outright winner you are failing.

 

[thilanliyan]

It uses SP, even nVidia doesn't strip SP.

Even Titan does poorly in crypto because it takes 3 cycles to do what AMD hardware can do in 1.

Whatever it is, I'm glad at least one of the manufacturers has it. I'm much more willing to spend money on general purpose video cards rather than dedicated ASICs as the video cards have some value to it even if mining goes belly up.

 

[Carfax83]

770 is 0.2 FPS (yes not even 1 FPS) faster in Crysis 3, so that is a win for GTX770.

The minimum in Crysis 3 is 19% higher for the 770 compared to the 7970..

At any rate, that's not the point I was making. The point was that RS said a 770 @ 1300 could not even beat a 7970 @ 1200.

Obviously that's not correct.. The only reason the Radeons did well in the link RS posted was because all the benchmarks used ridiculously high levels of AA (to the point where they were either barely, or completely unplayable), which tends to favor them as they have much higher bandwidth than the 680/770.

A 770 at 1300 will beat a 7970 at 1200 very easily in every game other than those that the Radeons are the strongest in.

Anyway, I don't want to derail this thread by making it an NVidia vs AMD discussion so I'm going to stop posting.

 

[SolMiester]

The premise holds when you consider how old 7970 is already. For someone to have one since release and OC to 1.2ghz or even higher, they already had 780 performance for so long..

Now AMD is talking about a refresh in a few months that offer ~780 performance.. for $500?? Come on, that's a major rip off and should be by anyone's standards.

@SolMiester, the 680 was a rip off, weak gains over a gtx580 it replaced while being more expensive. This ofc includes the 7970 launch prices as well, nobody denies this. My point is the entire 28nm generation has been bad for consumers, low performance leap, major pricing jump.

ps. By the time AMD's refresh hits, we would be nearly 2 years into this gen and still getting craptastic perf/$.

eh?, i though the 680 had the same price on release as the 580?....and weak performance over the 580? 35%+
http://anandtech.com/bench/Product/767?vs=772
One thing I will agree on, is the price increase, however performance leap?, rubbish....IMO

 

[SolMiester]

The point is that you could have gotten a $550 card at launch well over a year ago that with overclocking can perform similar to a $650 GPU that was released last month. It doesn't matter that the $650 card can outperform said $550 card over a year later.

So $350 bucks from AMD can get you $650 of nvidia's performance. Even if Nvidia's $650 of performance can net you their $1000 of performance it's still only around 15-25% more performance that you can get for $350.

But only good if you need 1 GPU...eh?

 

[blackened23]

A 770 at 1300 will beat a 7970 at 1200 very easily in every game other than those that the Radeons are the strongest in.

Anyway, I don't want to derail this thread by making it an NVidia vs AMD discussion so I'm going to stop posting.

I don't mean to perpetuate the discussion, i'd have to echo that the 770 seems to be a very highly overclocked GTX 680. That's not necessarily a bad thing, as what it *did* do, is bring that same performance to a lower price level, which was awesome. It brought a heavily oveclocked GTX 680 to a 400$ price point, which was even better than the then 7970GE 450$ price point, so nvidia definitely had a winner there.

That being said, the reason i'm saying this is because several comparisons were done at OCN with the GTX 680 lightning and 770, and for all intents and purposes they were similar at the same memory and core clocks. I mean, they performed pretty much dead-even at similar clocks. Now, the GTX 770 does have higher quality VRAM which most GTX 680 cards do not have (but the lightning did), so out of the box the 770 is guaranteed to get better VRAM clocks by a large margin. But if you even the clocks between the 680 lightning and the 770 lightning, they pretty much performed the same. Now -- that is specific to the MSI lightning.. nearly every other GTX 680 on the planet has substantially worse VRAM and will never be able to get 7GHz clockspeeds out of the VRAM. I think the lightning 680 was one of the few able to hit 7ghz fairly easily on the RAM.

I think overall, the 770 is probably in a very slim lead (2-5% depending on game) over the 7970GE, which isn't too surprising because the 770 really is a highly clocked 680. Again, that's not a bad thing - it forced AMD to lower their prices across the board, and it brought higher than stock GTX 680 performance to a 400$ price point. So the card was definitely a winner because of that and forced AMD to shift their pricing strategy. That also puts AMD in a strange position because when nvidia is offering a better value than AMD is with their GTX 770, and nvidia typically isn't known as the value leader...that puts AMD in a bad spot and will allow nvidia is going to sell a ton of 770 cards.

Some others will say that the 7970 can be clocked higher than 1050mhz and pass the 770 by a slim amount. That's possible, I don't think that's an entirely invalid comment. I used the 7970s briefly and I will say, the overclocking headroom is pretty ridiculously high, IMO. The performance difference between the 925mhz stock and 1250mhz (which is what I got mine up to, in the brief 2-3 months I had them) was insane. But, overclocking is never guaranteed. So that may not be entirely worth mentioning in a review, as I don't find much value in out of the box stock vs. overclocked reviews.

Anyway, i'll echo your comment on not turning this into an AMD vs nvidia type of thread, and just end there.

 

[toyota]

eh?, i though the 680 had the same price on release as the 580?....and weak performance over the 580? 35%+
http://anandtech.com/bench/Product/767?vs=772
One thing I will agree on, is the price increase, however performance leap?, rubbish....IMO

yeah its funny when people bitch about the 680 only having a 35% over the 580. the 680 cost the SAME so at least it did give 30-35% more performance at the same price point. the 7970 gave slightly less performance per dollar than the 6970. bottom line is that Nvidia gave over 35% more card for the money than the 7970 did when you compare them to the cards they replaced.

 

[Black Octagon]

Has anyone actually SEEN this original 'source'??? Videocardz.com refers to this site: http://www.chinadiy.com.cn/html/92/n-10092.html

But when I click it, I see an article about a new Antec PSU. No record of any other news about AMD from the pat few days that mentions a 9000 series either...

This still hasn't been answered...

 

[blackened23]

This still hasn't been answered...

Chiphell is pretty much where any and all leaks hit first. ChinaDIY and chiphell pretty much go hand-in-hand....

But you'll need to translate as the website and forum is obviously not english.

 

[thilanliyan]

yeah its funny when people bitch about the 680 only having a 35% over the 580. the 680 cost the SAME so at least it did give 30-35% more performance at the same price point. the 7970 gave slightly less performance per dollar than the 6970. bottom line is that Nvidia gave over 35% more card for the money than the 7970 did when you compare them to the cards they replaced.

The 580 was priced higher than the 6970 which is why it LOOKS better for the 680. So if the 6970 had cost $650 then we would all be praising the 7970 for bringing higher performance at $550?

The 7970 was priced relative to what else was in the market at the time (which happened to be the 580), just like the 680 was priced against the 7970 when it came out. Couple that with the fact that it was on a new process node, and you could have bet a good chunk of money that it was going to cost more than the 6970. Not sure why people still think that the 7XXX series was such a rip off. It brought decent performance gains and was the fastest single card at the time. If nVidia had something faster at the time they might have priced it lower, but they didn't.

 

[toyota]

The 580 was priced higher than the 6970 which is why it LOOKS better for the 680. So if the 6970 had cost $650 then we would all be praising the 7970 for bringing higher performance at $550?

The 7970 was priced relative to what else was in the market at the time (which happened to be the 580), just like the 680 was priced against the 7970 when it came out. Couple that with the fact that it was on a new process node, and you could have bet a good chunk of money that it was going to cost more than the 6970. Not sure why people still think that the 7XXX series was such a rip off. It brought decent performance gains and was the fastest single card at the time. If nVidia had something faster at the time they might have priced it lower, but they didn't.

lol so a next gen product beats a previous gen product? wow breaking news. we are supposed to get MORE performance at the SAME price than previous gen. AMD did NOT do that and actually gave LESS performance per dollar than the card it replaced. so yes the 7970 was a rip off at launch and comparing it to the 580 which was already a piss poor value from the previous generation does not change that.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Faster than 780 but slower than Titan? Thats a fine hair to split. It good that the cards will be fast, but with AMD's next gen playing catch up with Nvidia's current gen, I can't see how thats exciting or changes things since Maxwell will come out maybe 6 months after that and will rebalance things back to where they are now. It will all come down to price. Before maxwell, the cards should be priced about the same as a GTX 780. After maxwell, the new AMD cards will go down to $400 I bet, unless Maxwell sells for $1,500 (probably will).

If maxwell costs that much, or anywhere close to it I won't be upgrading AGAIN. That would be over 2 years with the same cards. I have never done that.

That said, with these consoles sporting 7800 level performance I may not need to upgrade for years more. *shrug*

 

[SirPauly]

You are still ignoring facts. HD7970 is more impressive than 5870 was over 4890 or 6970 was over 5870.

I can cherry pick as well -- The GTX 480 was more impressive than the GTX 680 was over the GTX 580 --- but the GTX 480 lacked balance and efficiency when compared to the competition, imho.

 

[Elfear]

yeah its funny when people bitch about the 680 only having a 35% over the 580. the 680 cost the SAME so at least it did give 30-35% more performance at the same price point. the 7970 gave slightly less performance per dollar than the 6970. bottom line is that Nvidia gave over 35% more card for the money than the 7970 did when you compare them to the cards they replaced.

so yes the 7970 was a rip off at launch and comparing it to the 580 which was already a piss poor value from the previous generation does not change that.

Wait a second...

 

[toyota]

Wait a second...

wait a second for what? I am only referring to the cards increasing performance per dollar over the cards they replaced.

 

[Carfax83]

yeah its funny when people bitch about the 680 only having a 35% over the 580.

It may have been 35% faster than the 580 at launch, but right now, it's more like 45% (and greater) after driver maturation.

 

[Imouto]

wait a second for what? I am only referring to the cards increasing performance per dollar over the cards they replaced.

The GTX 580 was $390 when Nv launched the GTX 680.

Not to talk about the GTX Titan and the GTX 780.

 

[toyota]

It may have been 35% faster than the 580 at launch, but right now, it's more like 45% (and greater) after driver maturation.

yeah that has nothing to do with the launch scenario though. plus the 7970 is much stronger too now.

 

[toyota]

The GTX 580 was $390 when Nv launched the GTX 680.

Not to talk about the GTX Titan and the GTX 780.

I dont remember seeing them that low when the 680 launched. still my point is comparing launch msrps.

 

[blackened23]

I dont remember seeing them that low when the 680 launched. still my point is comparing launch msrps.

Just curious - did the 580 actually lower in price when the 680 was released? I was under the impression that it just slowly disappeared after becoming an end-of-life product. That's what typically happens when intel releases a new CPU generation, or AMD/nvidia release a new GPU gen. I could be wrong about the 580, though.

 

[bystander36]

When the 680 was released, at least at Fry's, the 580 was more expensive than the 680 and the 680 was $499.

 

[SolMiester]

I think we are talking release prices.....580 & 680 were both $499, so we got 35% perf/$ improvement over last gen, I dont have the launch prices on 6970 and 7970, however know that they werent the same....

 

[Elfear]

I think we are talking release prices.....580 & 680 were both $499, so we got 35% perf/$ improvement over last gen, I dont have the launch prices on 6970 and 7970, however know that they werent the same....

This has been rehashed ad nauseum the past 1.5yrs but the main reason people were up in arms about the 7970's price is because of expectation. For ~3.5yrs AMD priced their top cards very cheaply compared to Nvidia even when their cards were on top (5870 for 6 months). Gamers got great bargains for cards that were generally 10-15% behind Nvidia's best.

All of a sudden those bargains ended and people are up in arms that AMD quit offering their cards for so cheap. At that point it is AMD's fault that GPU prices in general have increased while Nvidia gets a free pass.

Was the price increase from 6970 --> 7970 greater than the 580 --> 680? Absolutely. But then again AMD was the one offering the bargains in the first place. I'm not sure where the outrage came from when they just put themselves on parity with Nvidia in the bargain department.

It's like being pissed at the sandwich shop that offered amazing deals on tasty sandwiches and then got wise and started charging the same amount as the other shops. How dare they charge as much as the other guys? I want my bargain!

 

[cmdrdredd]

This has been rehashed ad nauseum the past 1.5yrs but the main reason people were up in arms about the 7970's price is because of expectation. For ~3.5yrs AMD priced their top cards very cheaply compared to Nvidia even when their cards were on top (5870 for 6 months). Gamers got great bargains for cards that were generally 10-15% behind Nvidia's best.

All of a sudden those bargains ended and people are up in arms that AMD quit offering their cards for so cheap. At that point it is AMD's fault that GPU prices in general have increased while Nvidia gets a free pass.

Was the price increase from 6970 --> 7970 greater than the 580 --> 680? Absolutely. But then again AMD was the one offering the bargains in the first place. I'm not sure where the outrage came from when they just put themselves on parity with Nvidia in the bargain department.

It's like being pissed at the sandwich shop that offered amazing deals on tasty sandwiches and then got wise and started charging the same amount as the other shops. How dare they charge as much as the other guys? I want my bargain!

Do remember that AMD released the 7970 @ $549 while the GTX 680 released @ $499 and offered performance on day one that bested the 7970 in many ways.

So they didn't charge the same, they charged more...and gave less for 6 months when they finally got on the ball with drivers.

 

[stahlhart]

Way off topic now. We're done here.
-- stahlhart