What does AMD have to fight the 780?

[ocre]

OMG!!!!!

It would be utterly amassing if they had these out by July. the timing of this information has got me suspicious though. I just cannot believe they will be here so soon. The competition would be great but i think the timing frame wishful thinking.

I dont know about this rumor. I am thinking q4 if at all this year

 

[raghu78]

OMG!!!!!

It would be utterly amassing if they had these out by July. the timing of this information has got me suspicious though. I just cannot believe they will be here so soon. The competition would be great but i think the timing frame wishful thinking.

I dont know about this rumor. I am thinking q4 if at all this year

AMD learnt from HD 7970 launch that its not important to be first to market, but come at the right price performance wrt competition without much of a time gap. HD 7970 was released 17 months ago. AMD definitely had more than enough time to refine their architecture. Also its going to be on TSMC 28nm which is very mature. so no production volume or yield issues. The fact that PS4 has 8 ACE 2.0 means GCN 2.0 was ready a long time ago. the consoles are on schedule to launch in Q4 2013. obviously a full fledged game console take more time than add-in-boards to go from chip tapeout to retail release.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

It's not fair to say that about AMD's graphics division, they had the fastest card for well over a year, for about four months they didn't even have competition. NV managed to best AMD only for a while until AMD released 7970GHz edition. They do that with CPUs, their CPUs are just terrible Only the recently released jaguar is a decent CPU considering what it is.

AMD does have moments if genius, I don't mean good enough for less is a bad thing. Its actually a real smart strategy.

 

[Rvenger]

looks like we will have a AMD response to Nvidia GTX 700 series in Q3

http://www.chiphell.com/thread-755237-1-1.html

the only difference is previously it was expected that HD 8870 was Hainan XT and HD 8850 was Hainan Pro. Also it does not make sense to use Hainan chip for HD 8950. the Curacao chip is a much larger chip (420 sq mm) and needs a salvage part for improving yields.

http://videocardz.com/34981/amd-radeon-hd-8870-and-hd-8850-specifiation-leaked
http://videocardz.com/39041/meet-aruba-curacao-hainan-and-bonaire-the-codenames-radeon-hd-8000-series

This is my expectations

HD 8970 - 2304 sp, 3 geometry engines, 8 ACE 2.0, 48 ROP, 6 GB GDDR5, 384 bit memory (1100 / 7000) for USD 600.

HD 8950 - 2048 sp, 3 geometry engines, 8 ACE 2.0, 48 ROP, 3 GB GDDR5, 384 bit memory (1000 / 6000) for USD 400 - 450.

HD 8870 - 1792 sp, 2 geometry engines, 8 ACE 2.0, 32 ROP, 2 GB GDDR5, 256 bit memory (1200 / 7000) for USD 300

HD 8850 - 1536 sp, 2 geometry engines, 8 ACE 2.0, 32 ROP, 2 GB GDDR5, 256 bit memory (1100 / 6000) for USD 230

HD 8830 - 1280 sp, 2 geometry engines, 8 ACE 2.0, 32 ROP, 2 GB GDDR5, 256 bit memory (1000 / 6000) for USD 200

also the 8 ACE 2.0 is identical to what the PS4 uses. This lineup would take the fight to Nvidia. God knows we need competition. If AMD can get this lineup released by July August it would be great. This with AMD CF frame pacing driver would restore competition in all segments.

8950 would be very enticing for the $$. Hopefully they will also release an 6gb model.

 

[sushiwarrior]

looks like we will have a AMD response to Nvidia GTX 700 series in Q3

http://www.chiphell.com/thread-755237-1-1.html

the only difference is previously it was expected that HD 8870 was Hainan XT and HD 8850 was Hainan Pro. Also it does not make sense to use Hainan chip for HD 8950. the Curacao chip is a much larger chip (420 sq mm) and needs a salvage part for improving yields.

http://videocardz.com/34981/amd-radeon-hd-8870-and-hd-8850-specifiation-leaked
http://videocardz.com/39041/meet-aruba-curacao-hainan-and-bonaire-the-codenames-radeon-hd-8000-series

This is my expectations

HD 8970 - 2304 sp, 3 geometry engines, 8 ACE 2.0, 48 ROP, 6 GB GDDR5, 384 bit memory (1100 / 7000) for USD 600.

HD 8950 - 2048 sp, 3 geometry engines, 8 ACE 2.0, 48 ROP, 3 GB GDDR5, 384 bit memory (1000 / 6000) for USD 400 - 450.

HD 8870 - 1792 sp, 2 geometry engines, 8 ACE 2.0, 32 ROP, 2 GB GDDR5, 256 bit memory (1200 / 7000) for USD 300

HD 8850 - 1536 sp, 2 geometry engines, 8 ACE 2.0, 32 ROP, 2 GB GDDR5, 256 bit memory (1100 / 6000) for USD 230

HD 8830 - 1280 sp, 2 geometry engines, 8 ACE 2.0, 32 ROP, 2 GB GDDR5, 256 bit memory (1000 / 6000) for USD 200

also the 8 ACE 2.0 is identical to what the PS4 uses. This lineup would take the fight to Nvidia. God knows we need competition. If AMD can get this lineup released by July August it would be great. This with AMD CF frame pacing driver would restore competition in all segments.

Right kind of idea but all of those numbers are wrong. EDIT: Not all, but the 8970 numbers are very pretty far off.

 

[raghu78]

Right kind of idea but all of those numbers are wrong. EDIT: Not all, but the 8970 numbers are very pretty far off.

sushi are you working at any of the add-in-board companies or are you privy to NDA information from AMD. would you please enlighten us :biggrin:

 

[Will Robinson]

That is not disclosable at this time....:sneaky:

 

[boxleitnerb]

Tahiti stands to gain the most from power efficiency optimizations and improvements to front end. Tahiti also is ROP limited. HD 7970 Ghz is not 50% faster than HD 7870. clock for clock the improvement is around 40%.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/HIS/HD_7950_X2_Boost/28.html

HD 7870 - 80
HD 7970 (925)- 105
HD 7970 Ghz(1050) - 115 (80 x 1.44 = 115.2)

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/grafikkarten/2013/nvidia-geforce-gtx-780-im-test/3/

similar relation here. so at same clocks of 1 Ghz you are looking at 40% improvement for 60% more sp. there is more perf to be extracted.

With a new optimized architecture on a very mature TSMC 28nm process with power state optimizations AMD can get another 30% perf at same TDP. TSMC 28nm process is very mature now. AMD can go for 950 - 1000 mhz clocks and voltage binning with 1.15 - 1.75v to fit inside 250w TDP.

You cannot conclude that with certainty. The 7970 20% faster than the 7950 despite having only 15% more pixel fillrate. I would look at the frontend instead. AMD didn't double the ACEs for no reason with Bonaire.
Btw, the Tahiti successor likely is Hawaii, not Curacao and Dave Baumann confirmed Hainan as a notebook GPU. So the specs from Chiphell are fake. Doesn't make sense anyway to use the fastest GPU for only one SKU.

 

[raghu78]

You cannot conclude that with certainty. The 7970 20% faster than the 7950 despite having only 15% more pixel fillrate. I would look at the frontend instead. AMD didn't double the ACEs for no reason with Bonaire.
Btw, the Tahiti successor likely is Hawaii, not Curacao and Dave Baumann confirmed Hainan as a notebook GPU. So the specs from Chiphell are fake. Doesn't make sense anyway to use the fastest GPU for only one SKU.

HD 7950 is on avg 5% (3 - 7% depending on game) slower than HD 7970 at the same clocks. the large difference comes from the fact that HD 7950 runs at 125 Mhz slower clocks than HD 7970. so even though HD 7970 has 14% more shaders (1792 x 1.14 = 2043) the perf rarely scales by more than 5% at same clocks.

also I stated above that HD 8950 specs are incorrect and gave my explanations too. HD 8950 should be a salvage Curacao chip with 2048 sp and the rest of the chip same as HD 8970 with half the VRAM.

the names might be different but the next gen GCN products look to launch in early Q3 2013 and will be on 28nm. 20nm products will be out only in June -July 2014. I can't believe AMD will wait till next year July to release their next gen.

 

[boxleitnerb]

HD 7950 is on avg 5% (3 - 7% depending on game) slower than HD 7970 at the same clocks. the large difference comes from the fact that HD 7950 runs at 125 Mhz slower clocks than HD 7970. so even though HD 7970 has 14% more shaders (1792 x 1.14 = 2043) the perf rarely scales by more than 5% at same clocks.

also I stated above that HD 8950 specs are incorrect and gave my explanations too. HD 8950 should be a salvage Curacao chip with 2048 sp and the rest of the chip same as HD 8970 with half the VRAM.

the names might be different but the next gen GCN products look to launch in early Q3 2013 and will be on 28nm. 20nm products will be out only in June -July 2014. I can't believe AMD will wait till next year July to release their next gen.

No. 7970 is 20% faster than the 7950 check your own links (computerbase 780 review). That wouldn't be the case if there was a ROP bottleneck.

 

[raghu78]

No. 7970 is 20% faster than the 7950 check your own links (computerbase 780 review). That wouldn't be the case if there was a ROP bottleneck.

http://www.legionhardware.com/artic...z_edition_7950_iceq_xsup2_boost_clock,13.html

a HD 7950 at 975 - 1000 Mhz is on par with HD 7970(925 Mhz). same for HD 7950 at 1100 - 1125 Mhz is on par with HD 7970 Ghz(1050 mhz). you can check with HD 7950 and HD 7970 users and ask them to post benchmarks. also the reference HD 7950 boost without power control maxed out to +20% does not run at 925 mhz consistently.

http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/34761-amd-hd-7950-vs-hd-7970-clocks/?page=10

"Our look at the reference Radeon HD 7950 and HD 7970 cards shows there to be a 15 per cent gap in performance in favour of the range-topping GPU. But raise the HD 7950's clocks to the higher speeds of the 7970 and the gap melts away to around five percent, often a little less, depending upon gaming title."

 

[boxleitnerb]

Why do you ignore Computerbase results that you yourself have posted and randomly pick other reviews? Believe what you will...

 

[ICDP]

Why do you ignore Computerbase results that you yourself have posted and randomly pick other reviews? Believe what you will...

Raghu is correct. I have owned both cards and a HD 7950 at similar clocks is only a few percent slower than a 7970. The core OC potential is pretty much identical as well so the 7970 wont clock any higher as a rule.

 

[Ibra]

looks like we will have a AMD response to Nvidia GTX 700 series in Q3

http://www.chiphell.com/thread-755237-1-1.html

the only difference is previously it was expected that HD 8870 was Hainan XT and HD 8850 was Hainan Pro. Also it does not make sense to use Hainan chip for HD 8950. the Curacao chip is a much larger chip (420 sq mm) and needs a salvage part for improving yields.

http://videocardz.com/34981/amd-radeon-hd-8870-and-hd-8850-specifiation-leaked
http://videocardz.com/39041/meet-aruba-curacao-hainan-and-bonaire-the-codenames-radeon-hd-8000-series

This is my expectations

HD 8970 - 2304 sp, 3 geometry engines, 8 ACE 2.0, 48 ROP, 6 GB GDDR5, 384 bit memory (1100 / 7000) for USD 600.

HD 8950 - 2048 sp, 3 geometry engines, 8 ACE 2.0, 48 ROP, 3 GB GDDR5, 384 bit memory (1000 / 6000) for USD 400 - 450.

HD 8870 - 1792 sp, 2 geometry engines, 8 ACE 2.0, 32 ROP, 2 GB GDDR5, 256 bit memory (1200 / 7000) for USD 300

HD 8850 - 1536 sp, 2 geometry engines, 8 ACE 2.0, 32 ROP, 2 GB GDDR5, 256 bit memory (1100 / 6000) for USD 230

HD 8830 - 1280 sp, 2 geometry engines, 8 ACE 2.0, 32 ROP, 2 GB GDDR5, 256 bit memory (1000 / 6000) for USD 200

also the 8 ACE 2.0 is identical to what the PS4 uses. This lineup would take the fight to Nvidia. God knows we need competition. If AMD can get this lineup released by July August it would be great. This with AMD CF frame pacing driver would restore competition in all segments.

Article date is September 15th, 2012. I'm surprised you haven't added XRD2 memory in this. :|

 

[raghu78]

Article date is September 15th, 2012. I'm surprised you haven't added XRD2 memory in this. :|

the chiphell post is dated may 23, 2013. whatever it is given that 20nm is atleast a year away I believe AMD has 28nm chips intended to replace Pitcairn and Tahiti. What they are named is not important. Bonaire (HD 7790) is a refresh to Cape Verde (HD 7770) and provides 30% more performance in the same TDP. so its a matter of when these refresh chips will be released.

 

[raghu78]

Raghu is correct. I have owned both cards and a HD 7950 at similar clocks is only a few percent slower than a 7970. The core OC potential is pretty much identical as well so the 7970 wont clock any higher as a rule.

correct. people won't use common sense. there are so many HD 7950 reviews which show overclocked performance. also many users have posted scores of benchmarks on the forums of various sites and still people are misinformed.

 

[sontin]

What they are named is not important. Bonaire (HD 7790) is a refresh to Cape Verde (HD 7770) and provides 30% more performance in the same TDP. so its a matter of when these refresh chips will be released.

How many times you want to repeat that nonsense?
Perf/Watt is not really better with Bonaire than other pitcairn or 7750 cards:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/EVGA/GTX_780_SC_ACX_Cooler/27.html

 

[raghu78]

How many times you want to repeat that nonsense?
Perf/Watt is not really better with Bonaire than other pitcairn or 7750 cards:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/EVGA/GTX_780_SC_ACX_Cooler/27.html

you need reading comprehension lessons. I said HD 7790 is 30% faster than HD 7770 for the same 85w TDP. obviously power consumption on HD 7790 will be around 5 - 10w more than HD 7770. but this means that HD 7790 uses up more of the 85w TDP and that HD 7770 at stock rarely uses up 85w.

comparing HD 7790 at 1 Ghz and 85w TDP with HD 7750 at a low 800 mhz clock and 55w TDP is a miserable fail. perf/watt is always better when you are at such low clocks as on HD 7750. do you know why notebooks GPUs are clocked lower. for power reasons.

i think you really need to stop telling others what to do. follow your own advice. stop talking bullshit.

 

[sontin]

And i and others said that AMD cards except the 7770 have the same perf/watt and only the 7770 is worse.

But maybe you dont know what "Perf/Watt" means.

 

[raghu78]

And i and others said that AMD cards except the 7770 have the same perf/watt and only the 7770 is worse.

But maybe you dont know what "Perf/Watt" means.

there too you are wrong

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/EVGA/GTX_780_SC_ACX_Cooler/27.html

as long as you are not bandwidth crippled the HD 7790 provides better perf/watt than HD 7870 and HD 7770. all these 3 are fully enabled chips at 1 Ghz. so perf/watt comparisons are straightforward.

1280 x 800 perf/watt

HD 7790 - 139
HD 7870 - 124
HD 7770 - 118

Obviously at higher resolutions like 1920 x 1080 , the 128 bit memory cards are bandwidth crippled and at 2560 x 1600, even HD 7750 will fall below HD 7870 in perf/watt.

 

[sontin]

What? If the 7790 would be "bandwidth crippled" then the perf/watt would be much better. You see that behaviour with GTX680 and Metro2033.

In higher resolution the compute performance is more important than anything else. And here the perf/watt is nearly the same.

 

[Headfoot]

I love that everyone keeps acting like gk104 wasn't "planned" to be the high end chip. Clearly it was. That's what happened. You can't argue with reality (despite how much you try).

That is a different question from "IS gk104 the high end chip?" Clearly it is not, because GK110 is better.

The real take-away point is that nVidia is STAGGERING the launches, preferably to get more money out of the same enthusiasts since refreshes can't happen as fast as they once did (process development slowdown and all). Instead now they stagger the SKUs within the GPU architecture.

Both gk104 and gk110 are/were the high end chip, just at different points in time. Gk110 was NOT the high end chip until you could buy it. On paper, it always was. But that makes no difference when there is no product to buy.

The timing of the launches is absolutely indispensable to understanding the strategy. Timing is everything

 

[thilanliyan]

I love that everyone keeps acting like gk104 wasn't "planned" to be the high end chip.

Pfft...even Titan is low/mid-range, 680 is just budget, along the lines of IGPs. Wait till you see nVidia's REAL high end. I swear, it's coming.

 

[Lepton87]

Pfft...even Titan is low/mid-range, 680 is just budget, along the lines of IGPs. Wait till you see nVidia's REAL high end. I swear, it's coming.

Is that a slide that NV showed just before FX series launched? There should've been an asterisk that says in small print "for the biggest embarrassment of a card we have ever made"

 

[SirPauly]

I love that everyone keeps acting like gk104 wasn't "planned" to be the high end chip. Clearly it was. That's what happened. You can't argue with reality (despite how much you try).

That is a different question from "IS gk104 the high end chip?" Clearly it is not, because GK110 is better.

The real take-away point is that nVidia is STAGGERING the launches, preferably to get more money out of the same enthusiasts since refreshes can't happen as fast as they once did (process development slowdown and all). Instead now they stagger the SKUs within the GPU architecture.

Both gk104 and gk110 are/were the high end chip, just at different points in time. Gk110 was NOT the high end chip until you could buy it. On paper, it always was. But that makes no difference when there is no product to buy.

The timing of the launches is absolutely indispensable to understanding the strategy. Timing is everything

I don't know what was on confidential road maps but the key for planning may be if there was ever a GK-100 initially planned -- and if there was -- what happened to it?