Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [FZ] Radeon HD 6000 is an evolutionary design
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[FZ] Radeon HD 6000 is an evolutionary design - Page 6

post #51 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by timAHH View Post
What about something like Stone Giant? 5870 gets like 40-45fps on that where a GTX480 gets 85-90. One of those is playable, one isn't.

For people who get a graphics card and keep it for several years, the GTX400 GPUs will likely shine much brighter than HD5000 in the long run.

I personally agree with you though, I would never keep a GPU that long. I have a bad habit of upgrading with each generation, but this time I will probably pass on HD6000.
The Fermi advantage in SG has nothing much to do with tess performance.
I say that because Fermi holds the same performance advantage over Cypress at all levels of tess, this includes no tess scores as well.
Basically what I'm saying is, they both take equal performance hits at varying levels of tess.
But yeah, in 3 years Fermi will probably perform better in more games, hmm kinda like now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Choggs396 View Post
Haha yeah... scaling is really good with just two, but three it drops quite a bit IIRC. It's been a while since I looked at any benchies though.

I was originally gonna get an i7 or Phenom II with an HD4870/90 back when they were released, but decided it wouldn't really have been an upgrade (at least gaming-wise) unless I opted for two cards right off the bat. I can't believe how long these 8800's have lasted in terms of performance... I still play most of my games at max or near max details. They have started to show their age though in some of the newer titles so I think I'll finally have to stop pushing back the date and spring for a whole new setup sooner than later.... i7 + HD6870 sounds good though.
Except for a half dozen games, there probably isn't any game 8800gtx can't max.
I remember getting 300fps in Source games with mine.
Mighty-iTX
(12 items)
 
One foot in..
(17 items)
 
mATX
(12 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4770K M6-Impact 780Ti Samsung 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Crucial M4 256 Glacer 240L W8.1 K272HUL 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Saitek Seasonic X-650 Prodigy MX518 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
4770K/45/43 Maximus VI Extreme R290X R290X 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Samsung Crucial M4 64GB RAIDR LSSWM 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Cooler Master Glacer 7 Ultimate 64 SyncMaster Eclipse 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
XFX 1050 BE 600T Silver MX518 Desk 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-4330 Z87 Gryphon GTX690 G.Skill RipJawsX 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
WD Blacks Hyper 212 W8.1 ACER 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Ultra X3 1000w Corsair 230T Orange Razer 
  hide details  
Reply
Mighty-iTX
(12 items)
 
One foot in..
(17 items)
 
mATX
(12 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4770K M6-Impact 780Ti Samsung 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Crucial M4 256 Glacer 240L W8.1 K272HUL 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Saitek Seasonic X-650 Prodigy MX518 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
4770K/45/43 Maximus VI Extreme R290X R290X 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Samsung Crucial M4 64GB RAIDR LSSWM 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Cooler Master Glacer 7 Ultimate 64 SyncMaster Eclipse 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
XFX 1050 BE 600T Silver MX518 Desk 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-4330 Z87 Gryphon GTX690 G.Skill RipJawsX 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
WD Blacks Hyper 212 W8.1 ACER 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Ultra X3 1000w Corsair 230T Orange Razer 
  hide details  
Reply
post #52 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by grunion View Post
The Fermi advantage in SG has nothing much to do with tess performance.
I say that because Fermi holds the same performance advantage over Cypress at all levels of tess, this includes no tess scores as well.
Basically what I'm saying is, they both take equal performance hits at varying levels of tess.
But yeah, in 3 years Fermi will probably perform better in more games, hmm kinda like now.
We really don't need to rely on other benchmarks to use 'heavy' tessellation to gauge tessellation performance anymore. There are flat out tessellation benchmarks now:

http://www.geeks3d.com/20100819/gpu-...ion-benchmark/

I get that you're saying the 'dropoff' is the same, but there's still a 200-300% difference in starting point... and the nVidia cards certainly aren't 200-300% faster overall. That's tessellation talking:

http://www.geeks3d.com/20100826/tess...arative-table/

[edit] And re-looking at the numbers, the ATI card dropoff is way harsher than the Fermis.. so your point isn't even really accurate.
Edited by Celeras - 8/31/10 at 2:43pm
Ivykepler
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 3570K, 4.6 GHz @ 1.29V Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UD5H eVGA GTX780 ACX SC 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws X DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Crucial M4SSD2 SATA III (128GB) Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Dell 24' 07WFPHC, 1920x1200 + HP W2371d CM Storm Quick Fire Rapid, MX Red 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX850 Coolermaster HAF 932 Logitech G9x 
  hide details  
Reply
Ivykepler
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 3570K, 4.6 GHz @ 1.29V Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UD5H eVGA GTX780 ACX SC 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws X DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Crucial M4SSD2 SATA III (128GB) Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Dell 24' 07WFPHC, 1920x1200 + HP W2371d CM Storm Quick Fire Rapid, MX Red 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX850 Coolermaster HAF 932 Logitech G9x 
  hide details  
Reply
post #53 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Celeras View Post
We really don't need to rely on other benchmarks to use 'heavy' tessellation to gauge tessellation performance anymore. There are flat out tessellation benchmarks now:

http://www.geeks3d.com/20100819/gpu-...ion-benchmark/

I get that you're saying the 'dropoff' is the same, but there's still a 200-300% difference in starting point... and the nVidia cards certainly aren't 200-300% faster overall. That's tessellation talking:

http://www.geeks3d.com/20100826/tess...arative-table/

[edit] And re-looking at the numbers, the ATI card dropoff is way harsher than the Fermis.. so your point isn't even really accurate.
Ok well you're linking a BM I've not even mentioned.
I'll have a look at it when I get a min.
I did run run that, checking CFX scaling, but as far as tess scaling goes, not yet.

Attachment 170504


But yet again I see a benchmark that takes multiple cards to reach "Playable" fps.
So really what's the point?
Mighty-iTX
(12 items)
 
One foot in..
(17 items)
 
mATX
(12 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4770K M6-Impact 780Ti Samsung 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Crucial M4 256 Glacer 240L W8.1 K272HUL 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Saitek Seasonic X-650 Prodigy MX518 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
4770K/45/43 Maximus VI Extreme R290X R290X 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Samsung Crucial M4 64GB RAIDR LSSWM 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Cooler Master Glacer 7 Ultimate 64 SyncMaster Eclipse 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
XFX 1050 BE 600T Silver MX518 Desk 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-4330 Z87 Gryphon GTX690 G.Skill RipJawsX 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
WD Blacks Hyper 212 W8.1 ACER 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Ultra X3 1000w Corsair 230T Orange Razer 
  hide details  
Reply
Mighty-iTX
(12 items)
 
One foot in..
(17 items)
 
mATX
(12 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4770K M6-Impact 780Ti Samsung 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Crucial M4 256 Glacer 240L W8.1 K272HUL 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Saitek Seasonic X-650 Prodigy MX518 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
4770K/45/43 Maximus VI Extreme R290X R290X 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Samsung Crucial M4 64GB RAIDR LSSWM 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Cooler Master Glacer 7 Ultimate 64 SyncMaster Eclipse 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
XFX 1050 BE 600T Silver MX518 Desk 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-4330 Z87 Gryphon GTX690 G.Skill RipJawsX 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
WD Blacks Hyper 212 W8.1 ACER 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Ultra X3 1000w Corsair 230T Orange Razer 
  hide details  
Reply
post #54 of 129
We already knew this. Next...

and get those damned kids off my lawn, will ya!
Number Cruncher
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2700k @ 4.6 1.3V Gigabyte Z68XP UD4 MSI TF3 7950 3GB G. Skill 4x4GB Ripjaw Zs 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Samsung 830 256GB 2 - WD 750 GB Black WD 320GB Blue Lite-On DVD Drive 
CoolingOSMonitorPower
Corsair H80 Win 7 Pro x64 Acer P243w Corsair 750W TX 
CaseAudio
Lian Li PC-A71F Audioengine A2/Audioengine D1 DAC 
  hide details  
Reply
Number Cruncher
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2700k @ 4.6 1.3V Gigabyte Z68XP UD4 MSI TF3 7950 3GB G. Skill 4x4GB Ripjaw Zs 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Samsung 830 256GB 2 - WD 750 GB Black WD 320GB Blue Lite-On DVD Drive 
CoolingOSMonitorPower
Corsair H80 Win 7 Pro x64 Acer P243w Corsair 750W TX 
CaseAudio
Lian Li PC-A71F Audioengine A2/Audioengine D1 DAC 
  hide details  
Reply
post #55 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by grunion View Post
But yet again I see a benchmark that takes multiple cards to reach "Playable" fps.
So really what's the point?
A single 480 is 66 FPS, a single 5870 is 10 FPS on the 'insane' setting. It would certainly be playable for one of them..
Ivykepler
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 3570K, 4.6 GHz @ 1.29V Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UD5H eVGA GTX780 ACX SC 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws X DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Crucial M4SSD2 SATA III (128GB) Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Dell 24' 07WFPHC, 1920x1200 + HP W2371d CM Storm Quick Fire Rapid, MX Red 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX850 Coolermaster HAF 932 Logitech G9x 
  hide details  
Reply
Ivykepler
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 3570K, 4.6 GHz @ 1.29V Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UD5H eVGA GTX780 ACX SC 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws X DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Crucial M4SSD2 SATA III (128GB) Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Dell 24' 07WFPHC, 1920x1200 + HP W2371d CM Storm Quick Fire Rapid, MX Red 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX850 Coolermaster HAF 932 Logitech G9x 
  hide details  
Reply
post #56 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mygaffer View Post
Jesus, not this crap again.

A lot of socially frustrated internet monkeys will be sitting around going, "Its going to suck!" while a lot of other socially frustrated internet monkey's will be typing, "Its going to ROCK!".

All the while masturbating furiously with one hand while holding their graphics card of choice in the other, watching a press conference with Jen-Hsun speaking or else a tech demo of Ruby flying a fighter jet.

All the while us normal folks, well, relatively normal, will be waiting for a product release and trusted reviews.

As an aside, I find it a little strange that AMD would build all these successes with the ATI brand then retire it. Seems like exactly the wrong time to retire the brand, though I doubt it will affect sales in any significant way.
The saddest thing is that typically reality falls firmly in the middle... which in this case happens to be EXACTLY what the card has been represented as since day one.

Ever since the very first rumors about 6k hit, we (as in, people that think rationally) have expected a modest but notable improvement in performance, along with possibly improved power consumption.

When the card is looking to be EXACTLY like it was made out to be, people then say massive win, or even worse, "fail"? What the hell is fail about being exactly as advertised?
post #57 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Celeras View Post
A single 480 is 66 FPS, a single 5870 is 10 FPS on the 'insane' setting. It would certainly be playable for one of them..
Well no doubt the 480 thumps the 5870..

But is 66FPS really "playable", I see no mention of mins, other filtering being applied.

I'll tell you this, I won't be holding my breath waiting for these scores to matter or influence my purchase decision.
Mighty-iTX
(12 items)
 
One foot in..
(17 items)
 
mATX
(12 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4770K M6-Impact 780Ti Samsung 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Crucial M4 256 Glacer 240L W8.1 K272HUL 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Saitek Seasonic X-650 Prodigy MX518 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
4770K/45/43 Maximus VI Extreme R290X R290X 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Samsung Crucial M4 64GB RAIDR LSSWM 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Cooler Master Glacer 7 Ultimate 64 SyncMaster Eclipse 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
XFX 1050 BE 600T Silver MX518 Desk 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-4330 Z87 Gryphon GTX690 G.Skill RipJawsX 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
WD Blacks Hyper 212 W8.1 ACER 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Ultra X3 1000w Corsair 230T Orange Razer 
  hide details  
Reply
Mighty-iTX
(12 items)
 
One foot in..
(17 items)
 
mATX
(12 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4770K M6-Impact 780Ti Samsung 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Crucial M4 256 Glacer 240L W8.1 K272HUL 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Saitek Seasonic X-650 Prodigy MX518 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
4770K/45/43 Maximus VI Extreme R290X R290X 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Samsung Crucial M4 64GB RAIDR LSSWM 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Cooler Master Glacer 7 Ultimate 64 SyncMaster Eclipse 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
XFX 1050 BE 600T Silver MX518 Desk 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-4330 Z87 Gryphon GTX690 G.Skill RipJawsX 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
WD Blacks Hyper 212 W8.1 ACER 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Ultra X3 1000w Corsair 230T Orange Razer 
  hide details  
Reply
post #58 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Celeras View Post
A single 480 is 66 FPS, a single 5870 is 10 FPS on the 'insane' setting. It would certainly be playable for one of them..

What would get playable? It's not even a game, is it? Doesn't it just test specific instruction sets?
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 2500k Asus P8P67 Galaxy GTX580 8GB G Skill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Intel 80 gb SSD, Raptor 150 Windows 7 Home Premium 24" Samsung LCD Saitek Eclipse 
PowerCaseMouse
PCP&C 750W Antec P180 Logitech MX-510 blue 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 2500k Asus P8P67 Galaxy GTX580 8GB G Skill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Intel 80 gb SSD, Raptor 150 Windows 7 Home Premium 24" Samsung LCD Saitek Eclipse 
PowerCaseMouse
PCP&C 750W Antec P180 Logitech MX-510 blue 
  hide details  
Reply
post #59 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by sccr64472 View Post
What would get playable? It's not even a game, is it? Doesn't it just test specific instruction sets?
Kind of getting sidetracked with grunion ;x Only point that I was trying to make is that these 6000 series are not a radical new architecture, and the previous generation in the 5000 series has but a single tessellation unit. Fermi's by comparison have.. well more, I can't remember exactly how many (8?). They SHOULD be considerably faster at tessellation, as the above benchmark demonstrates.

Why is that relevant here? Well, the leaked benchmarks of the 6870 show a HUGE increase in the Heaven 2.1 score over the 5870, and denotes 'extreme' tessellation. Unless there's some unknown surprise waiting, that single tessellation unit in the architecture is not capable of this kind of increase. Hence why it's a reasonable assumption to think the leaks are fake, and why this article (which is based off the benchmarks) doesn't really hold much water.

S'all I'm sayin~
Edited by Celeras - 8/31/10 at 3:31pm
Ivykepler
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 3570K, 4.6 GHz @ 1.29V Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UD5H eVGA GTX780 ACX SC 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws X DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Crucial M4SSD2 SATA III (128GB) Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Dell 24' 07WFPHC, 1920x1200 + HP W2371d CM Storm Quick Fire Rapid, MX Red 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX850 Coolermaster HAF 932 Logitech G9x 
  hide details  
Reply
Ivykepler
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 3570K, 4.6 GHz @ 1.29V Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UD5H eVGA GTX780 ACX SC 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws X DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Crucial M4SSD2 SATA III (128GB) Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Dell 24' 07WFPHC, 1920x1200 + HP W2371d CM Storm Quick Fire Rapid, MX Red 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX850 Coolermaster HAF 932 Logitech G9x 
  hide details  
Reply
post #60 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kand View Post
Mmm. Meat.

Did you even read he entire article?
My hard drive keeps meating my ethernet port. I should buy pants for them.
Goofy
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD 4850e 2.4Ghz 22 watts 1.1v 1500HT 300FSB Gigabyte GA-M78SM-S2H What I'm Testing 2 2gb Geil PC6400 960MHZ 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Hitachi 160gb SATA-II Pioneer DVR 111D Redhat Core 12 x86_64, Windows XP HANNspree 20" 1600x900 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitec Premium Desktop Mini-Box M3-ATX 120 Watt DC-DC Spire Logitec 
Mouse Pad
Xtrac 
  hide details  
Reply
Goofy
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD 4850e 2.4Ghz 22 watts 1.1v 1500HT 300FSB Gigabyte GA-M78SM-S2H What I'm Testing 2 2gb Geil PC6400 960MHZ 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Hitachi 160gb SATA-II Pioneer DVR 111D Redhat Core 12 x86_64, Windows XP HANNspree 20" 1600x900 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitec Premium Desktop Mini-Box M3-ATX 120 Watt DC-DC Spire Logitec 
Mouse Pad
Xtrac 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [FZ] Radeon HD 6000 is an evolutionary design