Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › AMD/ATI › [Official] AMD Radeon HD 6850/6870 Owners Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Official] AMD Radeon HD 6850/6870 Owners Thread - Page 80

post #791 of 6939
Quote:
Originally Posted by sendblink23 View Post
Did you try to *Restore to factory defaults inside the CCC > Options > Preferences

?
that worked thanks hombre. I did try restore defaults just not in the options > preferences drop-pane.
The mothership
(23 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Phenom X6 1090T Crosshair V Gigabyte GV-N670OC-2GD Gigabyte GV-N670OC-2GD 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
8gb of some junk  KINGSTON SH103S3120G KINGSTON SH103S3120G ST3000DM 
Optical DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
MATSHITA BD UJ240AS H100 2x GT-AP15 2x Corsair SP140 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
2x Fractal Design R2 Silent Series Win7 Asus VG278HE Logitech G710+ 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Fatal1ty 1000w Fractal Design R4 Logitech G500 Steelseries 
AudioAudioOther
Logitech Z-5500 w/ bookshelfs Mackie Studio USB Cables 
  hide details  
Reply
The mothership
(23 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Phenom X6 1090T Crosshair V Gigabyte GV-N670OC-2GD Gigabyte GV-N670OC-2GD 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
8gb of some junk  KINGSTON SH103S3120G KINGSTON SH103S3120G ST3000DM 
Optical DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
MATSHITA BD UJ240AS H100 2x GT-AP15 2x Corsair SP140 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
2x Fractal Design R2 Silent Series Win7 Asus VG278HE Logitech G710+ 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Fatal1ty 1000w Fractal Design R4 Logitech G500 Steelseries 
AudioAudioOther
Logitech Z-5500 w/ bookshelfs Mackie Studio USB Cables 
  hide details  
Reply
post #792 of 6939
I just ran several benchmarks of Unigine Heaven 2.1 at my monitor's max 1680x1050 with Extreme Tessellation on and no crashes whatsoever. I think this rules out a PSU fault.

Here are the results:

FPS:19.9
Scores:502
Min FPS:8.3
Max FPS:60.5


Settings

Render:direct3d11
Mode:1680x1050 fullscreen
Shaders:high
Textures:high
Filter:trilinear
Anisotropy:4x
Occlusion:enabled
Refraction:enabled
Volumetric:enabled
Replication:disabled
Tessellation:extreme
 
Metro 2033 review
Metro 2033
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-3820 Asus Sabertooth X79 MSI GTX 1060 6 GB Gaming X 16 GB Corsair DDR3 1866 Mhz Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD 830 128GB + WD Caviar Black 1TB Sony Optiarc DVD-RW Corsair A70 + Noiseblocker M12-P Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ RL2455HM Cooler Master Octane Corsair AX750 Professional Modular 80 Plus Gold Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus 
Mouse
Cooler Master Octane 
  hide details  
Reply
 
Metro 2033 review
Metro 2033
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-3820 Asus Sabertooth X79 MSI GTX 1060 6 GB Gaming X 16 GB Corsair DDR3 1866 Mhz Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD 830 128GB + WD Caviar Black 1TB Sony Optiarc DVD-RW Corsair A70 + Noiseblocker M12-P Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ RL2455HM Cooler Master Octane Corsair AX750 Professional Modular 80 Plus Gold Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus 
Mouse
Cooler Master Octane 
  hide details  
Reply
post #793 of 6939
hello

add me


post #794 of 6939
Well, I've been going crazy trying to find news on the 6970 and how it might stack up and couldn't find anything....so........I decided to do some calculations on my own.

The 6870 has 1120 shaders. So far the 6970 is rumored to have 1536 shaders. Feel free to check me if I'm wrong but I figured it would go like this:

1120 = 100% = 11.2% per core

11.2 * 1536 = ~172% or a 72% increase in performance (if core speeds and everything else is the same)

Looking at the Guru3D Review I extrapolated these numbers:

A 6870 scores 46fps in BC2 all maxed out a 1920x1200
That means a 6970 should score about (46*1.72) = ~79.1fps

A 6870 scores 28fps in Crysis:WH (enthusiast) at 1920x1200
That means a 6970 should score about (28*1.72) = ~48.2fps

And so on and so fourth. The math adds up when you look at 6850 performance.

6850 has 960 = ~ 85% performance of a 6870
46fps * .85 = ~ 39fps. The 6850 scored 38fps in the review. (BC2 maxed out at 1920x1200)

So if my math holds up, a 6970 should be about 72% faster than a 6870. That puts it right up there with a 5970 give or take a few frames per second. If priced right this will DEFINITELY be my next upgrade!

Let me know what you guys think.
post #795 of 6939
Thread Starter 
Nice effort +1.
But the clocks are said to be 860MHz on the core, vs 900 of the 6870, but we don't know how fast the memory runs at.. it could be 1200MHz like the 5870, or faster.. i doubt they will make it any slower since apparently the memory still gains more performance for the 68xx cards than the core. But i reckon it should be about the performance of a 5970 / GTX 580.. but pricing and power consumption/heat (to some) will be a deciding factor.. mostly price.. unless you're a fanboy . I may actully get a 6970 depending on what that's like.. if it's priced lower than the GTX 580 and about the price of a 480 (doubt it though).
Edited by Razi3l - 11/10/10 at 1:42am
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500k @ 4300Mhz Biostar TP67XE Waiting to buy a new one 8GB 1600Mhz 7-8-7-21 1T 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 840 SSD [250GB] Antec H20 620 Windows 7 x64 Acer S242HL 
PowerCase
Thermaltake 775W NZXT Phantom [White] 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500k @ 4300Mhz Biostar TP67XE Waiting to buy a new one 8GB 1600Mhz 7-8-7-21 1T 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 840 SSD [250GB] Antec H20 620 Windows 7 x64 Acer S242HL 
PowerCase
Thermaltake 775W NZXT Phantom [White] 
  hide details  
Reply
post #796 of 6939
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAHOP240 View Post
So if my math holds up, a 6970 should be about 72% faster than a 6870. That puts it right up there with a 5970 give or take a few frames per second. If priced right this will DEFINITELY be my next upgrade!

Let me know what you guys think.
The 5970 is only 37% faster than a 6870.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i3 530 H55M-S2 Sapphire 6870 4GB XMS3 1600Mhz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
--- --- W7 Pro 21.5'' LG 1080p 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Wave (Belgian edition ftw) --- Silverstone SG02 Logitech G9 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i3 530 H55M-S2 Sapphire 6870 4GB XMS3 1600Mhz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
--- --- W7 Pro 21.5'' LG 1080p 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Wave (Belgian edition ftw) --- Silverstone SG02 Logitech G9 
  hide details  
Reply
post #797 of 6939
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAHOP240 View Post
Well, I've been going crazy trying to find news on the 6970 and how it might stack up and couldn't find anything....so........I decided to do some calculations on my own.

The 6870 has 1120 shaders. So far the 6970 is rumored to have 1536 shaders. Feel free to check me if I'm wrong but I figured it would go like this:

1120 = 100% = 11.2% per core

11.2 * 1536 = ~172% or a 72% increase in performance (if core speeds and everything else is the same)

Looking at the Guru3D Review I extrapolated these numbers:

A 6870 scores 46fps in BC2 all maxed out a 1920x1200
That means a 6970 should score about (46*1.72) = ~79.1fps

A 6870 scores 28fps in Crysis:WH (enthusiast) at 1920x1200
That means a 6970 should score about (28*1.72) = ~48.2fps

And so on and so fourth. The math adds up when you look at 6850 performance.

6850 has 960 = ~ 85% performance of a 6870
46fps * .85 = ~ 39fps. The 6850 scored 38fps in the review. (BC2 maxed out at 1920x1200)

So if my math holds up, a 6970 should be about 72% faster than a 6870. That puts it right up there with a 5970 give or take a few frames per second. If priced right this will DEFINITELY be my next upgrade!

Let me know what you guys think.

Hehehe good one! I also did a little speculative math a few days ago on Tom's Hardware in the article about the possible delay of the 6970, and I took the time to rewrite parts of it now that we have the GTX 580.

It goes like this:

1. If the 1536 core number is correct, there is no plausible explanation for a manufacturing problem, given that the 5870 has 1600 cores and probably a bigger die size. If AMD (unlike Nvidia) got it right the first time, why would they screw up on this one ?


Now, if we take into account the optimizations that Barts brought, where a 960 core GPU is equivalent to something like a 1340 core Cypress (a little slower than the 1440 Core HD 5850), and a 1120 core GPU is equivalent to a 1500 Cypress (slighly slower than the 1600 core HD 5870), then I could say that, on average, AMD has "gained" around 380 cores with their optimizations.


In that case, a 1536 core Cayman GPU will have more or less the performance equivalence of a hypothetical last generation 1980 core Cypress. And this makes sense, since this number, give or take, was circling around the web for a while. They just didn't take into account the performance optimizations where AMD has managed more for less.

Taking this into account, let's make a small (yet again speculative) comparison:

The 5850 has a 160 core difference to the 5870 (1440 -> 1600)

The GTX 470 has a 32 core difference to the GTX 480 (448 -> 480) and again another 32 core difference to the full 512 core GTX 580.

Now, the GTX 480 is faster than the 5870, and the GTX 470 is faster than the 5850, but slower than the 5870.

So, and given the differences in cores of these parts, and taking into account that each GPU maker makes the necessary adjustments to GPU and RAM clockspeed to give each core increase a worthwhile difference in performance, one could say that:

- 448 Nvidia cores is faster than 1440 AMD cores. But an increase in 160 cores makes the HD 5870 faster (with corresponding faster GPU and RAM clocks, as I said above, of course).

If you were to give the 5870 another 160 cores, you would probably get GTX 480 performance or slightly better.

So, say 1600+160= 1760 cores.

But now that Nvidia released a GTX 580 with the full 512 cores, then the distance would remain the same. Now, if you add another 160 cores to the AMD part: 1600+160+160 = 1920, which would put them both competing on the same level.

But 160+160 = 320. Given that AMD has gained around 380 cores in optimization, it's possibly slightly better than Nvidia.

Now if you factor in the fact that Nvidia made a few improvements to their own architecture, the math becomes more complicated.

In my opinion, it might all be down to effective GPU and RAM clockspeed.

This is why AMD was probably trying to figure out how Nvidia was going to market the GTX 580, and why very little information is known about the specs of these chips.

In fact, it's of no wonder, both companies had plans for 32nm and they had to rewrite them and adapt to another generation in the same node. And the improvments that can be made are not limitless. Now that AMD knows what the Nvidia card can do, they can finalize the BIOS, GPU and RAM clockspeed and make some last minute driver optimizations.

I think this will be closer than we might think.
Edited by tpi2007 - 11/10/10 at 9:45am
 
Metro 2033 review
Metro 2033
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-3820 Asus Sabertooth X79 MSI GTX 1060 6 GB Gaming X 16 GB Corsair DDR3 1866 Mhz Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD 830 128GB + WD Caviar Black 1TB Sony Optiarc DVD-RW Corsair A70 + Noiseblocker M12-P Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ RL2455HM Cooler Master Octane Corsair AX750 Professional Modular 80 Plus Gold Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus 
Mouse
Cooler Master Octane 
  hide details  
Reply
 
Metro 2033 review
Metro 2033
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-3820 Asus Sabertooth X79 MSI GTX 1060 6 GB Gaming X 16 GB Corsair DDR3 1866 Mhz Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD 830 128GB + WD Caviar Black 1TB Sony Optiarc DVD-RW Corsair A70 + Noiseblocker M12-P Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ RL2455HM Cooler Master Octane Corsair AX750 Professional Modular 80 Plus Gold Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus 
Mouse
Cooler Master Octane 
  hide details  
Reply
post #798 of 6939
nvm
Edited by CAHOP240 - 11/10/10 at 12:19pm
post #799 of 6939
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAHOP240 View Post
Well, I've been going crazy trying to find news on the 6970 and how it might stack up and couldn't find anything....so........I decided to do some calculations on my own.

The 6870 has 1120 shaders. So far the 6970 is rumored to have 1536 shaders. Feel free to check me if I'm wrong but I figured it would go like this:

1120 = 100% = 11.2% per core

11.2 * 1536 = ~172% or a 72% increase in performance (if core speeds and everything else is the same)

Looking at the Guru3D Review I extrapolated these numbers:

A 6870 scores 46fps in BC2 all maxed out a 1920x1200
That means a 6970 should score about (46*1.72) = ~79.1fps

A 6870 scores 28fps in Crysis:WH (enthusiast) at 1920x1200
That means a 6970 should score about (28*1.72) = ~48.2fps

And so on and so fourth. The math adds up when you look at 6850 performance.

6850 has 960 = ~ 85% performance of a 6870
46fps * .85 = ~ 39fps. The 6850 scored 38fps in the review. (BC2 maxed out at 1920x1200)

So if my math holds up, a 6970 should be about 72% faster than a 6870. That puts it right up there with a 5970 give or take a few frames per second. If priced right this will DEFINITELY be my next upgrade!

Let me know what you guys think.
1- From were did you get 72% ? All what you have to do is to divide 1536 by 1120

1536/1120 = 1.37, this mean 37% increase in shader power (assuming that both operate at the same clock speed)

2- 37% increase in shader power doesn't mean 37% increase in gaming performance, because shader power in not only thing that has an impact on performance. There is something called TMU, ROPs and bus width. From what I heard HD6970 has only 32 ROPs and 256-bit bus (just like HD6800). Though it is going to have 96 TMU (compared to 56 TMU for HD6870).


3- When you said that HD6850 is ~ 85% HD6870 did you take into account that HD6870 has 16% higher clock ? If not, then HD6850 should more than 85% of HD6870 when both operate at same clock speed.
Edited by ThePath - 11/10/10 at 3:59pm
post #800 of 6939
6970 has 37% more shaders than the 6870.

I suspect the 6970 will be around 25% faster than Cypress overall.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X6 1090T BE @ 4 GHz Asus Crosshair Formula IV 2 x Asus Radeon HD EAH 6970 Mushkin 4 x 2GB PC3 10666 7-7-7-20 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Samsung SpinPoint F3 1TB Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Edition Asus VW246H Basic Logitech USB KB 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair TX 850 Watt Corsair Obsidian 800D Logitech G5 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X6 1090T BE @ 4 GHz Asus Crosshair Formula IV 2 x Asus Radeon HD EAH 6970 Mushkin 4 x 2GB PC3 10666 7-7-7-20 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Samsung SpinPoint F3 1TB Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Edition Asus VW246H Basic Logitech USB KB 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair TX 850 Watt Corsair Obsidian 800D Logitech G5 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AMD/ATI
Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › AMD/ATI › [Official] AMD Radeon HD 6850/6870 Owners Thread