Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Radeon HD 6000 Detailed Specs

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DarkFoss
    replied
    That is because for the 1st release AMD is not yet allowing custom models of this unit.
    Passively cooled models will not be available until AMD allows for customizations.

    Leave a comment:


  • DarkFoss
    replied
    You do know that the 6750 and 6770 are upgrades for the 5750 and 5770 and lower cards not the 5800 series ? The big difference is that the 6800 cards are not gimped by the 128 bit memory bus.

    The 5800 series upgrades will be out in a few weeks possibly.

    Leave a comment:


  • klikklak
    replied
    So any chance for HD3D support? I've got a viewsonic fuhzion screen, which supported according to the press release. This combined with eyefinity makes me want to upgrade to an 6850 or so. I'd however rather skip buying windows just to play games.

    Leave a comment:


  • d2kx
    replied
    Originally posted by Qaridarium
    german heise : "Im Unigine-Benchmark wiederum ist eine GeForce GTX 470 (30,6 fps) jedoch weiterhin schneller als die Radeon HD 6870 (27,7 fps) im DirectX-11-Modus. Die Performance im OpenGL-4-Modus ist mit dem uns vorliegenden Treiber bei gleichen Einstellungen im Vergleich zur Vorg?ngergeneration jedoch katastrophal, hier erreichte die HD 6870 nur 10,3 fps."

    http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldu...n-1123042.html

    quick translate into english :"in the unigine benchmark the 470 is faster than the 6870 30,6 to 27,7 if the dx11 mode is used but if someone try out the OGL4 mode the hd6870 is worst with only 10,3 fps "

    means if someone use this card on linux with OGL4 the card do have an worst tesselation performance at start...

    what da fuck is going on with the OGL driver team ?????
    The Linux driver does not suffer from the performance issues. If you're using Windows, go ahead and retest using the Catalyst 10.10a hotfix driver ( http://support.amd.com/us/kbarticles...10aHotfix.aspx ) for drastically improved OpenGL performance.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jimbo
    replied
    no,no you didn't get my point at all, I am impressed guessing that AMD is making a lot of money, I am not really impressed if current 6850, 6870 performs much better or is more cheap to the final user.

    I am guessing that developing costs are very low due to the fact that HD6000 chip is nearly an evergreen chip. Plus the die size is smaller, this implies that productions cost is reduced.

    HD6870 has 255mm2 die size and AMD are selling at the same price of an GTX 470 which has a die size of 529mm2.

    AMD is winning in production costs, so they can reduce prices if nvidia tries to sell cheap fermis. AMD is winning on performance too, the chip is more efficient so has room to use more watts, AMD HD6000 top class cards will outperform fermis top class cards.

    AMD is playing with nvidia, setting their cards to be only a little more performance / $ vs nvidia cards (they clearly seem to have room for more), and nvidia cannot play, it is owned, their die size and power consuption is at max.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jimbo
    replied
    And the chip is mainly the same. They are exploding a good product , something equivalent to what blizzard is doing with WOW, or nvidia have done with their previous G92 chips.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jimbo
    replied
    Originally posted by Kano View Post
    That review does not really look impressive, i would say the numbering is wrong, maybe 6770 instead of 6870 would be better...
    To me, it begins to look impressive if you look at transistor counts - die size - power consuption - final price. http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=27053&page=4 , it seems that AMD is making big money!! with less production costs ATI 6850 is achieving a little more performance than an nvidia 460.

    Leave a comment:


  • bridgman
    replied
    I guess it depends on what the numbers are supposed to mean. Some people think *8** means "our fastest single chip board" in which case I agree *7** could have been more appropriate. Other people think *8** implies a certain market segment or performance level, in which case the numbering is correct but we are now providing a significantly lower price point than before.

    What the heck, it gives people something to argue about

    Leave a comment:


  • Kano
    replied
    That review does not really look impressive, i would say the numbering is wrong, maybe 6770 instead of 6870 would be better...

    Leave a comment:


  • bridgman
    replied
    OK, I saw the press release go out so I *guess* we've officially launched...

    The 6850/6870 *are* 5-wide VLIW just like the previous generations. Not a fake AFAIK.

    Oh good, the first review is up : http://www.hexus.net/content/item.ph...=27053&page=18

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X