|
AMD is using less silicone is making the barts so there will be no reason for a price drop. they might not phase out the 5850 and 5830 because those are forms of 5870 and 5970 and they wont be giving away even more room for nvidia to have the more powerful gpu.
Actually, AMD has already stopped production on the 58xx line (Cypress). Cayman and Antilles (the 69xx line) are due next month, before Thanksgiving. Those cards will replace the 5870 and 5970.
|
On October 23 2010 07:10 clusen wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2010 06:35 skyR wrote: The 6870 fills a gap in AMD's lineup or technically replaces the flopped 5830. It does not replace the 5770. How can it replace the 5770 when its $240 and a 5770 is $140? When the lineup is fully released the 6870 will take the place of the 5770. Technically it can not replace the 5830, because that was based on Cypress, while the 5770 was Juniper. When a crappy dumbed down Cayman comes it might replace the 5830, but there are only 3 cards on the radar right now: 6950, 6970, 6990.
Again, you can not replace a $140 card with a $240 card. The 6800 series is there to replace the 5830 or in other words, the $200 segment where the GTX 460 has dominated for the last 6 months.
Barts is derived from Cypress. Not Juniper.
The 5770 carries onto 2011 with the 6800 and 6900 line up.
|
On October 23 2010 07:10 NicolBolas wrote:Show nested quote +AMD is using less silicone is making the barts so there will be no reason for a price drop. they might not phase out the 5850 and 5830 because those are forms of 5870 and 5970 and they wont be giving away even more room for nvidia to have the more powerful gpu. Actually, AMD has already stopped production on the 58xx line (Cypress). Cayman and Antilles (the 69xx line) are due next month, before Thanksgiving. Those cards will replace the 5870 and 5970. opps yes you're right lol i got my time lines messed up. I blame allt he companies revealing their produce timelines but not any product details, leads to a bunch of rumor threads which i try no to pay attention to.
On October 23 2010 07:30 skyR wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2010 07:10 clusen wrote:On October 23 2010 06:35 skyR wrote: The 6870 fills a gap in AMD's lineup or technically replaces the flopped 5830. It does not replace the 5770. How can it replace the 5770 when its $240 and a 5770 is $140? When the lineup is fully released the 6870 will take the place of the 5770. Technically it can not replace the 5830, because that was based on Cypress, while the 5770 was Juniper. When a crappy dumbed down Cayman comes it might replace the 5830, but there are only 3 cards on the radar right now: 6950, 6970, 6990. Again, you can not replace a $140 card with a $240 card. The 6800 series is there to replace the 5830 or in other words, the $200 segment where the GTX 460 has dominated for the last 6 months. Barts is derived from Cypress. Not Juniper. The 5770 carries onto 2011 with the 6800 and 6900 line up. technically they are all derived from R6xx ATI wasn't big on making new arch designed just continuously tweaking the same design.
|
Same procedure as every year... ATI is a tiny bit cheaper than Nvidia in the bang for buck ratio.
For Starcraft II it doesn't really matter much anyways because CPU is the limiting factor and anything in the range of a 5770 will be fine.
For SC2 I'd say get the GTX460 because the alt-tabbing issue with ATI cards still hasn't been fixed afaik (20 seconds to tab in anyone? and no, fullscreen windowed is not a solution, it's only a workaround).
Oh and for everything else, also get a Nvidia.
|
6850 is the new sweet spot imo. Faster than the GTX 460 1GB, cheaper, and consumes less power.
|
On October 23 2010 05:43 mahnini wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2010 01:17 Boblion wrote: The 5850 and 5870 prices will drop quickly. that makes no sense there's no reason to drop the price on the 5800 series as the manufacturing process for the 6800 is far more efficient allowing AMD to price them so low. are they actually introducing a 6900 series? i thought the X9XX was reserved for dual gpu cards now? If they want to sell their 5850 they will have to drop the prices ( at least at retail )
the 6870 is better and cheaper. Who will buy the 5850 ? They need to get rid of old stocks. That will be like the 4850/4870 vs the 5770 all over again... you know when the 4870 was a better deal :p
On October 23 2010 04:21 a176 wrote: You probably wont be seeing 58xx series price drops anytime soon, unless AMD offers retailers the rebates themselves. You have to remember the retailers buy them for just a bit less than they're selling them for. To sell a $350 video card $100 cheaper than you bought it for ... not very good business sense. You think they will get more value for those cards in 6 months ?
|
On October 23 2010 08:43 writer22816 wrote: 6850 is the new sweet spot imo. Faster than the GTX 460 1GB, cheaper, and consumes less power. I've never followed the less power crap, those are under furmark, benches under normal game play are quite lower for both cards. And what a few hours a day of load maybe only adds up to like 20-50 more bucks a year in electric bills. Unless you volt mod Tri sli OC to the max at which point why do you even care about electricity you just spent like 2-4 k on a computer, unless you happen to fold 24/7 with the computer.
|
On October 23 2010 07:30 skyR wrote: Again, you can not replace a $140 card with a $240 card. The 6800 series is there to replace the 5830 or in other words, the $200 segment where the GTX 460 has dominated for the last 6 months.
Barts is derived from Cypress. Not Juniper.
The 5770 carries onto 2011 with the 6800 and 6900 line up. Prices and how you launch your lineup depend on your competition(or the lack of, which is the case now in some segments), that's why AMD focussed on bringing out Barts first(as you said, there is/was a hole. When they launched Cypress they had a hole in the high-end, so they released Cypress first) , but it doesn't change the fact that Barts is the successor to Juniper and will take the same role in the 6xx0-generation.
Juniper is just a smaller version of Cypress so they don't have to lasercut such a big part off of the chip, get higher yields and therefore save money. The architecture is the same, except for minor tweaks, hence the delay in launch time. Guess what Barts is compared to Cayman? Hemlock will become Antilles(X2-card), Cypress will become Cayman(high-end single gpu), Juniper will become Barts(midrange single gpu) and so on. I already told you: you have to differ between "right now" and "once the whole lineup is launched".
Barts won't cost 240$ forever. They only do now because AMD is leading in most segments and can dictate the prices in them.
AMD is in desperate need of money, they do not release a successor at the exact same pricepoint, when they do not have to. Besides it would not make sense, that's why the 5770 will still continue.
|
The 6850 and 6870 outperform the 5830 and 5850 respectively.
The naming convention is out of whack but, eh.....
Also, at it's current price, the 6850 outperforms the GTX 460 1GB, even after the 1GB version's price cut. Which kinda makes me RAGE, argghhhhh!!!!!
But just for SC2, all these cards are CPU limited, check out the link to tom's hardware on page 1.
|
I can't believe just how different the frames per second are on each review site, its all over the place.
You basically can't trust any website, I'd expect some small differences, maybe even 10-15 frames, but it can go as far as 30 frames per second difference.
|
On October 23 2010 21:57 thehitman wrote: I can't believe just how different the frames per second are on each review site, its all over the place.
You basically can't trust any website, I'd expect some small differences, maybe even 10-15 frames, but it can go as far as 30 frames per second difference.
Yeah something is a bit off about the Anandtech results in particular, and with the exclusion of the OCed 460 1GB, it just felt super rushed. Both AT and HWCanucks used the same drivers (260.89, 10.10), but HWCanucks test bench uses an i7 @ 4Ghz (vs. AT's 3.33Ghz).
Now this is what confuses me. HWCanuck's 4Ghz i7 should result in MUCH higher numbers for the lower resolution, 1680x1050. But when you look at the results:
Anandtech: 5870 - 88.5 6870 - 75.6 460 1GB - 62.9
vs. HWCanucks: 460 1GB - 44.9 5870 - 42.8 6870 - 42.6
It is obvious that HWCanuck benches are showing a clearly CPU-limited scenario, while Anandtech's oddly are not reflecting that, and at a much lower clock rate no less. I would be really suspicious of Anandtech's results tbh. Hopefully they revisit the benchmark, and consider showing minimum FPS numbers in the future.
Here is how Anandtech describes their benchmark:
The third game on our list is one of the games new to our benchmark suite: Starcraft II. Under normal circumstances Starcraft II isn’t particularly GPU limited – it spends much of its time CPU limited – but in 2-player battles in particular we find that it responds more to GPU performance than it does CPU performance. As icing on the cake we have 4x AA enabled, which thanks to the deferred rendering workarounds used by AMD and NVIDIA, crushes the performance of all the cards involved.
Here is HWCanuck's description:
In order to test StarCraft II performance we recorded a typical multiplayer battle on the Agria Valley map and used it as a replay in order to ensure every run was identical to one another. We used the last 3 minutes of the replay which includes the final assault on the enemy base. MSAA was applied in the NVIDIA and ATI control panels for certain tests.
|
On October 23 2010 21:57 thehitman wrote: I can't believe just how different the frames per second are on each review site, its all over the place.
You basically can't trust any website, I'd expect some small differences, maybe even 10-15 frames, but it can go as far as 30 frames per second difference.
1120-Core "Fixed" Radeon HD 6850 Video Card Review Samples Shipped to Media http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=12388&Itemid=47
Could explain something :p
|
Dropping a link to show the difference between the review samples and the retail cards, http://www.kitguru.net/components/graphic-cards/zardon/the-amd-hd6850-1120960-shader-debate-comparisons/
Overall ... not much of a difference. Though when comparing it against the 460, consider how close the performance is already, the 6850 doesn't look like too much of a winner now.
Considering you can get OC'd versions of the 460 for the price of a 6850, the 460 might be the better buy.
Even the EVGA FTW edition, running at 850mhz, retails for only $230 and handily outperforms the 6870.
The choice is yours
|
You can overclock the 6850/70 aswell, and there will be overclocked versions coming out.
Has any side tested the hotfix for 10.10 yet? According to the releasenotes it offers better performance in SC2.
|
The 6850 and 6870 run hot overclocked though
|
TR finally releases their numbers: http://techreport.com/articles.x/19844/10
A couple notes: 1) They are using 10.9a 2) Driver-level forced 4x AA 3) 2560x1600 resolution - not the most common resolution... Their time demo is a 10min 1v1...which isn't the most demanding scenario sigh.
|
To be honest, this launch is quite disappointing. They don't really offer the performance which AMD stated that they would. The 6850 would be great... if the GTX 460 was not extremely overclock friendly. Overclocking a 6xxx GPU just does not reap the same benefits as overclocking a GTX 460 GPU according to these benchmarks.
I see no real reason to run with the HD 6850 when the GTX 460 1GB has dropped to $200, and I see very little reason to get the 6870 when the GTX 470 has already dropped down to $250. If you end up getting an HD 6xxx card, I would suggest it to be the 6870 over the GTX 470 (which is the only real 6xxx card here that has a case).
|
lol I'd still go with a MSI Cyclone GTX 460 for less than $200. I think overall AMD failed to try and impress us with their current batch of "new budget GPUs".
|
On October 25 2010 18:00 Silentness wrote: lol I'd still go with a MSI Cyclone GTX 460 for less than $200. I think overall AMD failed to try and impress us with their current batch of "new budget GPUs". Well at least Nvidia had to cut prices... so even if you think that the 460 is still the better deal you should be thankful to AMD
|
|
|
|