backtop


Print 62 comment(s) - last by clovell.. on Oct 25 at 5:35 PM


(Click to enlarge)

(Click to enlarge)

(Click to enlarge)
Focus on smaller size, lower cost

Computer gaming advanced dramatically last year when ATI ushered in the DirectX 11 age with the Radeon HD 5870 graphics card. The introduction of the DisplayPort connector and Eyefinity multi-monitor support meant games could be played with many more pixels, leading to a better visual experience. Windows 7 was just about to launch, and gamers were eager for some major hardware upgrades.

However, production difficulties at TSMC meant that AMD's graphics division only shipped half the GPUs they were hoping to during the busy holiday shopping season. They still managed to sell over two million DX11 chips, but could've sold a lot more.

The original plans for this year's launch were for an entire lineup of 32nm GPUs, but TSMC scrapped their 32nm development in favor of the 28nm process. ATI took their 32nm designs and rejigged it for their third generation of 40nm products, codenamed Northern Islands. The high end consists of Barts, Cayman, and Antilles.

The new Radeon 6800 series uses the new Barts GPU and is comprised of the Radeon HD 6870 (Barts XT) and the Radeon HD 6850 (Barts Pro). The new chip is designed for slightly lower performance at a much lower cost. At 255 mm2, it is 25% smaller than the 334 mm2  Cypress chips it will replace.

A new seventh generation hardware tessellation unit doubles the performance of the Radeon 5000 series through improved thread management and buffering. Anisotropic Filtering has been enhanced by using a refined algorithm that addresses visible discontinuities in very noisy textures. It also allows for smoother transitions between filter levels. The third generation Unified Video Decoder (UVD3) adds hardware MPEG-4 decoding for DivX and xVid, as well as Blu-Ray 3D.

Both cards sport a dual-slot design and provide 2 mini-DisplayPort 1.2 connectors, 1 HDMI 1.4a connector, and 2 DVI ports. This allows the 6800 series to support up to four monitors natively.

Cards using the new chips and 1GB of GDDR5 will cost around $239 and $179 respectively. The pricing and performance is designed to target NVIDIA’s GeForce GTX 460. Barts is 30% smaller than the GF104 chip used in the GTX 460 and consumes less power. That means it has a cost advantage in production, and board partners can chose a quieter and cheaper cooling solution.  Higher performance at a lower price is a strategy that has served AMD well in the CPU market.

AMD thinks supply should be adequate, with "tens of thousands" of GPUs shipped to board partners such as ASUS, Gigabyte, and Sapphire.

Video cards using Barts were originally going to be known as the Radeon HD 6700 series, but AMD has decided to continue on with the Radeon HD 5700 series as it is. Our sources tell us that there will be no rebranding, but that the 5700 series is a top seller and fits in its price category very well. The 5800 series, on the other hand, has been deemed too costly and will be discontinued by the end of the year.

Radeon HD 6970 and 6950 video cards using Cayman GPUs with much higher performance will be introduced next month. That will be followed up by Antilles, which will bring two Cayman GPUs together for the Radeon HD 6990.






 

Radeon HD 6870

Radeon HD 6850

GTX 460  1 GB

GTX 460   768 MB

Radeon HD 5870

Radeon HD 5850

Radeon HD 5770

Radeon HD 5750

Stream Processors

1120

960

336

336

1600

1440

800

720

Texture Units

56

48

56

56

80

72

40

36

ROPs

32

32

32

24

32

32

16

16

Core Clock

900MHz

775MHz

675 MHz

675 MHz

850MHz

725MHz

850MHz

700MHz

Memory Clock

1.05 GHz (4.2GHz data rate) GDDR5

1GHz (4.0GHz data rate) GDDR5

900MHz (3.6GHz data rate) GDDR5

900MHz (3.6GHz data rate) GDDR5

1.2GHz (4.8GHz data rate) GDDR5

1GHz (4.0GHz data rate) GDDR5

1.2GHz (4.8GHz data rate) GDDR5

1.15GHz (4.6GHz data rate) GDDR5

Memory Bus Width

256-bit

256-bit

256-bit

192-bit

256-bit

256-bit

128-bit

128-bit

Frame Buffer

1GB

1GB

1GB

768 MB

1GB

1GB

1GB

1GB

Transistor Count

1.7B

1.7B

1.95B

1.95B

2.15B

2.15B

1.04B

1.04B

TDP

151W

127W

160 W

160 W

188W

151W

108W

86W

Idle

19 W

19 W

30 W

30 W

27 W

27 W

18 W

16 W

Plugs

2x 6-pin

1x 6-pin

2x 6-pin

2x 6-pin

2x 6-pin

2x 6-pin

1x 6-pin

1x 6-pin

Die Size

255mm2

255mm2

368 mm2

368 mm2

334mm2

334mm2

166mm2

166mm2

Price Point

$239

$179

$229

$199

$379

$259

$149

$129  

 

 



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Riduculous branding
By Drag0nFire on 10/21/2010 11:16:44 PM , Rating: -1
This is ridiculous! Based on the stats, the 6850 is much closer to a 5750 than to a 5850. Thus, it should be a 6750.

Unless they pull out some sort of miracle, the 6850 will be slower than the 5850. Does that make any sense to anyone?

Based on convention, 69XX should be a dual GPU card. Having a 69XX with a single GPU is just stupid.

They are clearly paying some marketing people way too much money. I thought they'd finally gotten their act together...

Here's a novel idea. Fire the marketing executives and replace them with engineers.




RE: Riduculous branding
By Jansen (blog) on 10/21/2010 11:25:26 PM , Rating: 5
Just be glad they decided not to rebrand the 5700 as the 6700.

Ultimately model numbers are decided by the manufacturer and can be arbitrarily changed. Like a certain other company did...three times.


RE: Riduculous branding
By Jansen (blog) on 10/21/2010 11:33:41 PM , Rating: 3
This is what I would've done:

6900 - Antilles
6800 - Cayman
6700 - Barts
6600 - Juniper

Unfortunately you would have to rebrand Juniper, but it would have the effect of keeping the product around and a consistent 600 series nomenclature. Plus you wouldn't expect someone to go from a 5700 to a 6600.


RE: Riduculous branding
By kroker on 10/22/2010 4:25:21 AM , Rating: 1
Rebranding Juniper as HD 6600 would have been a lot better than the confusion they've created. Barts should have been called HD 6700, no matter what AMD or anyone else says. And, even worse, they released these cards before releasing Cayman, so people who will be looking for a new card right now will see 6800 as the highest number available and they might think this is the high end.

Worse still, they did this right after ditching the ATI name, which created somewhat of an image void for them with they needed to fill (a brand is valuable, it's an investment, it takes a lot of time and effort to build trust and recognition, and then you throw it away?)

None of these decisions make any sense to me, but hey, AMD knows what it's doing, they're a successful company, it's not like they're loosing money or something...


RE: Riduculous branding
By AstroGuardian on 10/22/2010 9:29:49 AM , Rating: 2
What are you talking about? If they named the 6800 to 6700 than which chip would be the 6800? Is it more logical to skip the 6800 and go towards 6900 with two chips?
The naming makes some logic but not perfect. In time they might introduce 6875 which will be better than 6870 and 5870 and everything will fit in.


RE: Riduculous branding
By insurgent on 10/22/2010 8:41:57 PM , Rating: 2
The naming sucks but at least they're priced right relative to the other cards. Everything stays the same: average joe will base his decision on buffer size or bus width, etc... and enthusiasts, well they always know better.


RE: Riduculous branding
By inighthawki on 10/21/2010 11:42:51 PM , Rating: 3
They decided to change it. The 6800 series is now the mid-range cards and the 6900s will replace the 5800 series. I guess we just have to live with it. I mean, is it really THAT big a deal?


RE: Riduculous branding
By someguy123 on 10/22/2010 1:15:20 AM , Rating: 2
Not really a big deal to people browsing DT, but it'll definitely confuse average consumers into thinking the 68XX is faster than the 58XX so they can push more orders. Probably intentional, but that's marketing for you.


RE: Riduculous branding
By morphologia on 10/22/2010 10:36:36 AM , Rating: 1
Whose fault is it if someone makes a decision based on an arbitrary model number without comparing the facts? Someone who doesn't know a Radeon from a radio shouldn't be spending $200 on a video card upgrade.


RE: Riduculous branding
By eskimospy on 10/22/2010 11:43:22 AM , Rating: 4
Why people continually make excuses for deceptive marketing is beyond me. Of course it's the customer's money in the end, but AMD is deliberately misleading people here and that's wrong.


RE: Riduculous branding
By kroker on 10/22/2010 4:31:56 AM , Rating: 2
Changing the naming scheme is not the only thing they did, they also released them before Cayman, contrary to the tradition of releasing high end cards first instead of mid range, which might also potentially confuse customers.


RE: Riduculous branding
By Belard on 10/22/2010 1:05:16 AM , Rating: 2
Until I saw the chart and how its laid out - the label "6700" wouldn't quite make sense in that the x800 cards are $200+ cards and the x700 are sub $200 cards (in my mind). Having the "6770" at $240 has its own marketing problem.

If I was AMD, I could/would have resolved this by naming the cards:

6850 = $240 (faster than the 5850 - yet costs a bit less)
6830 = $180

Perhaps this time, in 4~6 months the 6850 will hit sub $100 pricing.


RE: Riduculous branding
By inighthawki on 10/22/2010 1:51:43 AM , Rating: 2
That's a decent idea, but a lot of people will associate the xx30 ati cards with low performance, xx50 with midrange, and xx70 with high end of their respective tier, but in fact the 6850 is actually quite a competitor, fairly worthy of the xx50 tag, yet maybe not the 800 tier since it's not a true successor to the previous 800 tier. Not the best marketing for your product to label it as the "low performance" version of the tier.


RE: Riduculous branding
By ninjaquick on 10/22/2010 5:26:40 PM , Rating: 2
We need, then, a number between 7 and 8...

6?50 and 6?70, cuz Xi is awesome


RE: Riduculous branding
By bug77 on 10/22/2010 3:30:42 AM , Rating: 2
Let's put it this way: whoever knew how to shop for a video card will continue to do so; whoever bought based on numbers on the box will continue to do so, too.

It seems AMD hinted they did this in order to make room within their naming schema for some unannounced product. Something to do with Fusion, probably.


RE: Riduculous branding
By gescom on 10/22/2010 9:44:13 AM , Rating: 2
It would be nice if You'd check price/performance instead of given names.


RE: Riduculous branding
By MrBungle123 on 10/22/2010 6:35:07 PM , Rating: 1
I'm just glad the idiots in the marketing departments have run out of numbers... the slow creep up has been happening since the Radeon 8500 (high end in its day) then the 9700 then the x800...

sure 800 series has been been synonamous with the high end but it wasn't too much of a leap to see this day coming eventually.

hopefully no one in AMD's marketing department finds out about hexadecimal numbers or we may see the Radeon HD 7A00 series cards next year.

In the mean time I guess I have to be annoyed by both AMD's lack of consistency and nVidia's meaningless alphabetic prefixes on their model numbers.

CAN SOME COMPANY PICK A NAMING SCHEME AND STICK TO IT FOR F*CK SAKE?!!!!

/end rant


"If you mod me down, I will become more insightful than you can possibly imagine." -- Slashdot














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki