|
bulanula
|
 |
June 08, 2012, 09:58:54 PM |
|
Anyway, back on topic.
Do you think we could see a reference 7990 ?
ATM I think AMD kicked the bucket and resigned against GTX 690 ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"In a nutshell, the network works like a distributed
timestamp server, stamping the first transaction to spend a coin. It
takes advantage of the nature of information being easy to spread but
hard to stifle." -- Satoshi
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coinoisseur
|
|
June 08, 2012, 10:05:23 PM |
|
My impression is that AMD has left it to individual brands to decide whether to offer a 7970x2. Instead, AMD is making official GHz editions of the 7970 with tighter ASIC binning so that it draws the same power but is clocked at ~1075MHz.
Crossing my fingers that the 8000 series will launch before next year. A tweaked GCN should be quite nice.
|
|
|
|
|
||bit
|
|
June 13, 2012, 01:27:51 AM |
|
What do you guys think would be the hash speed of a 7990, if it came out anyway?
My guess is double the 7970 - seems logical - or about 1.4GHash/s. Seems pretty beefy, for now.
|
|
|
|
|
crazyates
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 952
Merit: 1000
|
|
June 13, 2012, 02:45:03 AM |
|
What do you guys think would be the hash speed of a 7990, if it came out anyway?
My guess is double the 7970 - seems logical - or about 1.4GHash/s. Seems pretty beefy, for now.
700MH/s per core (at least on a 7970) is with a pretty hefty overclock. I'd say a 7990 couldn't handle the power of 2 cores OC'd that much, not to mention that heat! I'd say prolly closer in the 1000-1200MH/s range, at decent thermal levels. |
|
|
|
|
Mousepotato
|
|
June 13, 2012, 05:09:53 AM |
|
What do you guys think would be the hash speed of a 7990, if it came out anyway?
My guess is double the 7970 - seems logical - or about 1.4GHash/s. Seems pretty beefy, for now.
700MH/s per core (at least on a 7970) is with a pretty hefty overclock. I'd say a 7990 couldn't handle the power of 2 cores OC'd that much, not to mention that heat! I'd say prolly closer in the 1000-1200MH/s range, at decent thermal levels. Gotta also remember that AMD is gunning for the GTX690, so heat be damned. They'll find a way to be competitive with nVidia. If that means beefier components, then so much the better for miners. |
Mousepotato
|
|
|
rjk
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
1ngldh
|
|
June 13, 2012, 01:27:34 PM |
|
Gotta also remember that AMD is gunning for the GTX690, so heat be damned. They'll find a way to be competitive with nVidia. If that means beefier components, then so much the better for miners.
Well sometimes I wonder - Since ATI was bought by AMD I wonder if they are getting a bit more conservative. When's the last time anyone put an AMD processor in a no-compromises performance build? |
|
|
|
crazyates
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 952
Merit: 1000
|
|
June 13, 2012, 02:53:39 PM |
|
Gotta also remember that AMD is gunning for the GTX690, so heat be damned. They'll find a way to be competitive with nVidia. If that means beefier components, then so much the better for miners.
Well sometimes I wonder - Since ATI was bought by AMD I wonder if they are getting a bit more conservative. When's the last time anyone put an AMD processor in a no-compromises performance build? AMD has conceded the no-bars-hold performance to Intel. However, I do consider their purchase of ATI to be one of the smartest things they've done. GPUs are going to be more and more important as time goes on. Better graphics + OpenCL are going to be more important that anything else. Just look at the success of their APU series. So what if the CPU part is 10% behind Intel - the GPU portion is 150% better, and at decent power consumption. And with AMD's push for more and more software to leverage OpenCL, it's all working in their favor. So the future is to leverage GPU power for better performance. Intel can't do that because their GPUs suck balls, and arn't really getting better. Nvidia can't do that, because They only make GPUs. They might have the best drivers, but do they even make any chipsets anymore? They're only dealing with one part of the equation. This, in my mind, puts AMD and their APU development as the best candidate for future innovation.  Hokay. Sorry - Just something I was thinking about the other day.  /rant |
|
|
|
|
Aseras
|
|
June 13, 2012, 03:47:11 PM |
|
Keep in mind the gtx680/690 was not the fully fledged kepler chip either. It was going going to be the midgrade chip. nvidia is holding out with higher grade faster parts because the 7970 wasn't the beast they thought it was going to be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
cmg5461
|
|
June 13, 2012, 03:55:00 PM |
|
Keep in mind the gtx680/690 was not the fully fledged kepler chip either. It was going going to be the midgrade chip. nvidia is holding out with higher grade faster parts because the 7970 wasn't the beast they thought it was going to be.
GK104 lucked out. They underestimated it. GK100 failed. That was supposed to be their high end chip. GK110 is likely what we shall see in the new tesla's. Most likely won't be a gaming chip. Unless they use the shitty chips that aren't picked for their workstation cards. Still under development though. GK104 is just overclocked balls to the wall for nvidia. They REALLY lucked out. |
If I've helped: 1CmguJhwW4sbtSMFsyaafikJ8jhYS61quz
Sold: 5850 to lepenguin. Quick, easy and trustworthy.
|
|
|
|
Aseras
|
|
June 13, 2012, 08:39:42 PM |
|
Gotta also remember that AMD is gunning for the GTX690, so heat be damned. They'll find a way to be competitive with nVidia. If that means beefier components, then so much the better for miners.
Well sometimes I wonder - Since ATI was bought by AMD I wonder if they are getting a bit more conservative. When's the last time anyone put an AMD processor in a no-compromises performance build? AMD has conceded the no-bars-hold performance to Intel. However, I do consider their purchase of ATI to be one of the smartest things they've done. GPUs are going to be more and more important as time goes on. Better graphics + OpenCL are going to be more important that anything else. Just look at the success of their APU series. So what if the CPU part is 10% behind Intel - the GPU portion is 150% better, and at decent power consumption. And with AMD's push for more and more software to leverage OpenCL, it's all working in their favor. So the future is to leverage GPU power for better performance. Intel can't do that because their GPUs suck balls, and arn't really getting better. Nvidia can't do that, because They only make GPUs. They might have the best drivers, but do they even make any chipsets anymore? They're only dealing with one part of the equation. This, in my mind, puts AMD and their APU development as the best candidate for future innovation. http://media.forumpcs.com.br/wp-content/blogs.dir/34/files/llano_a8-3850-3066433/llano1.jpg/1200_0,0,0,0/llano1.jpg/llano1.jpgHokay. Sorry - Just something I was thinking about the other day. /rant AMD has blown a superior hardware lead befire. Look at the Alpha acqusition and the development of the Athlon and Opteron and first to x64. They kicked the shiat out of Intel performance wise for a while. Intel went back to the book and redid the whole design process and came back swinging, both with excellent new hardware and software optimizations. I expect AMD to do the same here. They have an excellent hardware team that is hampered by poor software and driver development and poor general leadership. |
|
|
|
|
crazyates
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 952
Merit: 1000
|
|
June 13, 2012, 08:49:28 PM |
|
Gotta also remember that AMD is gunning for the GTX690, so heat be damned. They'll find a way to be competitive with nVidia. If that means beefier components, then so much the better for miners.
Well sometimes I wonder - Since ATI was bought by AMD I wonder if they are getting a bit more conservative. When's the last time anyone put an AMD processor in a no-compromises performance build? AMD has conceded the no-bars-hold performance to Intel. However, I do consider their purchase of ATI to be one of the smartest things they've done. GPUs are going to be more and more important as time goes on. Better graphics + OpenCL are going to be more important that anything else. Just look at the success of their APU series. So what if the CPU part is 10% behind Intel - the GPU portion is 150% better, and at decent power consumption. And with AMD's push for more and more software to leverage OpenCL, it's all working in their favor. So the future is to leverage GPU power for better performance. Intel can't do that because their GPUs suck balls, and arn't really getting better. Nvidia can't do that, because They only make GPUs. They might have the best drivers, but do they even make any chipsets anymore? They're only dealing with one part of the equation. This, in my mind, puts AMD and their APU development as the best candidate for future innovation. http://media.forumpcs.com.br/wp-content/blogs.dir/34/files/llano_a8-3850-3066433/llano1.jpg/1200_0,0,0,0/llano1.jpg/llano1.jpgHokay. Sorry - Just something I was thinking about the other day. /rant AMD has blown a superior hardware lead befire. Look at the Alpha acqusition and the development of the Athlon and Opteron and first to x64. They kicked the shiat out of Intel performance wise for a while. Intel went back to the book and redid the whole design process and came back swinging, both with excellent new hardware and software optimizations. I expect AMD to do the same here. They have an excellent hardware team that is hampered by poor software and driver development and poor general leadership. I remember reading that Intel employed more software engineers than hardware. So ya, I totally agree with you on that point. |
|
|
|
|
cmg5461
|
|
June 14, 2012, 11:25:52 AM |
|
How come their hardware team didn't realize CPU memory bottlenecks after 4 cores?  hence faildozer |
If I've helped: 1CmguJhwW4sbtSMFsyaafikJ8jhYS61quz
Sold: 5850 to lepenguin. Quick, easy and trustworthy.
|
|
|
milazi
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 43
Merit: 0
|
|
April 24, 2013, 04:29:55 AM |
|
wtf...
|
|
|
|
|
|
bcpokey
|
|
April 24, 2013, 08:05:46 AM |
|
wtf...
you necro'd this thread to say that...? |
|
|
|
|
|
