To people who are technically versed: Will the HD 7xxx series be good at mining?

[XX55XX]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4455/amds-graphics-core-next-preview-amd-architects-for-compute

To anyone who knows stuff about programming and computer circuits: Are the next generation of Radeons going to be just as good at mining as their predecessors were? Or will we see outrageous prices for used 5xxx and 6xxx cards in a few months?

[tehcodez]

Horrible. The 7 series will be the worst cards at mining period (AMD will actually block the SHA-2 family). Better save your money and get that Matrox...

[TylerJordan]

Horrible. The 7 series will be the worst cards at mining period (AMD will actually block the SHA-2 family). Better save your money and get that Matrox...

whaaaaa? really?    

[rograz]

Horrible. The 7 series will be the worst cards at mining period (AMD will actually block the SHA-2 family). Better save your money and get that Matrox...

whaaaaa? really?    

Also only comes with DX9 support since all games are console ports anyway.

[ace24]

"At no point has AMD specified when a GPU using GCN will appear, so it’s very much a guessing game". It is rumored and extremely likely that the 7xxx GPUs, which have reportedly taped out and are quite possibly in production, are NOT this "future generation" AMD GPU. They will be based on a die-shrunk and likely tweaked 5xxx/6xxx-like GPU, meaning they should have similar performance characteristics to older generations while likely improving some workloads due to evolutionary changes, and improving performance/watt because of the die shrink.

No one knows how they will perform in any given situation of course, but I would expect them to be comparable to previous generations.

[bcpokey]

"At no point has AMD specified when a GPU using GCN will appear, so it’s very much a guessing game". It is rumored and extremely likely that the 7xxx GPUs, which have reportedly taped out and are quite possibly in production, are NOT this "future generation" AMD GPU. They will be based on a die-shrunk and likely tweaked 5xxx/6xxx-like GPU, meaning they should have similar performance characteristics to older generations while likely improving some workloads due to evolutionary changes, and improving performance/watt because of the die shrink.

No one knows how they will perform in any given situation of course, but I would expect them to be comparable to previous generations.

+1 to this guy. Sadly AMD has not released any 7xxx info basically. Well except the 7xxx mobility, showing proposed die-shrink, but that doesn't tell you much about the full scale versions. if they are tweaked 5/6xxx that will likely not be a good sign looking at the 6xxx vs 5xxx in terms of $/MHash (though good in $/Watt).

Since these cards ARE primarily gamer cards, expect a lot of focus on non-mining features like tessellation and DOF shader effects and other things that take up PCB space and don't contribute to hashing.

[clint25n]

It seems like someone could write new hashing software that will utilize what a certain card is good at. Perhaps not though.
Would be kinda cool if AMD would release a special mining card; would be certain to sell out.

Rograz, why are they blocking SHA-2?

[milk]

New slides show they are going into the same direction as nvidia. This means support for c++ and most likely less shader, but certainly not more. Recent mobos all come with 3 slots, so i guess we are suppose to use them 

[drknark]

Yep, they are going for more general purpose computing. In the presentation they even stated that one of the few applications that thrives on their current architecture is hashing.. that's not to say the 7-series will be bad for hashing, but they will certainly not be as optimal for it as the current generation.

[kokojie]

7xxx will perform similar to 58xx and 6xxx in terms of hashing, it'll be terrible for mining due to its "newness" and price will be pretty high. 58xx is still the best deal if you could find any at a good price point.

[Time2Rush]

Without getting too technical, that architecture (SIMD) will be less efficient for mining. The question is whether we will see it in the 7xxx series, and while unconfirmed - my guess is yes. They will probably reuse their current strategy - low end/mainstream parts using tried and true architecture (VLIW4 in the current 69xx) for the <79xx parts, while going to the SIMD (which is worse for mining) on the 79xx parts. The 4+1 architecture found in the 5xxx series is the most efficient mining architecture we will ever see, period. But, keeping in mind that VLIW4, in the current high end 6 series may not be as efficient, its still pretty good, combine this with a very large die shrink (40nm --> 28nm) we will still have some very efficient cards for mining, more efficient at cost and watt per hash rate than anything out today. Density may be the only real problem if my guess is correct, as we wont be seeing the dual gpu cards with the mining efficient architecture for the next generation.   

[Mabsark]

+1 to this guy. Sadly AMD has not released any 7xxx info basically. Well except the 7xxx mobility, showing proposed die-shrink, but that doesn't tell you much about the full scale versions. if they are tweaked 5/6xxx that will likely not be a good sign looking at the 6xxx vs 5xxx in terms of $/MHash (though good in $/Watt).
 

I don't know where you guys are getting this info from that the 5000 series give better hash rates as they don't. The equivalent 6000 series cards gives a couple of more Mh/s.

As for the 7000s, if it's just a die shrink, we'll see a major increase in hash rates if the GPU stays the same size, as there would be over a billion more transistors. A 28nm 6870 with a GPU size of a 40nm 6870 would offer similar performance to a 6970. On the other hand, the size of the GPU could be reduced, keeping the same number of transistors as before. This would provide a decrease in power consumption.

With smaller transistors, you can pack in more SPs per mm^2, and lots of SPs is what makes these cards good for mining. If the 7000 series is simply a die shrink, then we'll see faster hash rates, decreased power consumption, or both. Just look at the difference between the 55nm 4000 series and the 40nm 5000/6000 series.

[bcpokey]

+1 to this guy. Sadly AMD has not released any 7xxx info basically. Well except the 7xxx mobility, showing proposed die-shrink, but that doesn't tell you much about the full scale versions. if they are tweaked 5/6xxx that will likely not be a good sign looking at the 6xxx vs 5xxx in terms of $/MHash (though good in $/Watt).
 

I don't know where you guys are getting this info from that the 5000 series give better hash rates as they don't. The equivalent 6000 series cards gives a couple of more Mh/s.

As for the 7000s, if it's just a die shrink, we'll see a major increase in hash rates if the GPU stays the same size, as there would be over a billion more transistors. A 28nm 6870 with a GPU size of a 40nm 6870 would offer similar performance to a 6970. On the other hand, the size of the GPU could be reduced, keeping the same number of transistors as before. This would provide a decrease in power consumption.

With smaller transistors, you can pack in more SPs per mm^2, and lots of SPs is what makes these cards good for mining. If the 7000 series is simply a die shrink, then we'll see faster hash rates, decreased power consumption, or both. Just look at the difference between the 55nm 4000 series and the 40nm 5000/6000 series.

Define "equivalent"? 58xx vs 68xx? 5870 gets 430-450MHash/sec, 6870 gets 300-340MHash/sec. i don't see that as the 6xxx gettng more mhash/sec? if you are suggesting equvalence of price it still doesn't work out, a 5870 gets 430-450 again, and a 6950 2GB unlocked shaders (actually more expensive usually, but anyway) gets about 385 - 410 if you're lucky. Those numbers are both from personal experience and backed by https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mining_hardware_comparison

i'd be interested in what data you're using to suggest that 5xxx series don't hash better.

Anyway, just because die sizes have been shrunk doesn't mean they're going to be throwing on transistors and streamprocessors out willy nilly. Depends on the gaming focus AMD chooses to take. in theory the vliw4 config allows more SP / graphic core because it takes less die space, but we saw a reduction of SPs in the 68xx series (clocked higher).

Again, we don't really know jack, but it is unlikely the architecture will be superior to current 5xxx cards.

[rograz]

I don't know where you guys are getting this info from that the 5000 series give better hash rates as they don't. The equivalent 6000 series cards gives a couple of more Mh/s.

In terms of efficiency they are, 6970 is larger and uses more power than a 5870 and still the 5870 can outperform it, show me a 6970 pulling 445MH/s at 1ghz core like the 5870 does.

[Mabsark]

Define "equivalent"? 58xx vs 68xx? 5870 gets 430-450MHash/sec, 6870 gets 300-340MHash/sec. i don't see that as the 6xxx gettng more mhash/sec? if you are suggesting equvalence of price it still doesn't work out, a 5870 gets 430-450 again, and a 6950 2GB unlocked shaders (actually more expensive usually, but anyway) gets about 385 - 410 if you're lucky. Those numbers are both from personal experience and backed by https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mining_hardware_comparison

The 6870 is not equivalent to the 5870 though, it's the 5830s replacement. If you look at the specs of those 2 GPUs side by side, you'll see that the only difference is the increased clocks and twice as many Z/Stencil ROP Units and Color ROP Units. The 6950 replaces the 5850, the 6970 replaces the 5870 and the 6990 replaces the 5970. The majority of people make this mistake at first. The 6000 series don't use the same numbering scheme. They don't even use a consistent numbering scheme.

i'd be interested in what data you're using to suggest that 5xxx series don't hash better.

The mining hardware comparison chart. The Caymans (6950 and above) use a different architecture though so the same rule doesn't apply to them.

Anyway, just because die sizes have been shrunk doesn't mean they're going to be throwing on transistors and streamprocessors out willy nilly. Depends on the gaming focus AMD chooses to take.

Like I said, they can either reduce power consumption, increase performance or both. The variable is the GPU size.

in theory the vliw4 config allows more SP / graphic core because it takes less die space, but we saw a reduction of SPs in the 68xx series (clocked higher).

Again, we don't really know jack, but it is unlikely the architecture will be superior to current 5xxx cards.

The 6800s dont use VLIW4 they use VLIW5 the same as the 5000 series, it's only the 6900s that are using VLIW4, and they don't have less SPs. The 6870 has the same number of SPs as the 5830, which is 1120. A 28nm VLIW4 GPU would destroy the equivalent 40nm VLIW5 GPU in terms of hash rate.

[Mabsark]

I don't know where you guys are getting this info from that the 5000 series give better hash rates as they don't. The equivalent 6000 series cards gives a couple of more Mh/s.

In terms of efficiency they are, 6970 is larger and uses more power than a 5870 and still the 5870 can outperform it, show me a 6970 pulling 445MH/s at 1ghz core like the 5870 does.

Give me a 6970 and I'll show you one.

Have a look at the mining hardware comparison site. There's a 6950 @ 1GHz with 432 Mh/s. The best value listed for a 6970 is 423 Mh/s. You can tell instantly that those cards haven't been optimised because if they had, they would be getting better results than the 6950. Now look at all the other cards, starting with the 6870 vs the 5830. The 6000s get a couple of Mh/s more, which comes as no surprise to me since they're just tweaked versions of the 5000. Some of them aren't even tweaked, just rebranded.

[kokojie]

I don't know where you guys are getting this info from that the 5000 series give better hash rates as they don't. The equivalent 6000 series cards gives a couple of more Mh/s.

In terms of efficiency they are, 6970 is larger and uses more power than a 5870 and still the 5870 can outperform it, show me a 6970 pulling 445MH/s at 1ghz core like the 5870 does.

My stock sapphire 6970 get 420 MH/s, I haven't OCed them since they are call crammed together, I'm still waiting on riser cables from HongKong.

[Freakin]

my xfx 6970 blows chunks

[bcpokey]

Define "equivalent"? 58xx vs 68xx? 5870 gets 430-450MHash/sec, 6870 gets 300-340MHash/sec. i don't see that as the 6xxx gettng more mhash/sec? if you are suggesting equvalence of price it still doesn't work out, a 5870 gets 430-450 again, and a 6950 2GB unlocked shaders (actually more expensive usually, but anyway) gets about 385 - 410 if you're lucky. Those numbers are both from personal experience and backed by https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mining_hardware_comparison

The 6870 is not equivalent to the 5870 though, it's the 5830s replacement. If you look at the specs of those 2 GPUs side by side, you'll see that the only difference is the increased clocks and twice as many Z/Stencil ROP Units and Color ROP Units. The 6950 replaces the 5850, the 6970 replaces the 5870 and the 6990 replaces the 5970. The majority of people make this mistake at first. The 6000 series don't use the same numbering scheme. They don't even use a consistent numbering scheme.

i'd be interested in what data you're using to suggest that 5xxx series don't hash better.

The mining hardware comparison chart. The Caymans (6950 and above) use a different architecture though so the same rule doesn't apply to them.

Anyway, just because die sizes have been shrunk doesn't mean they're going to be throwing on transistors and streamprocessors out willy nilly. Depends on the gaming focus AMD chooses to take.

Like I said, they can either reduce power consumption, increase performance or both. The variable is the GPU size.

in theory the vliw4 config allows more SP / graphic core because it takes less die space, but we saw a reduction of SPs in the 68xx series (clocked higher).

Again, we don't really know jack, but it is unlikely the architecture will be superior to current 5xxx cards.

The 6800s dont use VLIW4 they use VLIW5 the same as the 5000 series, it's only the 6900s that are using VLIW4, and they don't have less SPs. The 6870 has the same number of SPs as the 5830, which is 1120. A 28nm VLIW4 GPU would destroy the equivalent 40nm VLIW5 GPU in terms of hash rate.

This is why i asked you to define equivalent, if you arbitrarily define equivalency by no metric but what "seems" like it should replace what i guess that makes sense. Except that the price, heat, power consumption and so on are not at all equivalent. A 6970 costs far more than a 5870, consumes more power, is often bigger and bulkier, and i suppose you are technically correct, that for those tradeoffs if you can manage to overclock it farther than a 5870 you can get a few more MHash potentially (non-equiv clocks). That's not a very good measure of equivalence though.

[Mabsark]

Define "equivalent"? 58xx vs 68xx? 5870 gets 430-450MHash/sec, 6870 gets 300-340MHash/sec. i don't see that as the 6xxx gettng more mhash/sec? if you are suggesting equvalence of price it still doesn't work out, a 5870 gets 430-450 again, and a 6950 2GB unlocked shaders (actually more expensive usually, but anyway) gets about 385 - 410 if you're lucky. Those numbers are both from personal experience and backed by https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mining_hardware_comparison

The 6870 is not equivalent to the 5870 though, it's the 5830s replacement. If you look at the specs of those 2 GPUs side by side, you'll see that the only difference is the increased clocks and twice as many Z/Stencil ROP Units and Color ROP Units. The 6950 replaces the 5850, the 6970 replaces the 5870 and the 6990 replaces the 5970. The majority of people make this mistake at first. The 6000 series don't use the same numbering scheme. They don't even use a consistent numbering scheme.

i'd be interested in what data you're using to suggest that 5xxx series don't hash better.

The mining hardware comparison chart. The Caymans (6950 and above) use a different architecture though so the same rule doesn't apply to them.

Anyway, just because die sizes have been shrunk doesn't mean they're going to be throwing on transistors and streamprocessors out willy nilly. Depends on the gaming focus AMD chooses to take.

Like I said, they can either reduce power consumption, increase performance or both. The variable is the GPU size.

in theory the vliw4 config allows more SP / graphic core because it takes less die space, but we saw a reduction of SPs in the 68xx series (clocked higher).

Again, we don't really know jack, but it is unlikely the architecture will be superior to current 5xxx cards.

The 6800s dont use VLIW4 they use VLIW5 the same as the 5000 series, it's only the 6900s that are using VLIW4, and they don't have less SPs. The 6870 has the same number of SPs as the 5830, which is 1120. A 28nm VLIW4 GPU would destroy the equivalent 40nm VLIW5 GPU in terms of hash rate.

This is why i asked you to define equivalent, if you arbitrarily define equivalency by no metric but what "seems" like it should replace what i guess that makes sense. Except that the price, heat, power consumption and so on are not at all equivalent. A 6970 costs far more than a 5870, consumes more power, is often bigger and bulkier, and i suppose you are technically correct, that for those tradeoffs if you can manage to overclock it farther than a 5870 you can get a few more MHash potentially (non-equiv clocks). That's not a very good measure of equivalence though.

It's not my definition, it's AMD's. That's how they marketed the cards. Changes nothing though. A 6870 is still just a 5830 with twice as many stencil ROPs and colour ROPs and a 6770 is just a rebadged 5770. When comparing the 5000s to 6000s, count the SPs.

The 5770 and 6770 have 800 SPs (same card, different sticker).
The 6850 has 960 SPs and hasn't got an equivalent 5xxx card.
The 5830 and 6870 have 1120 SPs.
The 5850 has 1440 SPs, the 6950 has 1408 SPs.
The 5870 has 1600 SPs, the 6970 has 1536 SPs.

That's how you compare these video cards, not by using some arbitrary naming sheme but by their technical characteristics.