Information on ATI 7xxx Series Dec. 5th!

[Mousepotato]

Multiple websites have already reviewed the 7970 and one published Bitcoin mining.

Posted upthread:
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/radeon-hd-7970-benchmark-tahiti-gcn,review-32344-14.html



So roughly 5% faster.  Given it is a die shrink one would expect a shrunk and doubled 6970 to be 70% to 80% faster.  CGN uses fewer more complex shaders and just like NVidia that results in lackluster mining performance.

Wow, 6970s get nearly 400 MH/s straight out of the box?

[Epoch]

Multiple websites have already reviewed the 7970 and one published Bitcoin mining.

Posted upthread:
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/radeon-hd-7970-benchmark-tahiti-gcn,review-32344-14.html



So roughly 5% faster.  Given it is a die shrink one would expect a shrunk and doubled 6970 to be 70% to 80% faster.  CGN uses fewer more complex shaders and just like NVidia that results in lackluster mining performance.

Wow, 6970s get nearly 400 MH/s straight out of the box?

The 7970 shouldn't even be considered for mining; GCN is AMD's version of Fermi. It is marginally faster than a 5870, sure. But it uses 30% more power to achieve 10% faster performance (250W for a 7970 vs 190W for a 5870). Not to mention a 7970 will retail for $500, compared to $200-$250 for 5870.

Nothing to see here; move along. But I'm glad to see a commercial site like Tom's review the card for bitcoin mining. The 5870 is still the card to beat. At least until the 78xx series is released; those should be just as quick for mining and use 1/2 the power.

[DeathAndTaxes]

Nothing to see here; move along. But I'm glad to see a commercial site like Tom's review the card for bitcoin mining. The 5870 is still the card to beat. At least until the 78xx series is released; those should be just as quick for mining and use 1/2 the power.

Maybe not.  The early reports/leaks indicated that 78xx would use VLIW5 and if they did I agree a 78xx is a no brainer better mining card.  The bad news is later reports have now indicated that 7800 and 7700 series cards will also be CGN.  Only the OEM low end junk 7600 series will be a die shrink of 6000 series.  If so then there likely will be no "good" new mining card.

[Epoch]

Nothing to see here; move along. But I'm glad to see a commercial site like Tom's review the card for bitcoin mining. The 5870 is still the card to beat. At least until the 78xx series is released; those should be just as quick for mining and use 1/2 the power.

Maybe not.  The early reports/leaks indicated that 78xx would use VLIW5 and if they did I agree a 78xx is a no brainer better mining card.  The bad news is later reports have now indicated that 7800 and 7700 series cards will also be CGN.  Only the OEM low end junk 7600 series will be a die shrink of 6000 series.  If so then there likely will be no "good" new mining card.

Hmm, I wasn't aware of that latest news tidbit ... I was operating under the assumption that the 78xx would be VLIW5. If they are GCN as you suggest (Graphics Core Next), like the 79xx, then 2012 will not likely see better GPUs than the 58xx/59xx or 69xx. 

[DeathAndTaxes]

Nothing to see here; move along. But I'm glad to see a commercial site like Tom's review the card for bitcoin mining. The 5870 is still the card to beat. At least until the 78xx series is released; those should be just as quick for mining and use 1/2 the power.

Maybe not.  The early reports/leaks indicated that 78xx would use VLIW5 and if they did I agree a 78xx is a no brainer better mining card.  The bad news is later reports have now indicated that 7800 and 7700 series cards will also be CGN.  Only the OEM low end junk 7600 series will be a die shrink of 6000 series.  If so then there likely will be no "good" new mining card.

Hmm, I wasn't aware of that latest news tidbit ... I was operating under the assumption that the 78xx would be VLIW5. If they are GCN as you suggest (Graphics Core Next), like the 79xx, then 2012 will not likely see better GPUs than the 58xx/59xx or 69xx. 

Yeah I am not sure what to think some sites are indicating GCN some VLIW5 and AMD hasn't confirmed one way or the other.  The 7800s are suppose to launch sometime in late Feb so likely we will know more as it gets closer to launch date.

[Unacceptable]

Multiple websites have already reviewed the 7970 and one published Bitcoin mining.

Posted upthread:
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/radeon-hd-7970-benchmark-tahiti-gcn,review-32344-14.html



So roughly 5% faster.  Given it is a die shrink one would expect a shrunk and doubled 6970 to be 70% to 80% faster.  CGN uses fewer more complex shaders and just like NVidia that results in lackluster mining performance.

Wow, 6970s get nearly 400 MH/s straight out of the box?

Uh,420 m/h with 11.6 drivers & 930/1375 OC on GUIminer/win7...but consumes 375 watts.In crossfire 840 m/h uses 740 watts.Not using MSI AB.

Temps are 72c @ 90% fan speed(very noisey).

Stock got me 360 m/h.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150517

BTW,while gaming @ the OC'ed clocks,I use 440 watts in crossfire(BF3),big diff compared to all out mining

I don't think they OC'ed the 7970 at all,so with some tweaking you might see 450-475 m/hash,just guessing though.As long as power consumption drops,it might not be too bad,BUT @ $500+,not a good bang for the buck

[SlaveInDebt]

http://lenzfire.com/2011/12/entire-gcn-lineup-hd-7000-series-specs-and-price-revealed-60538/

[CA Coins]

If this holds up, then SI looks like a bust for mining.  All GCN and pricey.  For example, the 7850 has less cores than 6950 and cost about the same.  From the comparison of 6970 with 7970, it looks like GCN cores don't mine as well either. 

[racerguy]

Are the 76xx's going to be a die shrink of the 6xxx's or still on the 40nm?  If they're a die shrink they still might be worthwhile, current 66xx's can do 100mhsh/s

[DeathAndTaxes]

Are the 76xx's going to be a die shrink of the 6xxx's or still on the 40nm?  If they're a die shrink they still might be worthwhile, current 66xx's can do 100mhsh/s

They almost certainly will be a die shrink.  Once 28nm gets established there cost per transistor is lower.  Not sure if even a double the 66xx would be worth it. 100MH/s even doubled is just 200MH/s per GPU?  You got FPGAs that can pull that.  Granted some people might be interested but density is going to suck if the "best" miner is ~200MH/s.  

[Mousepotato]

Wow, 6970s get nearly 400 MH/s straight out of the box?

Uh,420 m/h with 11.6 drivers & 930/1375 OC on GUIminer/win7...but consumes 375 watts.In crossfire 840 m/h uses 740 watts.Not using MSI AB.

Temps are 72c @ 90% fan speed(very noisey).

Stock got me 360 m/h.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150517

BTW,while gaming @ the OC'ed clocks,I use 440 watts in crossfire(BF3),big diff compared to all out mining

I don't think they OC'ed the 7970 at all,so with some tweaking you might see 450-475 m/hash,just guessing though.As long as power consumption drops,it might not be too bad,BUT @ $500+,not a good bang for the buck

930/1375 OC != "straight out of the box".

I didn't think 6970s could hit 395 MH/s out of the box, unless they (Tomshardware) did some tweaking to theirs just to make it benchmark slightly above a 5870.

[bulanula]

I didn't think 6970s could hit 395 MH/s out of the box, unless they (Tomshardware) did some tweaking to theirs just to make it benchmark slightly above a 5870.

Total BS in that article. Most of my 5870s can EASILY get a maximum of 440 Mhash/s when slightly overclocked to 960 MHz.

6XXX sucks compared to 5XXX. Even a 6990 sucks compared to the 5970 king ATM. A 6970 can almost never beat a 5870. 

Nobody really knows how the 7XXX will perform or behave until some months after release to allow for optimizations and OCing.

[Comepradz]

GCN Architecture
http://developer.amd.com/afds/assets/presentations/2620_final.pdf

[P4man]

Total BS in that article. Most of my 5870s can EASILY get a maximum of 440 Mhash/s when slightly overclocked to 960 MHz.

THG didnt overclock any of those card in that mining test. They got 375MH which is exactly what Im getting from my 5870 at stock speed. 375.3 to be exact.  That I can overclock mine to 1 GHz is irrelevant, THG could also overclock their 7970 to >1.1 GHz. Hashrate scales perfectly with clock.

[amazingrando]

This is going to be an interesting year.  Because I get very cheap power and the FPGA scene is still a bit murky, I'm not planning to make a big FPGA investment for a while. 

To me, the 7870/50 seem to be the most enticing as a stop-gap before we all move to FPGA/ASICs.  Granted, the prices will be high at first and supply probably constrained, but with a 120/90W TDP respectively, they could pay for themselves pretty quickly.

[DeathAndTaxes]

This is going to be an interesting year.  Because I get very cheap power and the FPGA scene is still a bit murky, I'm not planning to make a big FPGA investment for a while. 

To me, the 7870/50 seem to be the most enticing as a stop-gap before we all move to FPGA/ASICs.  Granted, the prices will be high at first and supply probably constrained, but with a 120/90W TDP respectively, they could pay for themselves pretty quickly.

The nominal wattage is less important than MH/W.  Based on the 7970 that looks to be inferior to 5870 & 5970.

[amazingrando]

This is going to be an interesting year.  Because I get very cheap power and the FPGA scene is still a bit murky, I'm not planning to make a big FPGA investment for a while. 

To me, the 7870/50 seem to be the most enticing as a stop-gap before we all move to FPGA/ASICs.  Granted, the prices will be high at first and supply probably constrained, but with a 120/90W TDP respectively, they could pay for themselves pretty quickly.

The nominal wattage is less important than MH/W.  Based on the 7970 that looks to be inferior to 5870 & 5970.

Right.  So for the 7870/50 (not 7970), you're talking 390/330-ish mh/s (my estimate) at only 120/90W or about 3.25 to 3.66 mh/W.  With a 5970 you're getting ~650 mh/s at 300W, or about  2.16 Mh/s.

[DeathAndTaxes]

This is going to be an interesting year.  Because I get very cheap power and the FPGA scene is still a bit murky, I'm not planning to make a big FPGA investment for a while.  

To me, the 7870/50 seem to be the most enticing as a stop-gap before we all move to FPGA/ASICs.  Granted, the prices will be high at first and supply probably constrained, but with a 120/90W TDP respectively, they could pay for themselves pretty quickly.

The nominal wattage is less important than MH/W.  Based on the 7970 that looks to be inferior to 5870 & 5970.

Right.  So for the 7870/50 (not 7970), you're talking 390/330-ish mh/s (my estimate) at only 120/90W or about 3.25 to 3.66 mh/W.  With a 5970 you're getting ~650 mh/s at 300W, or about  2.16 Mh/s.

Where do you get the idea you are going to get 390 MH/s from a 7870?  The latest reports/rumors is that the 78xx will be CGN like 79xx series.  The 7870 has 62% of the shaders of a 7970.  Somehow it will get 90% of the performance w/ 62% of the shaders?

414 * 0.62 = 250 MH/s on 120W = 2.1MH/W.

Also a 5970 get closer to 750MH/s at 250W.

[amazingrando]

Right.  So for the 7870/50 (not 7970), you're talking 390/330-ish mh/s (my estimate) at only 120/90W or about 3.25 to 3.66 mh/W.  With a 5970 you're getting ~650 mh/s at 300W, or about  2.16 Mh/s.

Where do you get the idea you are going to get 390 MH/s from a 7870?  The latest reports/rumors is that the 78xx will be CGN like 79xx series.  The 7870 has 62% of the shaders of a 7970.  Somehow it will get 90% of the performance w/ 62% of the shaders?

414 * 0.62 = 250 MH/s on 120W = 2.1MH/W.

Also a 5970 get closer to 750MH/s at 250W.

What's your source for saying that the 7870 will be CGN?  I haven't seen anything other than it will be a 28nm die shrink of the VLIW4 architecture with 1536 shaders, same as a 6970, which gets about 390mh/s.  You usually get a small bump in speed with the die shrink, so you should get at least 390 Mh/s, probably a bit more.

As for the 5970, I have quite a lot of them running in my data center.  Looking at the console output right now, my slightly overclocked (750MHz/300MHz) 5970's, using phatk2 and the usual phoenix miner optimizations are getting 340 mh/s per core or 640 mh/s total.  I haven't been able to get 375 per core without increasing voltage (and good cooling).  Thus, I doubt you're getting 750mh/s speed under 300W.  I can hook up one of my rigs to 120v with a kill-a-watt and check the next time I'm at the data center.

[DeathAndTaxes]

What's your source for saying that the 7870 will be CGN?  I haven't seen anything other than it will be a 28nm die shrink of the VLIW4 architecture with 1536 shaders, same as a 6970, which gets about 390mh/s.  You usually get a small bump in speed with the die shrink, so you should get at least 390 Mh/s, probably a bit more.

There are a lot of them, some in this thread.  The early reports seemed to indicate a die shrink.  The later ones now indicate only the low end OEM garbage will be a die shrink rebadge.  I agree with you (and had stated it in the past) IF the 7850 is a VLIW4 on 28nm it will be a monster card.  Sadly that doesn't seem to be the case.

As for the 5970, I have quite a lot of them running in my data center.  Looking at the console output right now, my slightly overclocked (750MHz/300MHz) 5970's, using phatk2 and the usual phoenix miner optimizations are getting 340 mh/s per core or 640 mh/s total.  I haven't been able to get 375 per core without increasing voltage (and good cooling).  Thus, I doubt you're getting 750mh/s speed under 300W.  I can hook up one of my rigs to 120v with a kill-a-watt and check the next time I'm at the data center.

I have to break it to you but those number are pure crap for a 5970.  Not just against what I have gotten but against what lots of other people have gotten.  The limit on each card varies but my slowest card is running 820Mhz/160Mhz.  3x5970 in open air rig pulls 870W at the wall (measured over 3 days using kill-a-watt).  Backing out 100W for the MB, power supply inefficiency, CPU, RAM, etc that puts each card @ roughly 250W a piece.  That is w/ cgminer 2.1.0 running on Linux w/ 11.6 drivers & 2.4 SDK.

If you aren't getting AT LEAST 700MH/s you are doing something horribly wrong.  Note: 700MH/s isn't "good" it is just barely acceptable.