Adult 6970 discussion Thread

Yea, i am aware of the binning process. Well...at least if yields are high that could also mean very competitive prices on the 6970s. Someone in their forums was quoting $400 for the 2G version!
 
Lord_Exodia said:
Funny you mention that I thought about that before. From my recent memory they'll usually come into a thread when everything is skewed completely and drop a hint via a quick comment that gives everyone a hint that they're barking up the wrong tree. They never really violate NDA and I'm sure that's not what you meant either. That is the part that bothers me about this too, if the card did indeed perform amazingly they would have chimed in by now and give that hint that we may be barking up the wrong tree. That's the other part that's bothering me. It leads me to believe that they are not barking up the wrong tree, but we're pretty dead on with the info.
Click to expand...
Either that or the NDA is a lot more stringent this time around.
 
AllenFX said:
Yea, i am aware of the binning process. Well...at least if yields are high that could also mean very competitive prices on the 6970s. Someone in their forums was quoting $400 for the 2G version!
Click to expand...

Yes, at OCUK the price of the 6970 (it only comes in 2Gb btw) was similar to 5870 launch prices, meaning they can well be cheap assuming people aren't price gouging
 
I think edging out the 570 and getting 2 Gb of vram for around $400 would not be a bad deal. Especially for those who believe paying $520 and up for a 580 just seems "a bit too high" . Over clock it a bit, call it a day and pocket the extra $100.
 
Nuby1Canuby said:
Now Charlie is saying there are 2 switches on the 6970. The first one swaps between 7 colors of the LEDs on the fan.
The second is supposed to swap between a 730MHz core with 1920 shaders and a 920MHz core and 2520 shaders.

http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/12/13/secret-amd-6900s-second-switch/


So now the shader rumors I've seen have gone from 1920 to 1536 to 1600 to 1536 and now 2520.
Click to expand...

Does the bottom of the article means its all bull or he is telling the truth. Article seems pretty serious but hopefully the joke at the end doesn't mean he is bullshitting.
 
NKD said:
Does the bottom of the article means its all bull or he is telling the truth. Article seems pretty serious but hopefully the joke at the end doesn't mean he is bullshitting.
Click to expand...

"The second switch itself is cleverly hidden on the back of the card, and you can see it is tiny and almost unnoticeable. It measures a mere 2.5 inches in length by just over an inch in height, and it is cleverly camouflaged against the black back plate. Most people missed it in the pictures, but if you know what to look for, you can spot it quite easily."


there is a stinkin' styrofoam wad for a "switch :p :p :p
 
samurai1999 said:
Charlie making stuff up for hits?
:eek:
Click to expand...

Editor's note: This article heavily uses the new HTML6.2 <sarcasm> and <bullshit> tags. If your browser does not support them, please upgrade to a version that does. Thank you.




... I'd say just for fun, really. Though the hits do help :p
 
Lord_Exodia said:
Good point I didn't even think of that, perhaps the 6850 would perform just in between but slightly above a 6870, this is the thing that keeps me thinking there is no way these things can be true.
Click to expand...

The HD6950 is in a 'class of its own'
- along with the GTX470
- and soon to be released GTX560
:D
 
jeremyshaw said:
Editor's note: This article heavily uses the new HTML6.2 <sarcasm> and <bullshit> tags. If your browser does not support them, please upgrade to a version that does. Thank you.
Click to expand...

I believe those are standard flags for a Charlie article
:D
 
samurai1999 said:
Charlie making stuff up for hits?
:eek:
Click to expand...

Editor's note: This article heavily uses the new HTML6.2 <sarcasm> and <bullshit> tags. If your browser does not support them, please upgrade to a version that does. Thank you.

let's see how many feathers get ruffled. lol count 1?
 
Nuby1Canuby said:
Now Charlie is saying there are 2 switches on the 6970. The first one swaps between 7 colors of the LEDs on the fan.
The second is supposed to swap between a 730MHz core with 1920 shaders and a 920MHz core and 2520 shaders.

http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/12/13/secret-amd-6900s-second-switch/


So now the shader rumors I've seen have gone from 1920 to 1536 to 1600 to 1536 and now 2520.
Click to expand...
So I take it you also believed in Fermin, right? http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/02/26/sweden-gets-world-exclusive-geforce-fermin-card/
 
Charlie's trolling both Nvidiots and fanATIcs in the same article

it's all sarcasm and bull inside, and not meant to be taken as anything other than a joke.
 
NKD said:
Does the bottom of the article means its all bull or he is telling the truth. Article seems pretty serious but hopefully the joke at the end doesn't mean he is bullshitting.
Click to expand...

It's a joke dude. There's no such thing as a 2520 shader part. Didn't the color changing LEDs line tip you off or how about the big white switch duct taped to the card? :)
 
Came across this insanity! Keep in mind that who ever did those benches is utilizing drivers not yet available to the public.
 
heflys20 said:
Came across this insanity! Keep in mind that who ever did those benches is utilizing drivers not yet available to the public.
Click to expand...

6970 beating the 580 in Heaven benchmark? That would be a shocker. But really I'm going to take everything with a grain of salt until REAL reviews come out. There's been way too much fluctuation between leaked results and rumors. I think the 190W TDP mode -might- have been an issue for previous poor results though. AMD's power save consciousness screwing performance results? It's plausible at least, but still no guarantees that the 6970 would win even if it was running at correct TDPs. But it would certainly draw a lot closer if true.
 
vjcsmoke said:
6970 beating the 580 in Heaven benchmark? That would be a shocker. But really I'm going to take everything with a grain of salt until REAL reviews come out. There's been way too much fluctuation between leaked results and rumors. I think the 190W TDP mode -might- have been an issue for previous poor results though. AMD's power save consciousness screwing performance results? It's plausible at least, but still no guarantees that the 6970 would win even if it was running at correct TDPs. But it would certainly draw a lot closer if true.
Click to expand...

Well, the guy who posted the benchmark says he got it from Sapphire; plus, he's running it on a Phenom.

Here's the actual post:

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=17999128&postcount=376
 
vjcsmoke said:
6970 beating the 580 in Heaven benchmark? That would be a shocker. But really I'm going to take everything with a grain of salt until REAL reviews come out. There's been way too much fluctuation between leaked results and rumors. I think the 190W TDP mode -might- have been an issue for previous poor results though. AMD's power save consciousness screwing performance results? It's plausible at least, but still no guarantees that the 6970 would win even if it was running at correct TDPs. But it would certainly draw a lot closer if true.
Click to expand...

I'm still not sure I get the logic of artificially constraining the TDP like they did. Dynamic clocking to stay within a set TDP makes great sense to me, but why set an artificially low TDP of 190W, with overclocking allowed to 250W (or 220W, whatever it is). Wouldn't it be easier/better to just set the TDP at the higher value all the time? Who wants to pay $400 for a video card that is intentionally running at a lower than possible TDP? It's not like Fermi where they are running into the PCIe spec. It still downclocks at idle, so you aren't going to lose any idle power savings - just doesn't make sense to me.
 
Forceman said:
I'm still not sure I get the logic of artificially constraining the TDP like they did. Dynamic clocking to stay within a set TDP makes great sense to me, but why set an artificially low TDP of 190W, with overclocking allowed to 250W (or 220W, whatever it is). Wouldn't it be easier/better to just set the TDP at the higher value all the time? Who wants to pay $400 for a video card that is intentionally running at a lower than possible TDP? It's not like Fermi where they are running into the PCIe spec. It still downclocks at idle, so you aren't going to lose any idle power savings - just doesn't make sense to me.
Click to expand...

Well, from the looks of it it was only the early drivers that some guys had which had the card running at the low TDP. This guy with the Sapphire card seems to be saying that the drivers he got were running the card at a higher TDP. We're also not yet sure if it has affected any of the actual games. It could be it's just a few intensive benchmarks where the card is reaching the TDP limit and thus clocking down.
 
I don't have time to read all 15 pages, but does anybody know what time the NDA lifts? I really like staying up til midnight to read [H] reviews.
 
jamesrb said:
I don't have time to read all 15 pages, but does anybody know what time the NDA lifts? I really like staying up til midnight to read [H] reviews.
Click to expand...

According to this, the NDA lifts at 9:00PM PST today. Not sure how true it is. I remember reading 12:00AM PST tonight as well somewhere else.
 
ManyCowsMoo said:
According to this, the NDA lifts at 9:00PM PST today. Not sure how true it is. I remember reading 12:00AM PST tonight as well somewhere else.
Click to expand...
I went back and checked previous ATI launches, they're either 6 AM PST or 9 PM PST.
So if a source says 9 PM PST, then that's probably a more accurate prediction.
 
GIBBO put a preview up at ocuk but he is still using the old drivers it seems. Becuase the guy with the sapphire had 67fps average and gibbo is till getting 52fps on the same settings, and GIBBO has an i7 950 running at 4ghz.
 
NKD said:
GIBBO put a preview up at ocuk but he is still using the old drivers it seems. Becuase the guy with the sapphire had 67fps average and gibbo is till getting 52fps on the same settings, and GIBBO has an i7 950 running at 4ghz.
Click to expand...

Yep, seems those newer drivers give it a huge boost.
 
UtopiA said:
We have a mess on our hands if that's not the case.
Click to expand...

I doubt it there was a picture posted of AMD driver schedule and it clearly showed that 8.8 series driver was scheduled for early december so I am sure the reviewers had that driver. Some of the earlier card that was packed and shipped off probably have the old drivers just to get you going. I am sure Ocuk has had stock for like over 2 weeks now. They have to have some drivers with the card.
 
NKD said:
I doubt it there was a picture posted of AMD driver schedule and it clearly showed that 8.8 series driver was scheduled for early december so I am sure the reviewers had that driver. Some of the earlier card that was packed and shipped off probably have the old drivers just to get you going. I am sure Ocuk has had stock for like over 2 weeks now. They have to have some drivers with the card.
Click to expand...

8.790 is the drivers that they are using. It's also the drivers that I have seen on EVERY LEAK.

Quote from Gibbo at OCUK:

The new drivers are much faster, but I did not get them in time. The new drivers basically mean a 6970 beats a GTX 580 in tessellation or at least is no longer chasing it.

Wait for reviews tomorrow guys, its a fantastic card for the money, but the GTX 580 does still have outright power, but it cost more.

For the same money I'd be bagging myself a pair of 6950's.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top