Let the 6970 Rumors Begin

Status
Not open for further replies.
you guys are debating semantics...you compare cards based on similar specs...never will both ATI and Nvidia come out with a new product on the exact same day...so for comparison you wait a few weeks or months for Company B to release their latest high end card or refresh and then compare...in the meantime the company that released first will have the higher performing card

when both new cards are released you will then gain an accurate representation of the best performing card...the in-between doesn't matter at all
 
UtopiA said:
This has never happened. Well, not in the last 5-6 years.
But to answer your question, you would compare B and C, simply because both companies had equal amounts of time to develop a product.

To put it into real terms, your situation is the equivalent of ATI launching a 5800 refresh when the GTX 480 launched.
Click to expand...

1. If you compare A and B, both companies also had equal amounts of time to develop their product: 1 year. The release cycles are simply off set by 1/2 year.

2. 5870 - 480 (and 580) - 6970 would be such an example if 6970 proves faster. 480 had single GPU crown for about 1/2 year, 580 is expanding on it but you don't get a double crown :)
 
UtopiA said:
This has never happened. Well, not in the last 5-6 years.
But to answer your question, you would compare B and C, simply because both companies had equal amounts of time to develop a product.

To put it into real terms, your situation is the equivalent of ATI launching a 5800 refresh when the GTX 480 launched.
Click to expand...

UtopiA said:
Where are you getting 1 year from?
There's no known information prior to the launch of product A.
Click to expand...

Where do you get that B and C had equal amounts of development time, there's no known information prior to the launch of product A.
 
It is as simple as this for single GPUs:
ATI had the performance crown with 5870 until 480.
nVidia has the performance crown since 480, but now with 580.

As most powerful graphics card goes: 5970 is still the fastest since its launch.
 
Nightbird said:
Where do you get that B and C had equal amounts of development time, there's no known information prior to the launch of product A.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, but are we trying to debate the definition of "time"?
Time exists for everyone, and moves at the same pace for everyone. We do not need to discuss "time" in any form, as it does not change.

I'm just reminding you that while one company develops (over time), the opposing company has an equal amount of time to develop a new product (a refresh). Allowing one company to stall in time, that is, do nothing, gives them an unfair advantage.
 
This makes my heat hurt...

Howabout, if this is faster, we'll call it the fastest single GPU e-VAR! (till the next GPU is faster).
 
UtopiA said:
I'm sorry, but are we trying to debate the definition of "time"?
Time exists for everyone, and moves at the same pace for everyone. We do not need to discuss "time" in any form, as it does not change.

I'm just reminding you that while one company develops (over time), the opposing company has an equal amount of time to develop a new product (a refresh). Allowing one company to stall in time, that is, do nothing, gives them an unfair advantage.
Click to expand...

I'm laughing because even with an idealized 1 year development periods, 1/2 year release date offsets, and steadily increasing performance, you would always compare the later released Nvidia card to the earlier AMD card, and not compare the later released AMD card to the earlier released Nvidia card.

I can't imagine any reasoning that awards victory solely to one side when both sides are constantly 1 upping the other.
 
How about... we compare the latest two released cards, eh?

If was always did this "generation" crap, we'd probably end up waiting till we're dead at every Fermi and every R600 :rolleyes:

We compared the HD5850 to the GTX285? Did that not happen? Didn't we still compare the HD5870 to the HD4870X2 and GTX295? Didn't we still compare the GTX480 to the GTX295? We compare what is out, and what we have. Whatever if you want to fictionally line up two cards together.

By the time nVidia released the GTX480, AMD already released the HD5970, and a shitstorm of "who's really faster; dual GPU cheat" came out.
 
Yup, Nightbird wins this useless debate by bringing some logic to it. If there is significant time between releases (I'd say about 1-2 months), then the first release will have been the most powerful GPU on the market for a significant amount of time. Wow, I feel stupid even stating that, and yet it's being debated. Anyways, here's where I got the 1-2 months from. If a new top GPU is released, and there's demand for it (which there actually isn't a ton of currently because of the lack of demanding games), then I'd say it takes about 1 month for a significant percentage of possible GPU buyers to jump on that GPU rather than wait for the competition.
 
UtopiA said:
This is incorrect.
Click to expand...

So, say A is an AMD card, N is an Nvidia card.

If the sequence of releases are as follows, and < indicates less performance:
etc...<A<N<A<N<A<N<A<N<...etc

You don't group them as:
etc...<[A<N]<[A<N]<[A<N]<[A<N]<...etc
and say: "Nvidia wins every generation"?

The whole point of awarding the crown is that the fastest GPU is the king.
The company that holds the crown for a longer period of time is king.

Other than this, there are races for performance/price ratios and fastest single card (dual-GPU) races.

Sure, you can select your favorite contender and cheer for them, but the race is what matters and whomever is faster at any point in time and sends the other side back to the lab is the winner. AMD has been in the lab for a while now, but the atmosphere says PREPARE FOR BATTLE!
 
It's a generational process, so you have to know which company starts the generation.

If ATI is first, this means the next Nvidia card will be the competitor; and if you think time is an issue, then ATI will have the opportunity to launch a refresh. If time is not an issue, then you compare both cards directly (first cards in a generation).

The whole point of the generation gap is to prevent things like "The 5870 is faster than the GTX 280, therefore ATI is superior". It's just ridiculous. Common sense.

If the sequence of releases are as follows, and < indicates less performance:
etc...<A<N<A<N<A<N<A<N<...etc
Click to expand...
Side note, this doesn't happen in reality.
Just another reason why my model makes more sense.
 
UtopiA said:
The whole point of the generation gap is to prevent things like "The 5870 is faster than the GTX 280, therefore ATI is superior". It's just ridiculous. Common sense.
Click to expand...

No, ATi was superior.


SImply put, nVidia had nothing to counter the HD5870 in single GPU and nothing ot counter the HD5970 in dual GPU for a seriously long time.


What the hell is this, an arena foozeball match? There aren't "generations" or whatever.


If ATi chose to use a DX8 card to fight nVidia's DX9 card, would we could it as a "generational win" for nVidia since ATi never showed up to the fight?


Would we count the 9700 Pro - which raped nVidia as far as all were concerned, not count?

Would the fact that it didn't support all the tricked out functionality of a newer API make it "last gen"? The fact that is was built on 150nm and not 130nm make it "last gen"?


Or would that still make it the fastest card of it's time, for a long time? Or what? It was a "generational win" for ATi? GPU vendors have obviously given up trying to time their launches right next to each others. In the RV770 story@anand, it was noted large ASICs take longer to develop.

nVidia has went the "go big or go home" route. AMD has chosen the exact oposite. They aren't going to buddy up and try to usurp each other ASAP - because it isn't going to happen as much, anymore.
 
launch date is now the 15th of dec and the cost for the 6970 is 450.
 
jeremyshaw said:
No, ATi was superior.
Click to expand...
With an asterisk.
"ATI is Superior" *.

* Since we have no competition whatsoever, yet.

When you over-simplify something, you demean its value.
A company's victory is almost meaningless if there's no competitor.
 
UtopiA said:
With an asterisk.
"ATI is Superior" *.

* Since we have no competition whatsoever, yet.

When you over-simplify something, you demean its value.
A company's victory is almost meaningless if there's no competitor.
Click to expand...

Yep, the technically inferior 9700Pro was meant to compete against the 4600Ti, *just* so it could be raped by the technically superior FX5900.

wait... what? "oh Noes, it only supports DX9 vs nVidia's DX9.0b" waa waa.

There I just unsimplified what the 9700Pro was supposed to be: the fastest card possible. Reguardless of some made up idealism about GPUs.
 
This is why price is a far better comparison, single gpu, double gpu and all that nonsense can be forgotten.

Just look at the closest 2 cards price wise and compare.
 
The Olympics, from UtopiA's perspective.


Two top contenders Tom and Jerry participate in the 100m race. This is Tom's first Olympic showing, Jerry's second.

At the start, Jerry bursts into the lead, finishing at 9.80 seconds, beating his old record of 9.85.
Tom follows close behind, finishing at 9.84 seconds.

At the awards ceremony, the Gold medal goes to... Tom?! Everyone is shocked!

The race judge UtopiA calmly explains his decision: "This is Tom's first race, Jerry's second. Jerry has had more time to prepare for this race than Tom, this is his second generation attempt you may say, and it wouldn't be fair to use this score. Jerry's first race time was 9.85 seconds and this should be used to compare with Tom's 9.84, hence Tom is the winner!"

Everyone: "BOOOOOOOO"

:D
 
Nightbird said:
The Olympics, from UtopiA's perspective.


Two top contenders Tom and Jerry participate in the 100m race. This is Tom's first Olympic showing, Jerry's second.

At the start, Jerry bursts into the lead, finishing at 9.80 seconds, beating his old record of 9.85.
Tom follows close behind, finishing at 9.84 seconds.

At the awards ceremony, the Gold medal goes to... Tom?! Everyone is shocked!

The race judge UtopiA calmly explains his decision: "This is Tom's first race, Jerry's second. Jerry has had more time to prepare for this race than Tom, this is his second generation attempt you may say, and it wouldn't be fair to use this score. Jerry's first race time was 9.85 seconds and this should be used to compare with Tom's 9.84, hence Tom is the winner!"

Everyone: "BOOOOOOOO"

:D
Click to expand...
Your scenario assumes both racers start at the same time.
My analysis describes two separate races, where each racer runs independently of the other. What you're describing is the equivalent of giving Tom the 1st Place medal, before Jerry has even had a chance to run his race (and potentially beat Tom's time).

Not to mention you also awarded victory to the slower runner which makes no sense whatsoever.

This is what I said about over-simplification.
Graphics card competition has very little in common with olympic races...
 
UtopiA said:
This is what I said about over-simplification.
Graphics card competition has very little in common with olympic races...
Click to expand...

The race is conducted every single day in the eyes of customers, and the side that wins generates more profit on that day. I think my adaptation of your view is perfect though :D
 
UtopiA said:
Your scenario assumes both racers start at the same time.
My analysis describes two separate races, where each racer runs independently of the other. What you're describing is the equivalent of giving Tom the 1st Place medal, before Jerry has even had a chance to run his race (and potentially beat Tom's time).

Not to mention you also awarded victory to the slower runner which makes no sense whatsoever.

This is what I said about over-simplification.
Graphics card competition has very little in common with olympic races...
Click to expand...

Oversimplification? Considering you want to simplify GPU releases into arbitrary "generations," instead of the market at the time, I don't see your point. I don't think anyone can, because there IS no "GPU generation war" - only who's there, at the time.
Would you consider the GTX580 to be a seperate gen from the GTX480? Would you consider the HD3870 to be a different gen from the HD2900 XT? But we all sure as hell know the HD6970 is gonna be compared to the GTX580. And it won't be because of some made up time bracket. It will be because these are the two newest GPU out there, and (hopefully) the two fastest GPU out there.
 
Before this thread gets any worse, here's a sign of hope that its 100% in the paws of the big guys:

http://forums.guru3d.com/showpost.php?p=3801534&postcount=59

Hilbert got one... well two! Can't tell if it's a 6850 AND 6970 or two 6970's.

img3199r3422.jpg
 
Last edited:
jeremyshaw said:
Oversimplification? Considering you want to simplify GPU releases into arbitrary "generations," instead of the market at the time, I don't see your point. I don't think anyone can, because there IS no "GPU generation war" - only who's there, at the time.
Click to expand...
You don't understand what simplifying means.

Judging GPU's by comparing the newest releases is a simplifcation, when you consider how generations work. In other words -- comparing the 5870 to the GTX 280 and declaring ATI the winner is a simplification of the process, and yields inaccurate (or pointless) results. I assume that example is obvious, since they are clearly in different generations.

If they aren't in the same generation, then there is a clear winner, thus making the comparison totally useless. So why even bother? Now, take that example and apply it to all GPU comparisons, and you have my logic.

Before this thread gets any worse, here's a sign of hope that its 100% in the paws of the big guys:
Click to expand...
We're just bored.
 
UtopiA said:
You don't understand what simplifying means.

Judging GPU's by comparing the newest releases is a simplifcation, when you consider how generations work. In other words -- comparing the 5870 to the GTX 280 and declaring ATI the winner is a simplification of the process, and yields inaccurate (or pointless) results. I assume that example is obvious, since they are clearly in different generations.

If they aren't in the same generation, then there is a clear winner, thus making the comparison totally useless. So why even bother? Now, take that example and apply it to all GPU comparisons, and you have my logic.
Click to expand...

Compare the latest GPU... it's not an oversimplification. It's a fact.

Hell, if we went your way, we would of recommended NOT buying a GPU back in Sept2009 until Fermi came out... in march. 2010. Smack dab inbetween ATi's HD5000 series. And AMD's HD6000 series.


Now which "generation" of cards was Fermi supposed to be up against? Evergreen? NI? Everything?


If you chose everything, then you agree there are no generations - just what's fast, and what isn't. If you keep on arguing... Fermi is both GTX500 and GTX400. What, you wannna line them up against mythical HD6000 series cards (it's looking to be that way :p) and "older" HD5000 series cards based on name? :p
 
The answer you to are looking for is market segment. You wouldn't compare SL 550 to a Charger R/T. The other is target. A you can compare a Murciélago to a 599 GTB but you really can compare it to a 911 Turbo S. Sure all three are really fast cards but two are about being elitist and one is about while being ridiculously fast, being aimed more at bang for the buck.

So the question is, what segment is it aimed at. If its aimed at the same market and it is priced similar then you can compare their performance.
 
This forum is really going downhill in the last month, now it's just getting beyond stupid.

I'm not a total ATI/AMD lover for the fact that their driver set team has some big problems, but suffice to say there are way too many posters here that are tossing around so much fud with nothing done about it. I'd go on but then it would probably result in another 7 day ban for name calling :roll:
 
DarkStryke said:
This forum is really going downhill in the last month, now it's just getting beyond stupid.

I'm not a total ATI/AMD lover for the fact that their driver set team has some big problems, but suffice to say there are way too many posters here that are tossing around so much fud with nothing done about it. I'd go on but then it would probably result in another 7 day ban for name calling :roll:
Click to expand...

You're reading a FUD thread and complaining about FUD :) It's like going to a bar and complaining about alcoholics :D
 
FUD or not, there is no reason why constructive speculation can not be had. Insults, abstract comparisons and mud flinging bring nothing positive to the thread.

This thread and these forums could use some heavy handed moderation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top