Radeon HD 4000 series - new inofficial info

S

sladesurfer

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 4, 2006
Messages
1,142
:D:D

german site Hartware.net has postet some specs of the upcoming generation of ATI cards.

they got this info from an anonymous reader so take it with a grain of salt. however it's from images of an "authentic looking presentation".

more here: Google Translate link

4850 and 4870 are still based on the 55nm process. The Memory Interface will stay at 256Bit and the ROPs at 16. The number of Stream Processors will increase by 50% to 480 and the number of Texture Mapping Units will be doubled to 32. when idling the 4870 is supposed to draw less than 10w of power.

the new high end model R700XT, or 4870X2 will be similar to the 3870X2. Still a 2x256MBit Memory Bus but now with GDDR5 Memory. just like the 3870X2 its gonna have lower memory clocks compared to the single 4870 version but it has a whooping 250W TDP much like the rumored spec of the 9800GX2.

Memory sizes are: 4850 512MB, 4870 1GB, 4870x2 2GB ... all GDDR5

Click to expand...
 
So the supposed 4870 has 1GB of memory, but the X2 version only has 512MB for each GPU? Or does that mean its 1024MB per GPU.

Hmmm... I dunno. I am skeptical.
 
NKDietrich said:
So the supposed 4870 has 1GB of memory, but the X2 version only has 512MB for each GPU? Or does that mean its 1024MB per GPU.

Hmmm... I dunno. I am skeptical.
Click to expand...

Supposedly R700 is not CF on a card, but will instead have a master chip controlling both chips, and therefore not be reflecting two 512MB of textures. It would act as one 1GB of textures instead.
 
I love the "all DDR5" part. We haven't even had the market saturated in GDDR4 yet.

I'll call shens until I see pics.. that's just me.
 
What's the benefit of 256-bit GDDR5 vs 512-bit GDDR4?

I've never seen any real stats on GDDR5.
 
GDDR5 *is* supposed to be out there, but whether it will be used or not remains to be seen. As for why GDDR4 isn't out there yet, its because only ATI has been using it really while for the most part, Nvidia has stuck with GDDR3. Not sure about the politics behind the deals there.

As for 256-bit w/ GDDR5 vs. 512-bit GDDR4, it's all about how bandwidth is calculated. If you have 256-bit GDDR5 at twice the frequency of a 512-bit bus with GDDR4, you have the exact same bandwidth. The 512-bit bus on the R600 was complete overkill. When paired with highly clocked GDDR4, your bandwidth was far larger than necessary, hence the 256-bit on the RV670 etc. did not bottleneck the 3870 even though it was faster than the R600.
 
POPEGOLD said:
Qimonda has already released DDR5 to its customers....are u calling BS on DDR5 existing?

or are you saying Ati has no 4000 line?
Click to expand...

He could be calling BS on neither of those questions, but merely being a bit skeptical that those are the specs for ATI's next gen...like me.
 
POPEGOLD said:
Qimonda has already released DDR5 to its customers....are u calling BS on DDR5 existing?

or are you saying Ati has no 4000 line?
Click to expand...

I call BS to the information itself.

Nice trying to put words into my mouth, it only makes your argument look less valid.
 
not to be a prick but inoffcial? i think your looking for unofficial :p smoke another one :D
 
POPEGOLD said:
u sound like a nvidia fan boi with your reaction
Click to expand...

And I could say the exact opposite about your reaction.

I question the source of the informations validity and all you can say is I am anti ATi, thats a giant leap.

I have purchased two video cards since I started building my own computers, a 6800GT and an x1950pro, The 6800GT never gave me a single problem, and it never let me down in any way. The x1950pro gave me nothing but problems, and the first one I had wouldn't even work at stock clocks, and it took 4 driver releases before multi monitor support worked properly.

So If I sound a little biased its because I have good reason to be, but im not, seriously.

Edit, ROFL you edited your post before I had a chance to reply, but I got what your originally said in the my quote.

You are getting more laughable every time you reply.
 
i call b.s. on this too. we'll be lucky to see anything like this by Q4 2008.

of course, if it is real, then i'll have two really low mileage 3870x2 cards for sale in May. ;)
 
jkw said:
i call b.s. on this too. we'll be lucky to see anything like this by Q4 2008.

of course, if it is real, then i'll have two really low mileage 3870x2 cards for sale in May. ;)
Click to expand...
When is this supposed to be released anyway, June? Not too long a wait to find out whether any of these specs are true. Providing of course, R700 doesn't get delayed. ;)
 
Supposedly CeBiT might see more info leaked but that's almost a certainty a closed-door affair. In all likelihood, R700/4000 series will debut near Computex...

As for all the Q4 2008 speculation... well, AMD seems to have hit the jackpot with the 55nm yields of the RV670 and what not so it's not entirely out of the question to believe that they might have some good returns for the R700 this time around, unlike R600's yield problems. And it better come out before Q4 anyways, or Kyle owes us all
 
Simpson5774 said:
And I could say the exact opposite about your reaction.

I question the source of the informations validity and all you can say is I am anti ATi, thats a giant leap.

I have purchased two video cards since I started building my own computers, a 6800GT and an x1950pro, The 6800GT never gave me a single problem, and it never let me down in any way. The x1950pro gave me nothing but problems, and the first one I had wouldn't even work at stock clocks, and it took 4 driver releases before multi monitor support worked properly.

So If I sound a little biased its because I have good reason to be, but im not, seriously.

Edit, ROFL you edited your post before I had a chance to reply, but I got what your originally said in the my quote.

You are getting more laughable every time you reply.
Click to expand...

Whatever your cold green nvidia heart tells u is fine with me

btw my last 3 cards have been nvidia
 
Simpson5774 said:
And I could say the exact opposite about your reaction.

I question the source of the informations validity and all you can say is I am anti ATi, thats a giant leap.

I have purchased two video cards since I started building my own computers, a 6800GT and an x1950pro, The 6800GT never gave me a single problem, and it never let me down in any way. The x1950pro gave me nothing but problems, and the first one I had wouldn't even work at stock clocks, and it took 4 driver releases before multi monitor support worked properly.

So If I sound a little biased its because I have good reason to be, but im not, seriously.

Edit, ROFL you edited your post before I had a chance to reply, but I got what your originally said in the my quote.

You are getting more laughable every time you reply.
Click to expand...

Quite a leap? It's made on the same mfg process the cards currently are, the power usages are in line with current cards, We've already seen the 4850/4870/4870 X2 structure in the 3000 series, R700 is rumored to be released in early Q2 this year, the memory busses are similar to current gen cards, the actual memory has doubled for high-end cards - which again happens about every refresh... what is so unbelievable here? :confused:

You're saying your biased because you had a crappy card, or maybe you're not, or maybe you are.. :confused:
I've got a 8800gt that artifacts and locks up under gaming, yet I'm certainly not biased.. just got a shitty card. It happens.
 
Seems in line with what was expected, so I don't dispute this info too much, though I'm doubting the TDP numbers. I doubt the new X2 consumes "only" 250 W.
There's just no mention if the shader based AA logic, is still the same as in R600 and its derivatives. Hopefully not.
 
If it is GDDR5 it probably will do right along 250W. It has some good power savings last I heard on top of great clocks.
 
xBanzai89 said:
If it is GDDR5 it probably will do right along 250W. It has some good power savings last I heard on top of great clocks.
Click to expand...

Not really. A 480 Stream Processor chip, will hover the 1 billion transistors mark. Now double that and you'll have a heat generation and power sucking monster. They can disguise the heat generation, but not the power consumption.
 
Silus said:
Not really. A 480 Stream Processor chip, will hover the 1 billion transistors mark. Now double that and you'll have a heat generation and power sucking monster. They can disguise the heat generation, but not the power consumption.
Click to expand...


question.. have you ever seen someone call BS then come back later if wrong and say " i was wrong"

i havent...not directed at u .. just asking have u seen it
 
POPEGOLD said:
question.. have you ever seen someone call BS then come back later if wrong and say " i was wrong"

i havent...not directed at u .. just asking have u seen it
Click to expand...

No, I haven't.
But what exactly does that have to do with what I said ?
 
This is hard to believe if it is on the same manufacturing process as what ATI is currently using, and clocked much higher and your still getting the same TDP values.

Anyway for such a product I will beleive it when I see it.

If ATI is going at least 480 Shaders then I hope Nvidia moves to a Single GPU 192 Shader card, if Nvidia shrinks down to 55nm then that could be doable with reasonable power consumption.
 
POPEGOLD said:
Whatever your cold green nvidia heart tells u is fine with me

btw my last 3 cards have been nvidia
Click to expand...

Okay, and you call me biased against ATi...... Real logic failure on your part.

Oh4Sh0 said:
Quite a leap? It's made on the same mfg process the cards currently are, the power usages are in line with current cards, We've already seen the 4850/4870/4870 X2 structure in the 3000 series, R700 is rumored to be released in early Q2 this year, the memory busses are similar to current gen cards, the actual memory has doubled for high-end cards - which again happens about every refresh... what is so unbelievable here? :confused:
Click to expand...

Did you even read what I said? or did you take the words "quite a leap" and ignore the rest of the post? I wasn't talking about the 'specs' listed in that pic, I wasn't talking about ATi or TSMCs 55nm process.
 
Simpson5774 said:
I call BS to the information itself.

Nice trying to put words into my mouth, it only makes your argument look less valid.
Click to expand...

Simpson5774 said:
I call BS
Click to expand...


Which one do I need to be looking at? You call bs on the information which is a jpg of a spec sheet.. ?

edit: Ah, I see in the third post you're questioning the source's validity. That's reasonable. But with these parts expected to begin rolling in June, when do you expect information to come out about these? It seems very likely to me that this is good info given the specs listed.
 
coldpower27 said:
This is hard to believe if it is on the same manufacturing process as what ATI is currently using, and clocked much higher and your still getting the same TDP values.

Anyway for such a product I will beleive it when I see it.

If ATI is going at least 480 Shaders then I hope Nvidia moves to a Single GPU 192 Shader card, if Nvidia shrinks down to 55nm then that could be doable with reasonable power consumption.
Click to expand...

With ATi shader counts, you need to remember to divide by 5 to get a more realistic equivalent to how nVidia counts shaders. 320=64, which is why G80 pwned R600, besides the AA issue. So 480=96--clock speeds help ATi make up the shortfall, but that still might not be enough as nV continues to refine the G8x-G9x design. Although, I'd certainly take more shaders if nV wants to offer them!
 
Interesting...

Seen it before and was quite intrigued by the numbers. :)

Whether it's true or not... :confused:
 
Commander Suzdal said:
With ATi shader counts, you need to remember to divide by 5 to get a more realistic equivalent to how nVidia counts shaders. 320=64, which is why G80 pwned R600, besides the AA issue. So 480=96--clock speeds help ATi make up the shortfall, but that still might not be enough as nV continues to refine the G8x-G9x design. Although, I'd certainly take more shaders if nV wants to offer them!
Click to expand...

Got a source for that information? My thoughts are that AMD's shader design isn't as efficient as nVidia's.
 
Since Ati is at a smaller process...adding more shaders wouldnt be beyond reason would it?

I call NO BS :p
 
jbzx86 said:
Got a source for that information? My thoughts are that AMD's shader design isn't as efficient as nVidia's.
Click to expand...

And that's what Commander Suzdal basically said. Even though it's not exactly 1/5, ATI's Stream Processors in R600 and its derivatives, are indeed less efficient than NVIDIA's Stream Processors in G80 and it's derivatives.
The obvious comparison is that a HD 3870 with 320 Stream Processors, is about equal to an old 96 Stream Processors 8800 GTS 640, in terms of performance.
 
POPEGOLD said:
Since Ati is at a smaller process...adding more shaders wouldnt be beyond reason would it?

I call NO BS :p
Click to expand...

One thing has nothing to do with the other. But I do think they are adding more Stream Processors. They HAVE to, since their current 320 do nothing to regain the performance crown. But they do need to do something about their shader based AA logic, or R700 will still be lackbuster with AA on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top