AMD 6900 reviews thread (UPDATED)

[tincart]

What does Kyle's behavior on his forum have to do with the reviews authored by Brent Justice?

I worked with Brent years ago on the long-dead g256.com. Great guy, writes good reviews, but I wish they tested more games.

 

[toyota]

What does Kyle's behavior on his forum have to do with the reviews authored by Brent Justice?

I worked with Brent years ago on the long-dead g256.com. Great guy, writes good reviews, but I wish they tested more games.

um isn't the reason clear? he gets pissy when you question any results.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Kinda like Eyefinity right?

Well, at least Eyefinity can be used on just about any road (that is any game) and is able to run with just one engine.

But for me personally, yes, I find Eyefinity to be about as useless and gimmicky as Physx. I have no desire to have bezels in the middle of my gaming scene. I have no desire to have my GPU create physics that do not appear any better than what we already have on the CPU and lower my frame rates for those same physics.

 

[Gikaseixas]

I started a 3rd account and he also banned me

Hope you were not choosing names like Mitsubishi, Nissan or Honda cuz that would have been easy to find out your identity

On a serious note now, Kyle must have serious issues, i personally like his site but i hear way too many complains about the guy.

 

[Genx87]

I actually like the way they[h] perform their reviews. However it would be nicer if compared results at HQ. But I learned years ago by Kyles bi-polar mood swings about manufacturers he is an emotional equivalent of a child. I just roll my eyes when he is swinging back and forth so dramactically. Anybody who goes to that extremes is a drama queen.

 

[notty22]

IMO, I've witnessed what everyone has mentioned about Kyle, and thats why his results are just that, another set of results. Because I do feel he lets his emotions/mood other motives effect his gut feelings he relates sometimes in his results, editorials or game settings.
Ever watch the video review of the intel SSD ? He hated that new fangled pos from the start, lol.
I do read his site, but once again, 3 game articles at 2560x resolution don't translate to results that actually apply to 90% of his reading audience.

 

[exar333]

The only negative I can think of of the 6950/6970 series is that the 6950 is almost too fast for it's own good. There is so little separation between the cards that really one SKU could probably have been fine.

Anyone know how these are OCing? If both of these hit the same ceiling, I really can't think why anyone would pick up the 6970. Thoughts?

 

[toyota]

The only negative I can think of of the 6950/6970 series is that the 6950 is almost too fast for it's own good. There is so little separation between the cards that really one SJKU could probably have been fine.

Anyone know how these are OCing? If both of these hit the same ceiling, I really can't think why anyone would pick up the 6970. Thoughts?

when the 6850 and 6870 are both oced to their respective typical max oc, they are within 5% of each other in most cases.

 

[tincart]

On a serious note now, Kyle must have serious issues, i personally like his site but i hear way too many complains about the guy.

I dealt with him a number of years ago and he seemed like a nice guy. One of my partners on a hardware website, an angry Texan named Stacey, bet Kyle that he could break a Ratpad in half without any cutting tools or acids. A sample Ratpad was sent along and Stacey beat it in half with a sledgehammer and put the pictures up on the site. Kyle thought it was hilarious and sent a load of Ratpadz merch along to give away on our site.

I had not participated in the forum up until a couple days ago, so I can't comment on what he does on there. If he acts this way, it's a shame.

 

[exar333]

With the recent 5xx and 69xx launches, I am somewhat torn. On one hand, we have 4 great products (570, 580, 6950, and 6970) that all could easily be recommended. Really, any of these four cards, depending on current deals/promotions, etc., would be awesome to recommend. On the other hand, what we have is refreshes that are not all that much better than what we had 1 year ago. If you are running multi-monitors or a 27''+ screen with a high resolution these are a step-up with the 2GB RAM, but otherwise they are kind of minor performance enhancements.

I am holding-off on a new GPU until I build a new skt 2011 SB system 3Q next year, so maybe the 7xxx or 6xx series will really step up the game somewhat around then. My 5870 is serving me well at 1920x1200 currently, but mulling either a multi-display setup or a single 30'' display...

 

[Elfear]

Others agreed, someone mentioned if you are spending $1000 on a 25*16 monitor you'll not be interested in less then a GTX 580 anyway cause what's the point in saving a few $ when you are spending that much on the screen.

I think you'd be surprised. Why spend $500 on a video card that gives you 5-10% more performance with your 30" screen than a $370 card? Or, why not spend $600 for 50-60% more performance than the $500 solution? Either way the $500 card doesn't seem like a very good deal.

 

[MrK6]

I think you'd be surprised. Why spend $500 on a video card that gives you 5-10% more performance with your 30" screen than a $370 card? Or, why not spend $600 for 50-60% more performance than the $500 solution? Either way the $500 card doesn't seem like a very good deal.

Exactly. Just because I bought an expensive monitor to get the most enjoyment out of my games doesn't mean I'm some kind of spendthrift that wastes money on overpriced graphics cards. I'm still running a 5850 (bought for $250) because none of these new cards offer the performance improvement that warrants their prices - even the 6950/6970's, as much of a deal as they are for us 2560x1600 gamers.

 

[Chiropteran]

What am I seeing here?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4061/amds-radeon-hd-6970-radeon-hd-6950/2

Look at the Geforce GTX 480 image. Just above and slightly to the right of the middle of the image are 2 black dots clearly out of place. Is this a rendering flaw of nvidia's drivers? Problem with the GTX 480 card used in the review? Normal behavior for nvidia cards? I don't see any mention of the artifacts in the text on that page, and I'm a little curious.

 

[tviceman]

I actually like the way they[h] perform their reviews. However it would be nicer if compared results at HQ. But I learned years ago by Kyles bi-polar mood swings about manufacturers he is an emotional equivalent of a child. I just roll my eyes when he is swinging back and forth so dramactically. Anybody who goes to that extremes is a drama queen.

I like their charts, but they don't test enough games, I always skip down to apples vs. apples comparisons, and they usually test games with too high IQ settings (i.e. low fps avg.). Many of their apples-to-apples comparisons have the cards in question getting ~30 fps on average, which I think the majority of their readers would agree is unacceptable or borderline unacceptable performance.

 

[Lonbjerg]

Well, at least Eyefinity can be used on just about any road (that is any game) and is able to run with just one engine.

So you claim that:
A) ALL games work with Eyefinity
B) You need not reduce ANY I.Q. settings when running Eyefinity?

If so, I would call you less than honest.

But for me personally, yes, I find Eyefinity to be about as useless and gimmicky as Physx. I have no desire to have bezels in the middle of my gaming scene. I have no desire to have my GPU create physics that do not appear any better than what we already have on the CPU and lower my frame rates for those same physics.

Then stick with your gimped CPU physics, running at 100% load, but yielding performance (compared to GPGPU physics) that is hillariously sad.

Just know that both AMD, Intel and NVIDIA is going to leave you standing at the station, looking at the rear end of the train...:sneaky:

 

[chucky2]

Hardware Canucks used the 10.12 driver.
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...899-amd-radeon-hd-6970-hd-6950-review-28.html

Yes, but it was RC2. Not that I have any idea how RC2 would perform against final.

Will be interesting to see what the 11.1 and especially 11.2 drivers (enough time for EOY vacations to not have affected the release) bring.....

Chuck

 

[exar333]

I think you'd be surprised. Why spend $500 on a video card that gives you 5-10% more performance with your 30" screen than a $370 card? Or, why not spend $600 for 50-60% more performance than the $500 solution? Either way the $500 card doesn't seem like a very good deal.

It's not about a good deal, it's about having the best. What dual-GPU is better than 2x580? Nothing. For some people dropping $1000 on a dual GPU system, or $1500 for a tri-SLI is to have the best. It's like getting an EE CPU...you pay for the best and it's not going to be the best bang-for-the-buck.

 

[Idontcare]

I actually like the way they[h] perform their reviews. However it would be nicer if compared results at HQ. But I learned years ago by Kyles bi-polar mood swings about manufacturers he is an emotional equivalent of a child. I just roll my eyes when he is swinging back and forth so dramactically. Anybody who goes to that extremes is a drama queen.

I'm not picking on any one member in particular, I am just quoting this post as an example to speak to when I say that I want you guys to be cognizant of the fact that Kyle is a fellow forum colleague here at AT's VC&G, albeit infrequently, and your dialogue regarding Kyle is not exactly kosher with the forum guidelines.

It is OK to name names when discussing article authors, author credibility is a relevant factor in determining article credibility, but we seem to be detracting from the spirit of acceptable personal assessment for the purposes of associating article credibility and are heading into something that could rather easily be interpreted as catty and pithy.

I want us to avoid being catty and pithy.

Please take this public conversation away from the public and into pm's or to PFI, this level of character analysis really doesn't belong in a technical forum.

Moderator Idontcare

 

[exar333]

Yes, but it was RC2. Not that I have any idea how RC2 would perform against final.

Will be interesting to see what the 11.1 and especially 11.2 drivers (enough time for EOY vacations to not have affected the release) bring.....

Chuck

AMD is really committing to high resolutions and/or multi-display systems with their 69xx line. Once the resolution gets cranked-up, you really see the staying power of the 2GB of VRAM. Very nice. For anyone gaming on 1920x1200 or less, I would think the 570 or 6970 would be equally-good choices.

 

[SlowSpyder]

So you claim that:
A) ALL games work with Eyefinity
B) You need not reduce ANY I.Q. settings when running Eyefinity?

If so, I would call you less than honest.



Then stick with your gimped CPU physics, running at 100% load, but yielding performance (compared to GPGPU physics) that is hillariously sad.

Just know that both AMD, Intel and NVIDIA is going to leave you standing at the station, looking at the rear end of the train...:sneaky:

I didn't say that all games work with Eyefinity. I was trying to point out that a game doesn't have to be specifically designed to work with it and can still work with it. There are hundreds of games that existed before Eyefinity that will work fine on it.

Some games may need a reduction in settings to work on Eyefinity. Many do not.

I am not making the point that hardware accelerated physics will not likely be the future. I am trying to make the point that Physx is a gimmick. If FarCry2 used Physx, but had the exact same physics that it has now, just that it ran on Nvidia GPU's, many pro-Nvidia posters would claim how incredible it was... all while getting lower frame rates than having those same physics run just fine on the CPU. Until Physx does something exciting (particles, broken glass, and cloth in the wind don't count) then I'll take the extra performance I get from having CPU physics.

The market seems to idicate that Physx is a non-factor. Nvidia hasn't pushed AMD out of the market since they started using hardware Physx. If anything I bet AMD has more marketshare now than when Nvidia bought Aegia.

 

[notty22]

I'm not picking on any one member in particular, I am just quoting this post as an example to speak to when I say that I want you guys to be cognizant of the fact that Kyle is a fellow forum colleague here at AT's VC&G, albeit infrequently, and your dialogue regarding Kyle is not exactly kosher with the forum guidelines.

It is OK to name names when discussing article authors, author credibility is a relevant factor in determining article credibility, but we seem to be detracting from the spirit of acceptable personal assessment for the purposes of associating article credibility and are heading into something that could rather easily be interpreted as catty and pithy.

I want us to avoid being catty and pithy.

Please take this public conversation away from the public and into pm's or to PFI, this level of character analysis really doesn't belong in a technical forum.

Moderator Idontcare

When I 'talk about' Kyle, I do usually mention I respect how he makes a living, company/site (with his team) doing things we all love to do. He has had a presence on the web, from back when I first started building and o/c my first builds, celeron 300.
He's colorful enough to have is own Wikipedia listing, good for him.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HardOCP

 

[cusideabelincoln]

Then stick with your gimped CPU physics, running at 100% load, but yielding performance (compared to GPGPU physics) that is hillariously sad.

Just know that both AMD, Intel and NVIDIA is going to leave you standing at the station, looking at the rear end of the train...

Physics > PhysX

Physx != physics

 

[thilanliyan]

What am I seeing here?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4061/amds-radeon-hd-6970-radeon-hd-6950/2

Look at the Geforce GTX 480 image. Just above and slightly to the right of the middle of the image are 2 black dots clearly out of place. Is this a rendering flaw of nvidia's drivers? Problem with the GTX 480 card used in the review? Normal behavior for nvidia cards? I don't see any mention of the artifacts in the text on that page, and I'm a little curious.

Haven't you heard? nVidia has flawless image quality with no optimizations whatsoever to degrade IQ down to the level of AMD. I'm sure what you're seeing is an artifact of your monitor.

 

[Elfear]

It's not about a good deal, it's about having the best. What dual-GPU is better than 2x580? Nothing. For some people dropping $1000 on a dual GPU system, or $1500 for a tri-SLI is to have the best. It's like getting an EE CPU...you pay for the best and it's not going to be the best bang-for-the-buck.

I agree, there are people out there who want the best and three 580s or four 6970s would be it. The point I was trying to make is that not all guys with a 30" monitor are spendthrifts. I waited and found a great deal on mine (much less than $1000) and I buy other computer components with a budget in mind too. I want the most bang for my buck and while it is extremely fast the 580 just doesn't fit the bill this go around.

 

[zebrax2]

I found the 69xx a little disappointing but what intrigues me the most is the dual bios part. Why go to all the trouble implementing it?