Yeah I just noticed the spelling error. "enableing" Hahaha. Also, the slide is saying this card will have less outputs than the hd7970 has. I'm going with fake now.
I think it's fake. Even if you toss out the spelling error, just has a fake feeling to it.
Not seeing any spelling errors.
Ah. Well that's very "AMD" of them. They done it before.Look in the fine print. "enableing"
You need to go look up that word and learn its definition if you you're going to use it correctly.
For an architecture tweak on the same manufacturing process? You're going to get let down pretty hard. An overclocked 5870 could beat a stock 6970... this is a similar situation.It is impossible that a 8970 is just 10-15% faster than a 7970. Even an Oced 7970 would beat a stock 8970 in that case. IMO we should expect 8970 to be about 40-50% faster at stock
Or just AMD's world-renowned marketing team at it again."As of March 2012... has been calculated at over 4.5..."
Hahahahaha, read that entire sentence. That sounds like a 14 year old kid wrote it, not a PR department of a major chip company. This is clearly the work of a bored individual trying to get attention.
Did I miss the release and review of the GK110 coz there's an awful lot of assumptions being made about it. Or we just taking NVIDIA Italy PR as gospel now?
Logic would imply that an expectation would be based on fact(s) or concrete evidence. So far we all we have are rumors and hearsay, and to bet anything on it is simply faith-based. For all we know, the GK110 may never exist. To claim something is certain based on no proof is relying on faith, which is something fanatics do, not logical people.GK110 beating Tahiti is a pretty logical assumption if you ask me. Gigantic die of doom squashing a cute little 352mm² die... seems pretty reasonable.
Given Nvidia's consistent failures with their large GPUs, I'd imagine they'd start toning back on the die size. GT200 was a disaster, GF100 was a disaster, and GK100 got scrapped, with GK110/112 (or whatever you want to call it) coming far later. GF110 was just fixing their broken GF100, although kudos to Nvidia for releasing it in a timely manner.
It'll be interesting to see if GK110 is an actual tweak to the GK100 Kepler line - the cards we should be seeing in around a month.
It is impossible that a 8970 is just 10-15% faster than a 7970. Even an Oced 7970 would beat a stock 8970 in that case. IMO we should expect 8970 to be about 40-50% faster at stock
Now, assuming this the HD 8970 will be anywhere from 10-20% faster than the HD 7970. If that's the case, and it probably will be, the top-tier GK110 card will easily have higher performance (by 10-15%). We'll be at the same situation as the HD 6970 vs. GTX 580 by the end of the year, where GK110 will be 10-15% faster but consume much more power. AMD will end up competing with the GTX 770 at the top. Mark my words.
That's just 4 more CUs, what are the chances that they're there in Tahiti and fused off waiting for a more mature 28nm process?
Will this reflex the price of the 7970 you believe ?
10-20% isn't much faster so either this card retails for like $650+ or it takes the 7970 price and the 7970 sits back seat around $350-$400 and the 7950 sits around $300 maybe?
The rest of the world would know as well, if they looked at the die shot linked on the first page.Even if a fake slide, I was thinking from the get go that the GCN gpu just might have parts disabled. So I won't be surprised if thats the case. They wanted to be first to market. And they did. First 1ghz gpu as well, and so on. Waiting for improved yields and so on. But only amd knows for sure.
Kepler killer?
For an architecture tweak on the same manufacturing process? You're going to get let down pretty hard. An overclocked 5870 could beat a stock 6970... this is a similar situation.
It'd be pretty difficult to squeeze out that kind of performance consistently unless AMD has a breakthrough in architecture design. The slide itself says it has 1.2+ times more compute power than a 7970, so that's where my expectation lies. I'd imagine 2304 shaders at ~1GHz would do the trick.Like the other poster said, a 7970 can be 25% faster than a stock 7970 so any amd refresh being 40-50% faster is not an unreal expectation.
It'd be pretty difficult to squeeze out that kind of performance consistently unless AMD has a breakthrough in architecture design. The slide itself says it has 1.2+ times more compute power than a 7970, so that's where my expectation lies. I'd imagine 2304 shaders at ~1GHz would do the trick.
Good thing I didn't buy a 7970. Can't wait for 8xxx series!
If you take into account that GCN is new, the 28nm is immature and 79xx have quite large overclocking headroom you can easily expect 8970 to be 30% faster than 7970. It would be stupid not to refresh very soon after BigK.
I go based off previous evidence. Previous evidence shows that refreshes on the same manufacturing process don't get anywhere near 40-50%.Like the other poster said, a 7970 can be 25% faster than a stock 7970 so any amd refresh being 40-50% faster is not an unreal expectation.