Of course it won't. How often are the newest high end cards the best bang for buck?
79XX series, Titan, 780, etc all had worse bang for buck compared to prior cards at release.
AMD's high-end has usually been very bang for buck. The exception is the 7970 going as far back as the 3870/50.
It's ironic. Competition usually lowers prices across the board. But AMD seeing Nvidia price gouging with their cards (even when AMD had the awesome 4870, 5870, and 6950) has given AMD reason to price the 7970 so high.
And even more ironic is that Nvidia saw AMD price gouging with the 7970 and then released their 680 at $500.
I bet that VRAM on Hawaii will hit 6200-6300 mhz. AMD likely capped it to hit its TDP target. In some of those benchmarks the Hawaii trashes a 7970Ghz. I bet with more ROPs the chip is now taking more advantage of the available bandwidth as there are more ROPs that need to be fed. Otoh, I believe Tahiti XT had too much memory bandwidth like 4890 in its day while the GPU was bottleneck from a pixel fill-rate, texture, ACE and geometry engine perspective. When I overclock my VRAM to 1800mhz, in some games the scores barely move and I am sitting at 345.6 GB/sec of bandwidth or 31% over a stock 7970 card. I think 400GB/sec is still way too excessive for a chip like Hawaii but perhaps AMD is testing 512-bit for their future GPU generations with GDDR6. It's a good "pipe cleaner" to get ready for their 20nm generation and see how GCN architecture responds to higher memory bandwidth as it scales. I was actually anticipating Hawaii to come in at 384-bit with 7Gbps VRAM. Interesting decision AMD made here with the 512-bit bus that's usually more expensive, increases PCB complexity and uses more power.
In 4-5 years once 4K becomes more mainstream we are going to need GPUs with 1GB/sec memory bandwidth.
I think I missed this, but where's the source saying that the 512-bit bus is smaller in terms of silicon real estate than Tahiti's 384-bit bus?
I think I missed this, but where's the source saying that the 512-bit bus is smaller in terms of silicon real estate than Tahiti's 384-bit bus?
Well, he wouldn't have dropped that hint if they hadn't made some kind of optimization to Hawaii's memory controllers. They may not be as small as Pitcairn's (they actually probably are not) but they should be more area efficient than Tahiti's. Somewhere in-between most likely.
Yeah, Tahiti is probably GCNs worst representative. It seems to do everything worse than every other chip. Cost of launching 1st I guess. I can't help but think that if AMD had just waited about 2 months Tahiti would have been a much better product than it currently is if it had incorporated the lessons learned in Pitcairn, but I guess there had to be a 1st product they learned from. One could say Hawaii is what Tahiti should have been. Similar to GTX480>GTX580
LOL The 480 was a broken piece of crap. Tahiti is just lacking in overall efficiency.
LOL The 480 was a broken piece of crap. Tahiti is just lacking in overall efficiency.
Now you're really reaching. Tell that to those still happily gaming on them.
It was hot and used a lot of juice. That's it.
LOL, nope, that's not it - GF100 was indeed "unmanufacturable" as Charlie@S|A stated. A1 spin was broken, A2 was broken, and finally A3 came out with locked parts but NV still had to give up on it for GF110. And there were also people happily gaming on HD 2900XT's despite the competition. 3DVagabond's point was that Tahiti, on the other hand, came out fully unlocked without delay, and as a leader while still not perfect. Perhaps you should create a thread on your "troll-free" forum on this topic, if you must really reach..
Edit - just saw that Kyle said Hawaii does indeed beat Titan!! This confirms the leaked review that I took with a small grain of salt in fears of being let down like with Cayman, Bulldozer, etc..
The 7970GHz is as crappy as the GTX480. If the second one used a broken chip then what uses the 7970GHz?!