Didn't see this posted elsewhere so here goes

http://www.nordichardware.com/news,7356.html

excerption

Looking good so far

GDDR5??????? man! when will nvidia ever deside to use GDDR4?

If these specs are true nvidia are going to be toast..

must be something wrong or a downside somewhere...

Dont seem to be anything out of the ordinary though. Just because nvidia didn't use gddr4 doesn't mean they cant just jump straight to gddr5.

lets hope its not another 2900xt situation. looks really promising though.

About freakin' time they raise up the TMU count.

Looks like they didn't raise the rop count. More shaders however.

4850 looks like the sweet spot.

This still won't be able to play Crysis at max detail however.

Well if thats anything like accurate then its back to the drawing board again with my build scheduled for about april, I can remember not so long ago being bothered by the relativel ack of new tec, now i finally decide to build they release a new CPU/GPU every other month. Oh well its all good and if the reported specs are close then the fight is really on with Nvidia.
Guess i will just have to draw the line in the sand some where or the thing will never get built.
Definatly time the TMU count went up but i was kind of expecting that it just seemed a logical step to take, would have liked the ROP count up as well but they need to save something for further down the line dont they.
Mactronix

Just buy what you can afford. You don't have to wait on the parts every time Nvidia, AMD or intel release something new.

These 4000 cards only compares to Geforce 8 series. Sure it has higher clocks and memory but it's still a 16 rop card with 256bit memory bus. It's not going to make some drastic improvements of what we have now.

who knows, the 4870X2 probably could play crysis. 960shaders, 64tmu.
Man thats a high clock @ 1050mhz.

How would it not make drastic changes? Can't you see a kick ass midrange here? 4850 with 480 shaders, 32tmu and the 4670 with 256bit bus, 24tmu, 240 shaders. Huge bang for buck if ATI sticks with the pricing. 4670 @ around $100.

480 shaders are still gonna be crap against what Nvidia has shader for shader. Any idea how many the geforce ten will have?

30-50% difference? Not much really. From 7 to Geforce 8 was a drastic change. Much as 100+% difference.

These new cards cost more anyway. 8800gt is currently $200 after rebates.

You do know Geforce 8800gt has 16ROP 56TMU right? 480 shaders sounds a lot but current AMD cards with 320 shaders can't compete with Geforce 8 with 128 shader. IMHO 320 AMD shader is only equivalent to Nvidia's 96 shader.

Good price is always good on the low end however. About time 256 bit memory is mainstream.

Well, forget my plans for a 3870X2. I'll pass and just get a cheap 3850 to hold me over until the 4870 or 4870X2.

GPUs at > 1ghz

damn dude, I would've thought they would be power guzzlers at that speed

I hope ATI can deliver

Why not? They are already at 800mhz currently.

Looking pretty impressive.
Looks like it could give Nvidia a bit of a fright...

True, but a 250mhz jump is pretty big for graphics cards

I would imagine that ATI would have tried to get the highest clocks possible on their HD3XX0 series to be more competitive with nvidia now, but then again maybe TSMC has refined their 55nm process to get higher yields of higher clocked GPUs.

If you are referring to the performance level, i tend to agree. The 320 shaders of the 2900/38xx series are, as a fact, only 64 complex shaders. The others can only compute simple instructions and are worthless without proper drivers.
I'd really like to see some information regarding the efficiency of those simply shaders, especially if their transistor count is compared to that of their complex brethren.

The core clock is high then what i would have expected but the memory is not that high for Gddr 5 hell even gddr4 and 3 go that high

I'm not 100% sure about this, but I think they merely listed the base clock speed, in which case you'd have to multiply it by two to get the effective clock speed. So 1800MHz would actually be 3200MHz, which if I recall correctly has some significance, like what .6ns (or something) memory is supposed to run at. Can someone confirm this part?