Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

How much better is the new 6000 series?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
October 3, 2010 10:46:45 PM

I need to know if I should buy a GTX 480 or wait until the 18th and get a new 6000 series.

More about : 6000 series

a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2010 10:51:12 PM

Well the chart on the news article here looks pretty messed up, so unless we get some reliable data, there's no way to know until the 18th
Score
0
a c 358 U Graphics card
October 3, 2010 10:53:37 PM

Wait for reviews and benchmarks.

I'm not expecting much improvement over the HD 5xxx series. 10% - 15% improvement perhaps? But that's just my guess.
Score
0
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2010 11:25:56 PM

Hard to say at this point. All I really can guess is that the new cards will be a decent improvement over the 5xxx cards, otherwise why waste the money to switch over production? And who knows, perhaps NVidia will have some new cards out around then too. So if you can wait a couple weeks, I'd recommend it, even if all it does is reduce prices a little.
Score
0
a c 376 U Graphics card
October 3, 2010 11:39:02 PM

jaguarskx said:
I'm not expecting much improvement over the HD 5xxx series. 10% - 15% improvement perhaps? But that's just my guess.

A really bad guess. They wouldn't bother with a new series unless the improvement is at least double that.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2010 11:46:44 PM

jyjjy said:
A really bad guess. They wouldn't bother with a new series unless the improvement is at least double that.

Unless they improved CFX performance by a huge margin and are pushing dual-GPU cards. Unlikely but possible.

The baseline would be it would be at least be on par with the 480 while having better performance/watt than the 5870 and added features.

If performance is really worse or only 15% better than the HD5000s without offering some eye-catching features (like 100%+ crossfire scaling), AMD/ATI would've rather done a respin of Evergreen, clock it higher and call it a day.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 4, 2010 12:20:37 PM

My guess is the pricing will be more important than the performance, if its good Nvidia could be in serious trouble. But a guess is exactly that only a guess.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 4, 2010 3:59:43 PM

its an odd point in the market. I'm rready for my new build, have money saved but am waiting not only to see benches on sandy bridge/ bulldozer but also see how the 6k series stacks up to the 5k series/ nvidia 400 series. on the 6k series there isn't a huge wait by the end of the month benchmarks should be everywhere provided the mid october release date turns out to be real
Score
0
October 4, 2010 5:32:36 PM

When is Sandy Bridge/ Bulldozer expected to come out?
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 4, 2010 5:47:31 PM

12/2010, BD = fall of 2011. May or may not be seen earlier with some form of wood screws :) 
Score
0
a c 598 U Graphics card
October 4, 2010 6:00:49 PM

It appears the first releases of the AMD 6xxx series will be mid-range cards, so they will not be comparable to the Nvidia GTX480's. When AMD will release their high-end cards is anyone's guess.
Score
0
October 5, 2010 1:32:47 AM

Quote:
Nvidia bothered to do that when they released Gf 9000 which offered virtually no improvement over Gf 8000.

Thats Nvidia
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 1:39:10 AM

Didn't that (9800GTX) also include a die shrink and other cost cutting improvements? Similar to 2900XT to 3870.
Score
0
a c 173 U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 1:41:02 AM

I can care less and not all caught up in all the hype unlike some, to much fap fap fap from the fanboys again. 10-15% is a good guess maybe 20% tops.
Score
0
a c 172 U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 1:44:55 AM

wait until the cards get released unless you currently have a computer that you are unable to game with. A gtx 480 will be a good card for a long time to come, but you will end up with a high power bill. The ati 6000 series look like they will be more efficient and more powerful.
Score
0
a c 376 U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 3:58:36 AM

nforce4max said:
I can care less and not all caught up in all the hype unlike some, to much fap fap fap from the fanboys again. 10-15% is a good guess maybe 20% tops.

The guy with nforce in his screen name calling others fanboys while giving a lowball estimate of ATIs next series as "tops."
Classic.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 4:43:12 AM

According to spec sheets, the higher transistor count and faster memory and clock speed puts the 6770 in the range of the 5850 or 5870. Which is almost twice the power. According to the spec sheets at least.
Score
0
October 5, 2010 5:52:47 AM

exactly 1.415926535897932384626433832795028841971693993751058209749445923078164062862089986280348253421170679 times better I know as I am a magnet :whistle: 














Seriously though no one knows yet that isn't under embargo wait till they are released then check the benchmarks.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 2:10:15 PM

ggsxt said:
I need to know if I should buy a GTX 480 or wait until the 18th and get a new 6000 series.

Right now, we know that the 6000 series is supposed to increase tessellation performance and it'll be at par with the current Nviida fermis.For any more information, wait for release, which is just two weeks away.
Score
0
a c 598 U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 2:56:32 PM

The release is just two weeks away, but mass availability won't be until November.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 3:00:49 PM

Well the 6870 beats the 5850 in performance...at least that's what the charts say :D erp:
I would wait for actual benchmarks for when it releases.
Score
0
a c 598 U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 3:15:31 PM

Here is the question I have. Why are they debuting the 6000 series with only their mid-range cards? Based on the chart that shows the 6870 is only comparable to the 5850 in performance, there must be a flagship model they plan to release later. In the past, a new graphics card series has always debuted with the fastest, most expensive flagship version, and the mid-range cards followed later.

I'm also wondering if that is the reason for the change in number/naming scheme. A lot of people think the 6870 is going to be the fastest card on the market. It isn't, but the name change is creating some hype for people who are expecting it to be the new Nvidia-killer. After hearing reports about problems with the AMD chip manufacturing process, it might make sense to sow some confusion. That also would explain the availability of mid-range cards, instead of high-end. If you add it all up, for me, it only raises more questions.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 3:19:32 PM

not necessarily true matto the hd5xxx series also debuted with the midrange cards (5770) . probably to sell the newer ones at a bit of a premium to early adopters then later as the months go on releas the upper and lower end cards and leveling down the new mid range cards into midrange pricing
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 3:55:21 PM

Just wait and not worry about you not having to wait. Whats a few weeks of waiting to know you made the right choice.
Score
0
a c 598 U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 4:59:04 PM

g00fysmiley said:
not necessarily true matto the hd5xxx series also debuted with the midrange cards (5770) . probably to sell the newer ones at a bit of a premium to early adopters then later as the months go on releas the upper and lower end cards and leveling down the new mid range cards into midrange pricing

Any thoughts about the name change though? I mean one would naturally assume that the 6870 is the logical replacement for the 5870, as the top single GPU card. The change in naming creates a perception and 'hype', that just wouldn't be there if everyone understood we were only talking about a mid-range GTX460 competitor. October would be one big 'yawn' in terms of video card expectations if this were really apparent.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 5:19:50 PM

probably just marketing on the numbers changing, peopel will associate the 6800 series with the 5800 series and think its much cheaper and go with the new cards. i found the 5970 odd that in the past most dual gpu cars would be just say "dual" then the gpu so 5970 would be a dual 5870 maybe they are going back to this nomenclature and so they figure the 6900 being the closest to the 7k numebr would be seen as the pinacle of the series and numbered them accordingly...

that is of coarse speculation no clue if thats how it'll play out or thier reasoning just the best i can figure
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 5:22:42 PM

That was hard for me to understand g00fy...
So, you're saying that AMD is advertising as it's nearly as cheap as a 5850 with the performance that's better than a 5870?
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 5:24:17 PM

g00fysmiley said:
not necessarily true matto the hd5xxx series also debuted with the midrange cards (5770) . probably to sell the newer ones at a bit of a premium to early adopters then later as the months go on releas the upper and lower end cards and leveling down the new mid range cards into midrange pricing


No it did not, the 5870 was first, a week later the 5850.
Heres dates and links to reviews here at TH
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/Components,1/Graphi...

Sept 23 for the 5870, 0ct 13 for the 5770/5750
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 5:31:58 PM

ahh so i was wrong, i had thought the 57xx were the first, mayeb they were just the first benches on the 5xxx series i came across :D  i am proven worng, its happened before, it will happen again. i tip my hat to mr. notty

and dalta sorry english second language so i'm bad at it sometimes. from the rumors and whats out there it appears amd/ati have decided to up the numbers on thier midrange series (have found nothing confirming this but somebody here might link an official stance on it) so the 5770 would be equivilant in the 6 series as a 6870, a 56xx would be a 67xx the 58xx would be following as a 69xx so trying to think if they do a dual chip what they will call it. as stated though thats just speculation on my part and as i see it, could be wrong
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 5:38:27 PM

In the past manufacturers put out their top cards first sot that it makes their product look so much better then the previous generations. If you put out a mid level card then you won't look much better then your competitor and then when you put out the high level people will have the feeling that it can't be better becasue the original card wasn't better.
Score
0
a c 598 U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 5:54:39 PM

The psychology of marketing is really very interesting. My take is that they usually release the top flagship model to show off the high-end performance, which usually makes it the "fastest card on the planet" at the time. But the prices are so high, only a few can afford one. So the rest of us begin craving one, anticipating the release of a lower priced model, and counting the days until we can buy one. When it happens, bam!, off we go to the Egg to purchase one.
Score
0
a c 376 U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 6:00:05 PM

Has the change in the numbering scheme even been confirmed? I took at as reliable as all the other rumors.
Score
0
a c 598 U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 6:11:29 PM

The numbering scheme is on so many charts and press reports. I have to assume that we will be seeing the announcement of a 6870 on October 19th that will be a pretty good card, but not necessarily the best in the series.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 8:15:59 PM

Press reports? I didn't think anything was officially announced. All I've seen so far are poor fakes (and some good ones) that get posted on reputable sites and taken as fact. What is true? I sure don't know - AMD and the people under NDA enjoy toying with us.
Score
0
a c 376 U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 8:25:35 PM

I don't remember any kind of consistency in the numbering scheme for the leaks/rumors/fakes.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 9:22:35 PM

My guess is 25-35% for normal performance, and pretty much doubling in tess/DX11 performance, or some very impressive improvement. Heres some math for everybody. Cypress 5870 stocks at 4.8 GHz effective. The Gigabyte Super OC is at 5 GHz. An increase of 5%. The core clock is increased 12%. So lets say overall clock speed increase 8.5% Here:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3732/overclocked-our-cust...

On average, it beats the stock 5870 by about 5-15%, so lets just call it 10% for the sake of simple math. 8% increase in overall clock rate, 10% increase in performance, so it seems you sometimes get more than you put in. Anyway, rumors say Cayman is 6.4 GHz effective, or something to that effect, with no change in core clock. 33% increase in effective memory clock speed, none for core, so call it 17% increase overall clock speed. Part 2. shaders, ROP, TMU, are all tied together when looking at a stat sheet. Take 5850 vs 5870 for example. Everything is in proportion. In any event, we know that 5850 is 725/1000. 20% loss in memory clock, 17% loss in core clock, so lets say 18.5 lower overall clock speed. However, it only loses 15% performance. Now, it has 1440 shaders, and everything that goes along with that, for only an 11% loss in "stuff" but ill just say shaders. Put the 2 together, it happens to avg out to around 15%, but that might just be coincidence. Anyway, moving on. The "6770" is suppose to have 1280 shaders, and land somewhere in between a 5850 and 5870. If they can get 1280 shaders to equal, say 1500 shaders, then they have achieved each shader being 17% more powerful/efficient in a rudimentary way of putting it. If the 6870 is suppose to have 1920 shaders, then it should be something like Cypress with 2250 shaders. A 40% increase. Along with all the corresponding TMU, and so on. So we have a 17% overall clock increase. Since we had a 8% increase with 10% performance, id assume that 17% clock gain would equate to 20% from those numbers. With an increase of 40% for actual power, smash the 2 together, and we arrive at around 30%. Granted, this is no where near perfect. ROP isnt always in step with other changes, core clock does more than memory clock generally, and shader count isnt everything to name a few things wrong. But even so, id say 30% is definitely around what we will see.
Score
0
a c 173 U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 9:28:07 PM

ares1214 said:
My guess is 25-35% for normal performance, and pretty much doubling in tess/DX11 performance, or some very impressive improvement. Heres some math for everybody. Cypress 5870 stocks at 4.8 GHz effective. The Gigabyte Super OC is at 5 GHz. An increase of 5%. The core clock is increased 12%. So lets say overall clock speed increase 8.5% Here:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3732/overclocked-our-cust...

On average, it beats the stock 5870 by about 5-15%, so lets just call it 10% for the sake of simple math. 8% increase in overall clock rate, 10% increase in performance, so it seems you sometimes get more than you put in. Anyway, rumors say Cayman is 6.4 GHz effective, or something to that effect, with no change in core clock. 33% increase in effective memory clock speed, none for core, so call it 17% increase overall clock speed. Part 2. shaders, ROP, TMU, are all tied together when looking at a stat sheet. Take 5850 vs 5870 for example. Everything is in proportion. In any event, we know that 5850 is 725/1000. 20% loss in memory clock, 17% loss in core clock, so lets say 18.5 lower overall clock speed. However, it only loses 15% performance. Now, it has 1440 shaders, and everything that goes along with that, for only an 11% loss in "stuff" but ill just say shaders. Put the 2 together, it happens to avg out to around 15%, but that might just be coincidence. Anyway, moving on. The "6770" is suppose to have 1280 shaders, and land somewhere in between a 5850 and 5870. If they can get 1280 shaders to equal, say 1500 shaders, then they have achieved each shader being 17% more powerful/efficient in a rudimentary way of putting it. If the 6870 is suppose to have 1920 shaders, then it should be something like Cypress with 2250 shaders. A 40% increase. Along with all the corresponding TMU, and so on. So we have a 17% overall clock increase. Since we had a 8% increase with 10% performance, id assume that 17% clock gain would equate to 20% from those numbers. With an increase of 40% for actual power, smash the 2 together, and we arrive at around 30%. Granted, this is no where near perfect. ROP isnt always in step with other changes, core clock does more than memory clock generally, and shader count isnt everything to name a few things wrong. But even so, id say 30% is definitely around what we will see.



Your post is nothing more than assumptions and wishful thinking. I want hard facts and no bull ***. I wish that mouse would close these ridiculous threads. If you want to continue this crap then go to Semiaccurate. :pfff: 
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 9:54:30 PM

Rumors they are, generated in my head they are not. Ever considered im using what i have to try to predict what might happen, no where in there did i say those are all 100% accurate? All we have right now is rumors, anybody can wait until release to guess performance when its right in front of them. My post was assumptions, but was not wishful thinking. I dont really care what happens with the release, but do you honestly think they would release it with only a 10-20% increase? Which by the way would only tie it, maybe a little above a 480? No! They have time on their side and would postpone the release date. If you want hard facts, wait 2 weeks, this is a SPECULATIVE THREAD, and therefore nobody is necessarily wrong, although 10-20% is extremely low, too low.
Score
0
a c 598 U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 11:07:27 PM

I know you guys hate rumors, and unsubstantiated facts, but this article pretty much spells it out. They address the naming scheme, and confirm that the cards that are going to be announced (not released until November) are primarily designed to compete with the GTX460. They are mid-range cards (according to this pretty thorough looking report):
http://www.nordichardware.com/news/71-graphics/41251-am...
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 5, 2010 11:29:04 PM

The chart is BS, and therefore i dont really believe the rest of it as all they know is the same rumors as us.
Score
0
a c 271 U Graphics card
October 6, 2010 8:58:23 AM

nforce4max said:
Your post is nothing more than assumptions and wishful thinking. I want hard facts and no bull ***. I wish that mouse would close these ridiculous threads. If you want to continue this crap then go to Semiaccurate. :pfff: 

I would do but there has been some complaints about merging or deleting these threads, so I'll leave it to those who have complained to do something.
Score
0
a c 271 U Graphics card
October 6, 2010 9:58:10 AM

Quote:
MM , are u gonna merge this thread too?
=)

Nah, I'm going to leave it up to TGGA or JDJ to sort out this and all the other 6xxx threads that are going to be cropping up. That is what is wanted isn't it?
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 6, 2010 12:48:44 PM

all th complaints about rumors and speculation. i think its fun to read abot the benches people are listing s leaked, some are poorly done fakes some look like they could be legit and are within reason of what the 6xxx series might be. if you don't like reading about speculation and researching possible benches when don't read the thread, thanks for leaving it open mm i fo rone am kept entertained by these :D 
Score
0
a c 271 U Graphics card
October 6, 2010 12:52:52 PM

g00fysmiley said:
all th complaints about rumors and speculation. i think its fun to read abot the benches people are listing s leaked, some are poorly done fakes some look like they could be legit and are within reason of what the 6xxx series might be. if you don't like reading about speculation and researching possible benches when don't read the thread, thanks for leaving it open mm i fo rone am kept entertained by these :D 

The complaints I alluded to were about the merging of threads to try and keep everything in one place, apparently that's bad and a "train wreck".
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 6, 2010 12:57:35 PM

ah yea. i didn't see a problem with thta part, oh btw a suggestion if you read it... donno where i'd send it, but this is the graphics and display section but there is no section to specifically discuss monitors... any chance that might happen ever?
Score
0
a c 271 U Graphics card
October 6, 2010 1:06:52 PM

g00fysmiley said:
ah yea. i didn't see a problem with thta part, oh btw a suggestion if you read it... donno where i'd send it, but this is the graphics and display section but there is no section to specifically discuss monitors... any chance that might happen ever?

There already is such a section.
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/forum-3-10.html
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 6, 2010 1:07:59 PM

Monitor = Display?
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 6, 2010 1:11:34 PM

doh.. i'm blind, i didn't look down far enough thanks for pointing that out, now to go read about monitors thanks! and um to stay on topic ish umm... how these resolutions withh stack up in the 6xxx series or somethign like that >_<
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
October 6, 2010 1:32:06 PM

I heard they were capping the 6xxx at 1080p to cut down on costs since so few use higher resolutions :ange: 
Score
0
!