Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

AMD Entry Level Radeon HD 7790 Revealed

Tags:
  • Build Your Own
  • Graphics Cards
Last response: in News comments
Share
March 11, 2013 12:45:29 PM

22nm? saweet! Is lower power consumption something we can assume?
Score
15
a b U Graphics card
March 11, 2013 12:46:16 PM

I would assume poor yeilds again.
First time ever to release the low level cards first.
Score
-10
Related resources
a c 81 U Graphics card
March 11, 2013 12:46:23 PM

shame on you amd for confusing customers with your sku-ing. if it's a 22nm gcn 2.0 card, it belongs to a seperate series.
no, rebadging it when new lineup comes out doesn't make it any better. :( 
Score
2
March 11, 2013 12:49:07 PM

madjimms22nm? saweet! Is lower power consumption something we can assume?

Looking at the Wiki page comparing AMD graphics cards I see that even the 8XXX series is only 28nm.

What gives?
Score
17
a c 135 U Graphics card
March 11, 2013 12:49:50 PM

It will be interesting to see how it places itself pricing wise. Even with the article suggesting 118 you can get at the lowest I'm seeing now 125 for 7850 in £.
Score
10
a c 87 U Graphics card
March 11, 2013 12:51:03 PM

That memory would have to be clocked pretty high to keep performance only 10% lower than the 7850. It's probably running at 1.5GHz, if not higher.
Score
-4
a c 87 U Graphics card
March 11, 2013 12:52:23 PM

Rick_CriswellI would assume poor yeilds again.First time ever to release the low level cards first.


That's possible, but even if true, I highly doubt that poor yields are the only reason for not releasing high end cards yet. AMD has little reason to release high-end cards in a time where they'd be difficult to really stress and most gamers who'd consider buying them would probably wait until there's more reason to upgrade. It'd take more sense to release them later when they'll be in greater demand and that gives AMD more time for improvement too.

It most certainly wouldn't be the first time that AMD introduced lower end cards first.
Score
15
a b U Graphics card
March 11, 2013 12:56:05 PM

Rick_CriswellI would assume poor yeilds again.First time ever to release the low level cards first.

They been doing that for a while, new architecture on lower end first before higher end.
Score
10
a b U Graphics card
March 11, 2013 12:56:28 PM

It's the 4770 all over again! That's actually a good thing!

Cheers!
Score
23
March 11, 2013 12:59:10 PM

If it is 22nm, then this card will play the same role as the Radeon 4770- a run on a new process to learn from and work out the kinks for the later 8000 series cards.
Score
15
March 11, 2013 1:05:44 PM

That's got to be 28nm, unless Intel is fabbing it (which ain't gonna happen, otherwise we would have heard of it).
Score
2
Anonymous
March 11, 2013 1:05:59 PM

Because those on welfare need GPUs too...
Score
-16
March 11, 2013 1:10:57 PM

how does the AMD graphics card naming work? I know with NVidia the 600 series is the latest and the 690 is the most powerful but amd confuses the hell outa me
Score
-5
a b U Graphics card
March 11, 2013 1:12:42 PM

Jarred IbarraIf it is 22nm, then this card will play the same role as the Radeon 4770- a run on a new process to learn from and work out the kinks for the later 8000 series cards.


If this is the case then this could explain them pushing back the release date of the 8000 series.
Score
4
a c 87 U Graphics card
March 11, 2013 1:26:02 PM

heero yuyhow does the AMD graphics card naming work? I know with NVidia the 600 series is the latest and the 690 is the most powerful but amd confuses the hell outa me


Nvidia is no less guilty of confusing things than AMD. For example, several of their low end 600 series cards have Fermi GPUs (from the GTX 400 and 500 series) and even more confusing, some of them are die-shrunk Fermi.

Nvidia's GTX 650 is literally just a GT 640 with GDDR5 memory and a higher GPU frequency. The GT 650M is a GT 640. the GTX 660M is a GTX 650. There are three different types of OEM GT 640 cards, at least one of which is a Fermi model desptie having the exact same name as the Kepler models and there are similar situations with some of their higher end cards.

Point is that both AMD and Nvidia do these tricks. A famous example is how many times Nvidia reused their G92 GPU. A similar example for AMD could include their Redwood GPU.
Score
15
March 11, 2013 1:27:05 PM

soldier2013Because those on welfare need GPUs too...


I lol'd
Score
-7
a b U Graphics card
March 11, 2013 1:27:53 PM

These are not the cards you're looking for /waves hand.
Score
1
March 11, 2013 1:31:39 PM

22nm? That'd be an shocker. I didn't think we would see them till next year. This is just going to give us a taste of the real dish.

de5_Royshame on you amd for confusing customers with your sku-ing. if it's a 22nm gcn 2.0 card, it belongs to a seperate series.no, rebadging it when new lineup comes out doesn't make it any better.


Your actually getting an better product and you _itch.
Score
14
March 11, 2013 1:31:40 PM

heero yuyhow does the AMD graphics card naming work? I know with NVidia the 600 series is the latest and the 690 is the most powerful but amd confuses the hell outa me


AMD works exactly the same as nvidia, higher number indicates more powerful card in each respective series. So 7000 series and 7980 is the most powerful single chip card. Nvidia is in fact more confusing since they add in "ti" and other suffixes that mean its a step up from that specific model but not as good as the next one up. Aka 650
Score
11
March 11, 2013 1:34:43 PM

heero yuyhow does the AMD graphics card naming work? I know with NVidia the 600 series is the latest and the 690 is the most powerful but amd confuses the hell outa me


bigger numbers are better. same as Nvidia. it's just there are more numbers...

anyways, the first number "_XXX" is the number of the series. the second number "X_XX" is the subseries (this generally depicts the GPU inside. for example, the 7970 and 7950 have tahiti GPU's, the 7870 and 7850 are on pitcairn, and the lower cards are based on the cape verde processor. this card, as mentioned, is based on a new GPU, which is on GCN 2.0 - probably an early run to see real-world performance specs and ready drivers for higher end cards) the third number "XX_X" tells you which cards are in what order in the subseries (7750 is below 7770, 7850 is below 7870, 7950 is below 7970, so on so forth) the "9" digit at the end is reserved for a dual-gpu card (6990, third party 7990s)

a few exceptions to the rules I put out above: the 7870 XT should really be a 7930, as per naming rules. (it's better than the 7870, and runs on the tahiti core, but it's below the 7930)

basically, bigger numbers are better. the first number denotes the series, the second number denotes performance range (7 being an entry-level card, 8 being mid-range, 9 being enthusiast or high-end) and the third number tells you the order in that performance range.

make sense?
Score
7
a c 87 U Graphics card
March 11, 2013 1:35:50 PM

tipooThat's got to be 28nm, unless Intel is fabbing it (which ain't gonna happen, otherwise we would have heard of it).


Intel is not the only company with a 22nm process technology. I agree that if these really are 22nm, it's surprising, but it is possible and it most certainly isn't necessarily Intel who made the GPUs if that's true.
Score
0
March 11, 2013 1:38:07 PM

22nm - for real? that would be sweet
Score
6
a c 87 U Graphics card
March 11, 2013 1:44:31 PM

blazorthonThat memory would have to be clocked pretty high to keep performance only 10% lower than the 7850. It's probably running at 1.5GHz, if not higher.


-3 and counting... Why the hate on speculation for the memory frequency?
Score
0
March 11, 2013 1:46:39 PM

Calm down guys (and gals?). If you check the source, it says it's based on the 28nm Bonaire, not 22nm. Also, the author of the Guru3D source article was merely speculating on the amount of RAM and the memory interface, and the author of this Tom's article is misrepresenting that speculation as fact.

So, unless the author knows something his sources don't, it's 28nm with an unknown amount of RAM and an unknown memory interface.
Score
10
March 11, 2013 2:06:35 PM

blazorthon-3 and counting... Why the hate on speculation for the memory frequency?

That'd be because there are more trolls around than people actually interested in the article.

In any case, "GNC"?
Score
1
a b U Graphics card
March 11, 2013 2:13:54 PM

It would have been nice if they had announced this earlier, but if it's 22nm and just below the 7850, this GPU is a good deal. This would OC right past the 7850.
Score
2
a c 87 U Graphics card
March 11, 2013 2:17:52 PM

obsama1It would have been nice if they had announced this earlier, but if it's 22nm and just below the 7850, this GPU is a good deal. This would OC right past the 7850.


I'd bet on the 7850 winning in an OC versus OC performance comparison if these specs are true. The 128 bit memory bus will greatly limit this card's capability whereas the 7850 has a much less hindering memory bus to let it's GPU stretch more. The 7850's much lower starting frequency is also potentially an advantage since it should, at least in theory, have much more headroom on the GPU frequency in addition to its memory advantage.
Score
2
March 11, 2013 2:28:25 PM

heero yuyhow does the AMD graphics card naming work? I know with NVidia the 600 series is the latest and the 690 is the most powerful but amd confuses the hell outa me

It's not complicated. First number is series, second and third number are used to denote strength of card (and second number always has higher "importance" than third number). For example:

7950 > 7850 because first 9 > 8
7870 > 7850 because second 7 > 5
7850 > 7790 because first 8 > 7

When you're comparing between series (e.g. 7850 and 6970) it's not so intuitive.
Score
5
March 11, 2013 2:29:50 PM

sublime2k...

Meant to write second, third, second.
Score
-1
March 11, 2013 2:37:55 PM

Well im a very casual gamer, but lately i have wanted more graphics muscle, so having an old 5750 VaporX i will surely update to this if the prices is good here in Mexico (HD 7850 cost as much as a HD 7950 everywhere else) and then overclocked a bit
Score
1
March 11, 2013 2:41:45 PM

But if it is low power why not single slot? It will be good to have powerfull card for small case...
Score
1
March 11, 2013 2:58:45 PM

10% slower than a 7850. So it's a useless sku, in other words. There wasn't enough space between the 7770 and 7850 to insert anything meaningful.

Score
-4
a b U Graphics card
March 11, 2013 2:59:46 PM

blazorthonNvidia is no less guilty of confusing things than AMD. For example, several of their low end 600 series cards have Fermi GPUs (from the GTX 400 and 500 series) and even more confusing, some of them are die-shrunk Fermi.Nvidia's GTX 650 is literally just a GT 640 with GDDR5 memory and a higher GPU frequency. The GT 650M is a GT 640. the GTX 660M is a GTX 650. There are three different types of OEM GT 640 cards, at least one of which is a Fermi model desptie having the exact same name as the Kepler models and there are similar situations with some of their higher end cards.Point is that both AMD and Nvidia do these tricks. A famous example is how many times Nvidia reused their G92 GPU. A similar example for AMD could include their Redwood GPU.

The GT640 comes in 4 variants, 1 retail and 3 OEM....there are 3 GT640's based on Kepler and 1 GT640 based on Fermi. The retail GT640 is a Kepler card...the Fermi based GT640 is an OEM card. There's also a GT645 that's Fermi based.
Score
0
March 11, 2013 3:00:04 PM

10% slower than a 7850 means this is a really worthless sku. There wasn't enough space between the 7770 and 7850 to insert anything.
Score
-5
a b U Graphics card
March 11, 2013 3:14:44 PM

Any ideas as to when actual stocks of these cards would come out to the market?
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
March 11, 2013 3:21:13 PM

wethrowpie10% slower than a 7850 means this is a really worthless sku. There wasn't enough space between the 7770 and 7850 to insert anything.
There is actually some gap at that point. AMD first brought up 7870XT to go up against GTX 660/TI better and now this card against GTX 650TI. Seems they want to cover any and all corners
Score
4
March 11, 2013 3:31:17 PM

madjimms22nm? saweet! Is lower power consumption something we can assume?

Now if they could only get the same company to make their CPU's
Score
-1
March 11, 2013 4:05:14 PM

if it is 22nm whos gonna make them?
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
March 11, 2013 4:28:29 PM

Sweet!! Hopefully Sapphire or XFX will make a low profile version for use in mITX builds.
Score
1
March 11, 2013 4:36:02 PM

Does this imply that the new 8000 series will also be 22nm chips?
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
March 11, 2013 4:48:29 PM

tomfreakif it is 22nm whos gonna make them?

I would hope TSMC, UMC and Global Foundries (the three largest foundries-for-hire) are all working on bringing 22nm into production.

They are all nearly three years behind Intel at this point, they really need to step up a bit.
Score
0
March 11, 2013 6:08:10 PM

heero yuyhow does the AMD graphics card naming work? I know with NVidia the 600 series is the latest and the 690 is the most powerful but amd confuses the hell outa me


amd X6X0 and below are non gaming cards, sure you can game on them, and they are a step up from intergrated, but not gameing with any quality, more or less the low end

amd X7X0 was the mid range card for the 5000 series, im not sure where they fall now, but because a X770 card can play most games close to max at 1920x1080 or 1920x1200 i call it a mid range.

amd X8X0 cards are more powerful than the X7X0 cards (this 7790 may overclock higher than the 7850 at stock so its an exception) and are the cards you want to get if you demand no reduced details.

amd X9X0 were the dual card ones back with the 4XXX and i believe the 5XXX cards, but they got pushed back to the high end cards at X950 and X970, these cards are for if you want to max a game at 1920x1080 or 1920x1200 and still get over 60fps.

now the X990 card is the dual gpu single card, its basicly amds 690.

for single gpu the 680 is matched with the 7970 (currently)
for dual gpu the 690 is matched with the 7990

personally i find amds nameing solution to be FAR better than nvidias who decided to release multipul cards with the same number, but put a few letters at the end. amd gives you an easy number that you can compare it to find out where it ranks, and with the 7XXX cards they added a badge the "ghz edition" which tells you the the card goes above the standard card in the same number bracket. while nvidia puts out a card that has a higher number, but the letters are a lower modifier, to make people who don't look into the cards think its a better one, but really its a scaled down version.

basically what i'm saying is amd is more forward with their names than nvidia.
Score
0
a c 87 U Graphics card
March 11, 2013 6:42:18 PM

wethrowpie said:
10% slower than a 7850 means this is a really worthless sku. There wasn't enough space between the 7770 and 7850 to insert anything.


The gap between the 7770 and the 7850 is huge. There's enough space for two cards, let alone just one.
Score
1
March 11, 2013 6:42:44 PM

Quote:
For an explanation of AMD's somewhat confusing naming conventions, refer to

Excuse me, what?
Their naming system is not confusing at all.
HD(abcd), where:
a= generation or series
b= performance range, 7 entry, 8 mid, 9 high.
c= performance range sublevel, 5 marks standard, 7 marks higher end
d = always 0
Maybe comparing generation to generation is a bit harder.
Anyway, this card breaks that convention, but its the only case in a long way, since the HD4770. Which, as said above may be a good thing, working now a few issues to implement early fixes to the new 8000 series.

@news: well it might be a great thing, lowering the manufacturing process never hurts, and neither does bridging gaps
Score
1
a c 87 U Graphics card
March 11, 2013 6:54:53 PM

alidan said:


amd X6X0 and below are non gaming cards, sure you can game on them, and they are a step up from intergrated, but not gameing with any quality, more or less the low end

amd X7X0 was the mid range card for the 5000 series, im not sure where they fall now, but because a X770 card can play most games close to max at 1920x1080 or 1920x1200 i call it a mid range.

amd X8X0 cards are more powerful than the X7X0 cards (this 7790 may overclock higher than the 7850 at stock so its an exception) and are the cards you want to get if you demand no reduced details.

amd X9X0 were the dual card ones back with the 4XXX and i believe the 5XXX cards, but they got pushed back to the high end cards at X950 and X970, these cards are for if you want to max a game at 1920x1080 or 1920x1200 and still get over 60fps.

now the X990 card is the dual gpu single card, its basicly amds 690.

for single gpu the 680 is matched with the 7970 (currently)
for dual gpu the 690 is matched with the 7990

personally i find amds nameing solution to be FAR better than nvidias who decided to release multipul cards with the same number, but put a few letters at the end. amd gives you an easy number that you can compare it to find out where it ranks, and with the 7XXX cards they added a badge the "ghz edition" which tells you the the card goes above the standard card in the same number bracket. while nvidia puts out a card that has a higher number, but the letters are a lower modifier, to make people who don't look into the cards think its a better one, but really its a scaled down version.

basically what i'm saying is amd is more forward with their names than nvidia.


4xxx series didn't have any 49xx cards. The dual GPU cards were the 48xx cards with an X2 after them (IE 4870X2 was two Radeon 4870s on a single card).

The 5xxx series did use 59xx for dual-GPU cards with the 5970 being a dual-GPU card and that was changed to the x990 with the 6000 series and 7000 series while the other x9xx cards in the 6000 and 7000 series are the high-end single GPU cards, but 4000 series and earlier just had X2s instead of x9xx cards to denote dual-GPU cards.

6000 basically pushed things forward a number with their 6000 series compared to the 5000 series. The 58xx cards were top single GPU cards while 69xx were top single GPU cards, 57xx was mid-ranged single GPU cards while 68xx were top single GPU cards, and 67xx was a re-brand of 57xx, arguably a lower mid-range while 77xx is now reduced to upper entry-level.

I also agree that I find AMD's naming scheme a little more strait-forward than Nvidia's naming scheme, at least since they went from their 8000 series to the 200 series and stuck with that, although both AMD and Nvidia keep changing where the cards are for each generation lately, so they can both be confusing if you're not already experienced with how the cards of each generation compare to others.

However, I wouldn't call the 7790 an exception to anything. It'll still place between the 7770 and the 7850 and at least based on its specifications, it seems like it would not be able to compete with the 7850 in an OC versus OC comparison. The memory, like with the 660 Ti versus the 670 and 7950, looks like it'll hold it back too much. It'll probably be more along the lines of the GTX 650 Ti which is in an even more similar situation with what seems to be a similarly performing GPU and a similar memory interface.
Score
-1
March 11, 2013 7:05:47 PM

This just in, Apple announces the same card coming to Mac within 4 years with a clock rate of 75 MHz and 512mb of GDDR5 memory over a 64-bit interface, charging 5 times the current price and to be "superior" in every way because it'll be white with an Apple logo on it.
Score
-3
a c 87 U Graphics card
March 11, 2013 7:10:27 PM

tobalaz said:
This just in, Apple announces the same card coming to Mac within 4 years with a clock rate of 75 MHz and 512mb of GDDR5 memory over a 64-bit interface, charging 5 times the current price and to be "superior" in every way because it'll be white with an Apple logo on it.


If this is in reference to Apple's upcoming 7950, then it's only fair to say that their 7950 actually isn't nerfed in any way and is *only* about double the price that we pay for our 7950s. Sure, it's not the newer Boost version of the 7950, but it still has reference specs according to Tom's article on it.
Score
1
March 11, 2013 7:50:14 PM

InvalidErrorI would hope TSMC, UMC and Global Foundries (the three largest foundries-for-hire) are all working on bringing 22nm into production.They are all nearly three years behind Intel at this point, they really need to step up a bit.
dude, TSMC are using 20nm, not 22nm. UMC are small players that couldnt keep up with the mainstream GPU demand. I dont even think they have 22nm ready.

Global Foundries are just able to keep 32nm in volume, 28nm still rather new, 22nm is nowhere near production levels. If Global Foundries is ready for 22nm they probably use to make AMD APU than GPU.
Score
3
March 11, 2013 8:43:08 PM

i wonder where people got the idea of 22nm when the article clearly mentions 28nm
Score
0
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!