Tuesday, December 4th 2012

Probable Radeon HD 8000 Series GPU Specifications Surface

AMD's Radeon HD 8000 "Sea Islands" family of GPUs may arrive some time in Q2-2013, but they won't arrive without a specifications overhaul. While NVIDIA is counting on performance enhancements to come out of higher clock speeds on existing silicon, while maintaining current (or lower) power-draw, with its "Enhanced Kepler" family of GPUs that will include the "GK110" juggernaut, AMD is counting on physically bigger chips with more components. AMD could step up transistor counts of its chips by as much as 20 percent, on existing 28 nm process.

According to a report, the biggest chip from AMD's fold could pack 5.1 billion transistors, amounting to 2560 stream processors, and an updated raster processing engine, with 48 ROPs ("Tahiti" has 32). While the Radeon HD 8970 maxes out the chip's capabilities, the HD 8950 could feature 256 fewer stream processors, at 2304. It could also go light on the clock speeds. AMD's performance-segment chip, codenamed "Sun" could see a similar stream processor increase to 1792, with the Radeon HD 8870 maxing it out, and HD 8850 featuring 1536. It maintains the memory bus width and raster engine layout of its predecessor.

AMD's mainstream chip, codenamed "Oland," which succeeds "Cape Verde," could address the problem of memory bandwidth, which is giving competing NVIDIA GPUs an upper hand in its segment. It could feature 896 stream processors, and a wider 192-bit GDDR5 memory interface. The Radeon HD 8770 maxes its specifications out, while the Radeon HD 8750 features a slimmer 128-bit memory interface, and 768 stream processors. The authenticity of this information can't be vouched for, but presents the only way in which AMD can end up with a competitive GPU lineup against NVIDIA, over 2013.Source: Hardware.info
Add your own comment

28 Comments on Probable Radeon HD 8000 Series GPU Specifications Surface

#1
v12dock
Interesting match against GK110 it seems to be a match against architecture scalability
Posted on Reply
#2
THE_EGG
Hmm the 8950 looks like it could quite easily match the 8970 providing it can be overclocked nicely.
Posted on Reply
#3
Delta6326
Can't wait its always my favourite time of the year when W1zz does hos reviews on new GPU's. Also these will be out around my bday :)
Posted on Reply
#4
EzioAs
Thanks for the great news. If the 8000 series is really what I've been hoping for, then I can't wait to get my hands on an HD8950. Coming from a GTX460 to an 8950 is probably the best jump in performance and performance per dollars I've been hoping for :). But let's not get carried away, there is still pricing. I'll almost never spend more than $350 for a video card :shadedshu
Posted on Reply
#6
Cortex
8950 could feature 212 fewer stream processors
You mean 256? 2560-2304=256.
Posted on Reply
#7
T4C Fantasy
CPU & GPU DB Maintainer
that chart lost credibility as soon as I saw 140 tmus for 8950
Posted on Reply
#8
TheGuruStud
The only way that AMD can remain competitive... :laugh:

Who are these jokers? :nutkick:
Posted on Reply
#9
DarkOCean
by: t4c fantasy
that chart lost credibility as soon as i saw 140 tmus for 8950
+1
and 16 rops with 192 bits for 8770 doesn't make much sense to me not with those low gpu clocks.
Bandwidth calculation for 8900 series its also way off.
Posted on Reply
#10
WaroDaBeast
♫♪ Oland... Oland, I behlieve ! Oland... to de dream... ♫


:D
Posted on Reply
#11
WarEagleAU
Bird of Prey
Agreed Guru. AMD is still competitive. Each company upends the other when they release new hardware. A shame AMD doesn't see how Nvidia does stuff and then emulate that to an extent. I think predictive branch and that shader clock really helps them out.
Posted on Reply
#12
hardcore_gamer
by: btarunr
According to a report, the biggest chip from AMD's fold could pack 5.1 billion transistors
This chip will be competing with GK110 that has 7.1 Billion transistors. It'll be hard for AMD to beat NVIDIA unless this chip is super efficient. Even if it matches GK110 in gaming performance, GK110 will be much faster in computing tasks.
Posted on Reply
#13
Zubasa
by: hardcore_gamer
This chip will be competing with GK110 that has 7.1 Billion transistors. It'll be hard for AMD to beat NVIDIA unless this chip is super efficient. Even if it matches GK110 in gaming performance, GK110 will be much faster in computing tasks.
It is evident in the GTX 680 that computing performance makes no difference for 99% of customers ;)
Since the main use for these cards is gaming.
Posted on Reply
#14
Prima.Vera
Are they going to be priced again in that ridiculous manner like when the 7xxx series was released??
Posted on Reply
#15
Zubasa
by: Prima.Vera
Are they going to be priced again in that ridiculous manner like when the 7xxx series was released??
If you look back, the 7970 was actually priced lower than the 7900GTX and X1900XTX.
Factor-in inflation the price actually is not as ridiculous as people makes them to be.
Posted on Reply
#16
avatar_raq
by: Zubasa
If you look back, the 7970 was actually priced lower than the 7900GTX and X1900XTX.
Factor-in inflation the price actually is not as ridiculous as people makes them to be.
Not if we compare them to the launch price of 5870/5850. AMD did a smart move to gain market share with aggressive pricing back then, but now they think they don't need such strategies anymore. The are wrong IMO.
Posted on Reply
#17
hardcore_gamer
by: Zubasa
It is evident in the GTX 680 that computing performance makes no difference for 99% of customers ;)
Since the main use for these cards is gaming.
GK104 was originally designed to be used in mainstream gaming cards. When 7970 didn't perform as nvidia speculated, they saw an opportunity to cut some costs. Since GK104 was good enough to beat 7970, nvidia released it as GTX 680 and delayed the real 680 (GK110).

Gaming is not the only market of these flagship GPUs. Computing also brings in significant revenue. Looking at these specs , I don't think 8970 can beat GK110 in computing.
Posted on Reply
#18
Zubasa
by: hardcore_gamer
GK104 was originally designed to be used in mainstream gaming cards. When 7970 didn't perform as nvidia speculated, they saw an opportunity to cut some costs. Since GK104 was good enough to beat 7970, nvidia released it as GTX 680 and delayed the real 680 (GK110).
The only problem for this theory is that the chip is named GK110 not GK100.
While the GTX680 is the GK104, going by nVidia's naming convention if GK110 is the original GTX680 it should be named GK100.
There is no evident of the GK100 ever existing, not even an engineering sample is shown.
Posted on Reply
#19
hardcore_gamer
by: Zubasa
The only problem for this theory is that the chip is named GK110 not GK100.
While the GTX680 is the GK104, going by nVidia's naming convention if GK110 is the original GTX680 it should be named GK100.
There is no evident of the GK100 ever existing, not even an engineering sample.
The point is if the spec bta reported is true, 8970 is too small to beat GK110 in both gaming and computing. Unless they come up with some ground-breaking innovation which is extremely unprobable atm considering the recent layoffs.
Posted on Reply
#20
T4C Fantasy
CPU & GPU DB Maintainer
by: hardcore_gamer
The point is if the spec bta reported is true, 8970 is too small to beat GK110 in both gaming and computing. Unless they come up with some ground-breaking innovation which is extremely unprobable atm considering the recent layoffs.
im not so sure NVidia will use GK110 for the 780, its possible of course but they will probably use the GK114, GK110 for server/workstation
Posted on Reply
#21
DarkOCean
by: T4C Fantasy
im not so sure NVidia will use GK110 for the 780, its possible of course but they will probably use the GK114, GK110 for server/workstation
Make sense.
Posted on Reply
#22
happita
by: avatar_raq
Not if we compare them to the launch price of 5870/5850. AMD did a smart move to gain market share with aggressive pricing back then, but now they think they don't need such strategies anymore. The are wrong IMO.
I agree. When the the HD 5xxx came out, I snatched my 5850 for $249. At the time, it was the 2nd most powerful chip from AMD next to the 5870, which sold for around $350-$400.

If I were to upgrade right now using that same $249 I spent before, I would only be upgrading to a 7850/7870. I think I'll wait until there is a sizeable jump in performance from my 5850. I will definitely need a card that will be able to handle Metro: Last Light when it comes out :D
Posted on Reply
#23
m1dg3t
by: hardcore_gamer
GK104 was originally designed to be used in mainstream gaming cards. When 7970 didn't perform as nvidia speculated, they saw an opportunity to cut some costs. Since GK104 was good enough to beat 7970, nvidia released it as GTX 680 and delayed the real 680 (GK110).

Gaming is not the only market of these flagship GPUs. Computing also brings in significant revenue. Looking at these specs , I don't think 8970 can beat GK110 in computing.
I see you are giving up on sciences and concentrating on being a comedian! :)

by: happita
I agree. When the the HD 5xxx came out, I snatched my 5850 for $249. At the time, it was the 2nd most powerful chip from AMD next to the 5870, which sold for around $350-$400.

If I were to upgrade right now using that same $249 I spent before, I would only be upgrading to a 7850/7870. I think I'll wait until there is a sizeable jump in performance from my 5850. I will definitely need a card that will be able to handle Metro: Last Light when it comes out :D
Picked my 5870 for just over $500, IIRC it was $540 all said and done. Picked my 7950 for $350. Double the performance and more for $150+ less. Wasn't a hard choice for me :o
Posted on Reply
#24
SonDa5
by: hardcore_gamer
GK104 was originally designed to be used in mainstream gaming cards. When 7970 didn't perform as nvidia speculated, they saw an opportunity to cut some costs. Since GK104 was good enough to beat 7970, nvidia released it as GTX 680 and delayed the real 680 (GK110).
Sounds like a myth to me.


Looking at the hardware at release the HD79XX series cards had alot more performance potential then the GK104 cards that NVIDIA released. Looking at the hardware the HD79XX cards are superior to GTX 6XX cards. I believe the only reason NVIDIA chose to increase the price of their inferior cards is for profit.


Right now AMD HD79XX cards are better than ever with mature drivers. Good drivers with superior hardware is why AMD HD79XX cards are better than NVIDIA GTX6XX cards.

No matter how good NVIDIA drivers get their hardware will alway cap ultimate performance while AMD has overhead to grow because of superior hardware.
Posted on Reply
#25
leopr
by: hardcore_gamer
GK104 was originally designed to be used in mainstream gaming cards. When 7970 didn't perform as nvidia speculated, they saw an opportunity to cut some costs. Since GK104 was good enough to beat 7970, nvidia released it as GTX 680 and delayed the real 680 (GK110).

Gaming is not the only market of these flagship GPUs. Computing also brings in significant revenue. Looking at these specs , I don't think 8970 can beat GK110 in computing.
They only released the GK104 because of the well known manufacture problems of TSMC (the yields weren't high enough), if NVIDIA could they would have sold the GK110 for a premium price (800-900 u$d like the GTX 690 or 8800 Ultra) without hurting the sells of the GK104.

In fact i believe the GK104 came after the 79x0 because they had to implement the Turbo Boost, clock for clock they couldn't compete with the 79x0 then and they can't compete now.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment