Monday, September 9th 2013

Next-Generation AMD Radeon Series Nomenclature Detailed

Since the very first DirectX 10-ready graphics cards by AMD, we've been used to the "Radeon HD xyz0" nomenclature, in which "x" denoted generation, "y" market segment, and "z" variant. That all is about to change with the company's Volcanic Islands GPU family, which will be unveiled (at least to the press), later this month. Using the same "x, y, z" variables as mentioned before, the new nomenclature could look like "Radeon Ry xz i" (where the new variable "i" could denote special features).

An example of this new nomenclature could be, say, Radeon R9 280 X, where "9" denotes the high-end market segment, currently held by Radeon HD 7900 series, "2" indicating generation, and "80" denoting variant. "XT" (full-spec) chips could get the "80" marking, and "Pro" (partial-spec) chips could get the "60" or "70" marking, but it isn't fixed, and could even be "50" and "40" for lower-end parts. At this point, we can't even speculate what the "i" (special feature) could denote. For mobile parts, the letter "M" could be prefixed to the "xz" component of the model number (example: Radeon R9 M380 X). Validations for graphics cards running early drivers with this naming scheme, have been showing up on our GPU-Z Validation database for days now, and our analysis is our best understanding of their naming strings. Capiche? Can't blame you.
Add your own comment

39 Comments on Next-Generation AMD Radeon Series Nomenclature Detailed

#2
Ghiltanas
by: Prima.Vera
Common guys! You sound like the average uneducated Joe. Is actually quite simple the new naming scheme, the article explains it perfectly. Read again if you have doubts.

P.S.

I am more interested in performance gain over previews generation, than on the naming scheme.

right ;)

and however new naming scheme isn't a bad thing for me, HD10000 mmm
Posted on Reply
#3
uuuaaaaaa
I wanted AMD Radeon HD 9999 :mad:
Posted on Reply
#5
cedrac18
by: HumanSmoke
So basically AMD are appropriating Nvidia's naming scheme- just replacing GTX/GTS/GT with R9/R8/R7 etc.

GTX 280 ( GTX= market segment, 2 = generation, 80 = hierarchy within the segment)
R9 280 ( R9 = market segment, 2 = generation, 80 = hierarchy within the segment)

Just to play the pedant, the word is Capisce if you're addressing a person- or probably Capite when addressing a group.
Actually this looks to be exactly like Intel Core i series

Radeon R9 170 and Core i7 4770

I7 = R9 = Radeon 79xx series
I5 = R8 = Radeon 78xx series

4770 4th generation = 1xx first generation since they are restarting over. the XX would be either 30, 50, 70 or 90 if AMD keeps their same numbering numbers

Nvidia puts GTX in front of low end cards like like their OEM only 645 not sure how these are in the same market segment as a 680
Posted on Reply
#6
SaltyFish
by: john_
6970 is smaller as a number than 7770, but 6970 is faster than 7770.
With the new naming the R9 280 will be maybe faster than R7 480 but R7 480 will be two generations newer than R9 280.

So the new naming doesn't give a priority to generation like it was until now, but in performance. I think this is better for the average consumer because new generations are not, like in the past, much faster than the old, or with much more features.
The new naming scheme reminds me of Intel's i3/5/7 thing. Granted Intel's current processor numbering is four digits with the first digit being generation like the current AMD GFX card naming scheme... but the idea still holds.
Posted on Reply
#7
Scrizz
i miss the old radeon days lol

X1900 XTX mmmm Xs
Posted on Reply
#8
HumanSmoke
by: cedrac18
Actually this looks to be exactly like Intel Core i series
You're right, AMD flat out copied Intel- but that's pretty much par for the course.
by: cedrac18
Nvidia puts GTX in front of low end cards like like their OEM only 645 not sure how these are in the same market segment as a 680
My observation was more along the lines of generalization than specifics- I'd also note that you'd find naming anomalies amongst pretty much any line ( Was the HD 6850 a better performing card than the HD 5850 ? Does the i7 4765T offer better potential performance than the i5 4670K ?)
I think we can both agree that AMD's naming scheme isn't overly original - now we're just splitting hairs over how many companies they are copying.
Posted on Reply
#9
Raghar
So AMD solved the what comes after 9 problem by using
R9 970 i originally HD 9970.
Well and next line would be called as... ? (You know that line after HD 9xxx.)
Posted on Reply
#10
NeoXF
by: Raghar
So AMD solved the what comes after 9 problem by using
R9 970 i originally HD 9970.
Well and next line would be called as... ? (You know that line after HD 9xxx.)
Rx-3xx x, Rx-4xx x, Rx-5xx x...
Posted on Reply
#11
HumanSmoke
by: NeoXF
Rx-3xx x, Rx-4xx x, Rx-5xx x...
Then again, if you ask another group of people inside AMD, it's still the HD 9000 series...so if AMD can't get it straight, hardly surprising that everyone else is scratching their heads.
From the press release printed here yesterday:
Posted on Reply
#13
NdMk2o1o
Will our HD 9800 pro's unlock to XT :cool:

IMO should just be called: AMD the shit!! 1 billion, AMD the shit!! 1 billion and 1 etc etc
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment