Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 21
  1. #1

    Post RV770 final specs revealed









    55nm TSMC process
    480 SP (4D+1D) - 1D consists of 96 SP
    32 TMU
    800-900MHz core clock
    PCB design similar to RV670
    Replace current RV670 price point

  2. #2
    Let's hope they have good launch drivers.
    E8400|P5Q Pro|HIS 4850 IceQ4 CF|WD 500GB|HX620W|CM690

  3. #3
    Yeah. Drivers please. Cat 8.3 and CrossfireX is broken for WinXP. Can't run 3DMark06 with it enabled. It just crashes.

    Let's hope they have good launch PRICES too!

    Then mebbe can combine with my 3870X2

  4. #4
    50%more shader power, woot

    Quote Originally Posted by Ske7ch View Post
    Let's hope they have good launch drivers.
    afaik its not a new design, its an improved rv670, so i dont think there will be any driver hassle.

    and thinking of the microsoft report showing 30% of all reported windows crashes were caused by nvidia drivers i dont think ati drivers are looking all that bad
    Last edited by saaya; Mar 28th, 08 at 04:42 PM.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by saaya View Post
    50%more shader power, woot

    afaik its not a new design, its an improved rv670, so i dont think there will be any driver hassle.

    and thinking of the microsoft report showing 30% of all reported windows crashes were caused by nvidia drivers i dont think ati drivers are looking all that bad
    Actually, ATI launch drivers for the 3870X2 wasn't too good considering the amount of horsepower it had. And I'm not referring to the stability of the drivers, I'm talking about the performance.
    E8400|P5Q Pro|HIS 4850 IceQ4 CF|WD 500GB|HX620W|CM690

  6. #6
    Resistance Is Futile JoOs7eR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sengkang
    Posts
    15,023
    wootz ~!
    l Intel® Core™ i7 5960x w/ Corsair H115i l Asus Rampage V Extreme l Aorus GTX 1080Ti Xtreme l G.Skill Ripjaws F4-2666C15Q-32GRR l Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 512GB l Samsung 850 Pro 512GB l 4x 2TB Western Digital Black l Dell U3014 A07 l Asus Xonar Essence One l AudioEngine A5+ w/ DS2 Stand l Steelseries P800 l Asus BW-12B1LT l NZXT Sentry 3 l Corsair AX1200i l Phanteks Enthoo Luxe TG w/ 5x Corsair ML140 Pro l Corsair K70 RGB l Razer Mamba Chroma l Razer Firefly l Windows 10 Home x64 l

  7. #7
    Well the fact that those few cards are using GDDR5 dictates that these cards will launch H2/2008 around same time as GT200.
    --------
    If these specs hold truth these high end cards could be great(HD3870 vs. HD4870):
    103% more shader performance
    171% more texture mapping performance
    35% mor ROP performance
    95% higher memory bandwith
    ----
    HD4870 X2, HD4870 and HD4850 looks great, but those HD4670 and HD4650..well they'll have hard time against 9600 GT.

  8. #8
    This is just a dumb copy of a old NHW news regarding the HD4000 specs from Hartware.de.

    old NHW news: http://www.nordichardware.com/news,7356.html
    original source: http://www.hartware.de/news_44085.html

    This is from 15th Feb!

  9. #9
    This part is new :

    55nm TSMC process
    480 SP (4D+1D) - 1D consists of 96 SP
    32 TMU
    800-900MHz core clock
    PCB design similar to RV670
    Replace current RV670 price point

    Hartware.de almost got it right

    http://bbs.chiphell.com/viewthread.p...extra=page%3D1

  10. #10
    55nm tsmc isnt new
    480sp isnt new
    800-900mhz isnt new (hd4850 clk according to hartware.de = 850mhz)

  11. #11
    Registered User Anarion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    282
    Ahh... This mean that the real war begins when AMD releases those.
    Intel Core 2 Duo E8400
    ASUS P5Q PRO | Be quiet! Straight Power 550W | Antec Three Hundred
    2x2 GB A-data Vitesta 800Mhz DDR2
    EVGA GeForce 9800 GTX+ SC 512 MB | Creative SoundBlaster Audigy 2 ZS
    Samsung 0.5 TB SATA2 & Samsung 1 TB SATA2
    Windows Vista Business x64 SP2

  12. #12
    PS3-Forever
    Guest
    anyway, it's very slow card to me

  13. #13
    256bit memory bandwidth? 384 would have been better.

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by slim142 View Post
    256bit memory bandwidth? 384 would have been better.
    Remember that when we are talking about how much data can memory channel pass onwards in one second it's not just about how wide that channel is. We have to look for memory clocks also.

    These high end models use GDDR5 memory which can reach ridiculously high clock frequencies which will more than compensate narrow interface.
    -----
    HD3870 32*2250MHz -> 72GB/s
    HD4870 32*4400MHz -> 140.8GB/s
    8800 Ultra 48*2160MHz -> 103.6GB/s
    HD2900 XT GDDR3 64*1650MHz -> 105.6GB/s
    HD2900 XT GDDR4 64*2000MHz -> 128.0GB/s

    As you can see: HD4870 has more capable memory channel than HD2900 XT even when memory channel is twice as wide in HD2900 XT

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by newzhunter View Post
    800-900MHz core clock

    Replace current RV670 price point
    woots 800-900 clock could see e first oc-ed cards to be breaking into the gigahertz mark...

    And smthing abt the price point would be giving nvidia sleepless nitez...
    http://bfbc2.statsverse.com/sig/clean5/pc/ANNIHILATOR47.png

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast