# Radeon HD 7770 Specifications Confirmed in GPU-Z Screenshot



## btarunr (Feb 13, 2012)

Much like a previous exposé with Radeon HD 7950, the specifications of Radeon HD 7770 that were rumored in our previous article have been confirmed by users. It confirms several specifications, starting from the stream processor count of 640, to the 128-bit wide GDDR5 memory interface. The GPU has an out of the box core clock speed of 1.00 GHz, it could be possible that this is a factory-overclocked card, if not, the core clock speed rumor sparked off by the Verdetrol marketing campaign are true, after all. 





*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## natr0n (Feb 13, 2012)

It looks to be worse than a 5770 or I am wrong?


----------



## jpierce55 (Feb 13, 2012)

btarunr said:


> Much like a previous exposé with Radeon HD 7950, the specifications of Radeon HD 7770 that were rumored in our previous article have been confirmed by users. It confirms several specifications, starting from the stream processor count of 640, to the 128-bit wide GDDR5 memory interface. The GPU has an out of the box core clock speed of 1.00 GHz, it could be possible that this is a factory-overclocked card, if not, the core clock speed rumor sparked off by the Verdetrol marketing campaign are true, after all.
> 
> [url]http://www.techpowerup.com/img/12-02-13/91a_thm.jpg[/URL]
> 
> Source: DonanimHaber



Interesting, it does not sound all that promising in performance considering no improvement in memory performance, less shaders than a 5770, and most likely a larger price


----------



## brandonwh64 (Feb 13, 2012)

Almost looks to be a downgrade?

5770:






7770:


----------



## jpierce55 (Feb 13, 2012)

brandonwh64 said:


> Almost looks to be a downgrade?
> 
> 5770:
> http://www.geeks3d.com/public/jegx/200910/radeon-hd-5770-gpuz.jpg
> ...



I show 80gb bandwidth on my 5770, and I am sure that is from the oc.... like the shot you just posted, yet I do wonder on the downgrade. I DOUBT the higher clock and improved architecture will permit much increase over the old cards considering the shader loss. Especially considering it will probably come with a higher price tag. The power consumption would be nice, but with that concern a 7750 is a much better idea. This cards sounds like a fail .


----------



## Andrei23 (Feb 13, 2012)

unless this will clock to 1500mhz on the core with ease, I would avoid this like herpes


----------



## blibba (Feb 13, 2012)

Perhaps this card is a tacit recognition that this is all the performance most gamers need, so they're delivering said performance at the lowest possible power consumption and price.

Also, fill rates in GPU-Z put it ahead of the 5770.


----------



## meirb111 (Feb 13, 2012)

*transistors count is up almost 50%*

the only thing they increased is transistors count almost 50%


----------



## afw (Feb 13, 2012)

Will perform less than a 5770/6770 IMO ... dont know y AMD is doing this ... :shadedshu


----------



## Crap Daddy (Feb 13, 2012)

It's a side effect of the verdetroll.


----------



## Cheeseball (Feb 13, 2012)

Since this HD 7770 is using VLIW4-technology compared to the HD 5770/6770's older VLIW5, I'm thinking it will probably perform the same with that amount of shaders. Hopefully the price is similar or lower.


----------



## WaroDaBeast (Feb 13, 2012)

Cheeseball said:


> Since this HD 7770 is using VLIW4-technology compared to the HD 5770/6770's older VLIW5, I'm thinking it will probably perform the same with that amount of shaders. Hopefully the price is similar or lower.



Damn, I had completely forgotten about that difference in architecture. Yeah, it should perform about the same then.


----------



## sergionography (Feb 13, 2012)

afw said:


> Will perform less than a 5770/6770 IMO ... dont know y AMD is doing this ... :shadedshu



not really, if anything this will perform equal to 6770 and 5770 but with better power consumption and a smaller die size(cheaper)
this will have 640 GCN cores while 6770 and 5770 used the old vliw5 which had 10cu's aswell(except vliw5 has 80 stream processors per cu totaling 800 while vliw4 and gcn has 64 yet perform better than the vliw5's 80) 
add to that the 28nm node which will allow higher frequencies then you are talking well over 20% performance boast at stock, and well under 100watt tdp (5770 if im not mistaken was in the 150watt range)


----------



## Cheeseball (Feb 13, 2012)

Yup, remember that the HD 5850 has 1440 shaders, but a HD 6870 that has 1120 shaders performs just about the same due to newer VLIW4 architecture.


----------



## sergionography (Feb 13, 2012)

Cheeseball said:


> Yup, remember that the HD 5850 has 1440 shaders, but a HD 6870 that has 1120 shaders performs just about the same due to newer VLIW4 architecture.



the 6870 used vliw5 aswell, but had rearranged units in it, like updated tesselation units and rops and what not, it was pretty much a conservative way to get as much performance as possible

and due to the smaller die and less heat output they were able to clock it higher therefore matching 5850 or better

vliw4 was only used in the 6900 series and was about 20% faster than vliw5 since the cu's were reduced to 64cores compared to the 80 in vliw5 yet performed the same


----------



## meirb111 (Feb 13, 2012)

sergionography said:


> not really, if anything this will perform equal to 6770 and 5770 but with better power consumption and a smaller die size(cheaper)
> this will have 640 GCN cores while 6770 and 5770 used the old vliw5 which had 10cu's aswell(except vliw5 has 80 stream processors per cu totaling 800 while vliw4 and gcn has 64 yet perform better than the vliw5's 80)
> add to that the 28nm node which will allow higher frequencies then you are talking well over 20% performance boast at stock, and well under 100watt tdp (5770 if im not mistaken was in the 150watt range)




cheaper die size yet price will be a higher power counsumption isnt a big plus for most people for home pc's they look at price /preformance its not  a "win win" its win some lose some.


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Feb 13, 2012)

eitherway dosent matter performance of the 7770 = 5830 / 6790


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 13, 2012)

Cheeseball said:


> Since this HD 7770 is using VLIW4-technology compared to the HD 5770/6770's older VLIW5, I'm thinking it will probably perform the same with that amount of shaders. Hopefully the price is similar or lower.



It needs to be beating it by a good margin if it is to remain at the same price of a 6770' as they pulled the same bullshit with 6770>5770 and kept the same performance at the same cost over 2 generations, so all they have done is given us 5770 performance, no more now less over 3 gens whilst keeping the cost the same over the generations.


----------



## _JP_ (Feb 13, 2012)

brandonwh64 said:


> Almost looks to be a downgrade?
> 
> 5770:
> http://www.geeks3d.com/public/jegx/200910/radeon-hd-5770-gpuz.jpg
> ...


Your card is overclocked. That is not a real world scenario, and not a good comparison because the 7770 is at stock. Allow me:









The 7770 has higher fill rates, from the start, and will OC beyond that. Consumes less energy while doing so. But, on the other hand, has less vRAM bandwidth, which might impact performance at higher resolutions and/or lower performance with games that load high-res textures, comapred to the 5770/6770. At stock, the 7770 might be better than the 5770/6770 but not enough to justify the replacement (considering it's release price), unless one is really in the need of reducing his electrical bills. That being said, I will not replace my 5770 for one of these.


----------



## Completely Bonkers (Feb 13, 2012)

Something doesn't computer. VLIW4 uses fewer transistors than VLIW5 per shader.  Therefore, with VLIW4 and fewer shaders, transistor count should have gone down by 30% not up by 50%. So there is something else going on here > either the data is incorrect, or the architecture supporting those shaders is radically different, or, even though the die tranny count is up 50%, *active* transistors are lower, due to locked/disabled shaders/pipeline.

How confusing. Eagerly awaiting w1z benchmarks esp. performance/watt.


----------



## Zen_ (Feb 13, 2012)

The capabilities of graphics core next in the future are a lot more interesting to me than ever faster acceleration of old games and console ports. That has to be considered in the total value of the product when reviews hit and the outright graphics performance will not likely be that impressive compared to 68xx cards.


----------



## Supercrit (Feb 13, 2012)

Now AMD uses x7xx for low/mid range cards? what the hell.
Even it would be faster than 5770, and takes less power, what price it will be? I got a 5770 2 years ago used for $100 and now a frigging 6770 still costs $120+, this card will probably cost higher than that. I missed the 4850 days.

The naming scheme is really getting out of control. 7770 still wouldn't beat a 5850, shame on you AMD, should of called it 7570


----------



## btarunr (Feb 13, 2012)

Cape Verde uses Graphics CoreNext, not VLIW4.


----------



## Crap Daddy (Feb 13, 2012)

Is it right that it's gonna be priced at 180$?


----------



## Casecutter (Feb 13, 2012)

btarunr said:


> Cape Verde uses Graphics CoreNext, not VLIW4.



Exactly, we will need to wait and see. Something tells me the 7750 might be like a 6790-6850 and no 6-pin, while a 7770 is close to the 6870 though only 85-90W.

Pricing is a different issue as we can't disregard the TSMC pricing increase for 28Nm that might be a factor of 15-20%; even Nvidia will be passing along whenever they arrive.  Right now it sound like sticker shock that AMD is only advertising, but Nvidia is not immune and their day will come... At which point it will be easier to swallow their increase as AMD has paved the way.

MSRP on the 6870 was $230 the going rate today is $160 –AR; add 15-20% to $160 and you’re at $185-195, or the under $200 MSRP AMD is surely targeting.  There’s nothing wrong with close to the 6870 performance (it is a lower numerical product) that today beats the original 6870 release MSRP by 20%.


----------



## Isenstaedt (Feb 13, 2012)

_JP_ said:


> That being said, I will not replace my 5770 for one of these.


No one changes a card for another with similar performance. that's would be lame. When upgrading I always try to go for over 2x performance.

I was hoping the 7770 to perform close to the 6850 or maybe the 6830 (6790), but it looks like it will perform just like the 5770.


----------



## Crap Daddy (Feb 13, 2012)

While we don't know the performance yet, the specs don't look too promising. I would have expected this to replace performance wise the 6870 at a lower launch price point but everything seems to be getting some weird prices under Rory's lead. I'd say wait for the benchmarks but be prepared to grab a 6870 just in case at 150$ while they last. On a second thought, make that two.


----------



## sergionography (Feb 13, 2012)

NdMk2o1o said:


> It needs to be beating it by a good margin if it is to remain at the same price of a 6770' as they pulled the same bullshit with 6770>5770 and kept the same performance at the same cost over 2 generations, so all they have done is given us 5770 performance, no more now less over 3 gens whilst keeping the cost the same over the generations.



the 5770 was priced well over 200 as it was selling and was considered med-high at the time as the 5800 series were the high end, the 5770 was technicaly replaced by the 6800 series as amd moved up a number digit
the 6770 was a rebranded 5770 but was well cheaper




meirb111 said:


> cheaper die size yet price will be a higher power counsumption isnt a big plus for most people for home pc's they look at price /preformance its not  a "win win" its win some lose some.



price may be higher than current 6770's(since they got cheaper now) but eventualy they will become similar or even cheaper as amd has room to be competitive in price but that wont really happen untill nvidia releases their next gen
as for die size it will allow for higher clocks which is what allowed the 1ghz factory clock when  6770 was 800-850(thats 15-20%)


----------



## sergionography (Feb 13, 2012)

another thing that has to be noted aswell is that according to this article the 640 cores are NOT vliw4 
they are GCN cores(same architecture as 7900 series)


----------



## brandonwh64 (Feb 13, 2012)

_JP_ said:


> Your card is overclocked. That is not a real world scenario, and not a good comparison because the 7770 is at stock.



Not my card


----------



## jpierce55 (Feb 13, 2012)

sergionography said:


> the 5770 was priced well over 200 as it was selling and was considered med-high at the time as the 5800 series were the high end, the 5770 was technicaly replaced by the 6800 series as amd moved up a number digit
> the 6770 was a rebranded 5770 but was well cheaper
> 
> 
> ...



The 5770 was never over $200. I bought it around release for $130. The 6770 was never $200 either. The nice thing about 5770/6770 is they x-fire together, I doubt the 7770 will.


----------



## cadaveca (Feb 13, 2012)

I paid $109 for my 6770. If this card is similarily priced, cool, but i expect maybe a bit more higher price, because 7970 is higher-priced than previous gens. Will have to wait for reviews, I guess.

Would be nice if these cards supported more than two in Crossfire too...might be interesting to see 4x7770 vs single 7970.


----------



## Cheeseball (Feb 13, 2012)

btarunr said:


> Cape Verde uses Graphics CoreNext, not VLIW4.



Oh okay, so it's using RISC functionality. If that's the case, then this should be able to trounce the HD 5770/6770 by... 10% more performance perhaps?

If it had 800 shaders, then it would be between a HD 6850 and HD 6870.

Just a guess as VLIW4 is single instruction-based only.


----------



## _JP_ (Feb 13, 2012)

brandonwh64 said:


> Not my card


Didn't know. "Your example" then.


----------



## R_1 (Feb 13, 2012)

sergionography said:


> the 5770 was priced well over 200 as it was selling


Since when the initial $160 price  is " well over 200". Maybe that 200 was in currency of People's Bank of China.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Feb 13, 2012)

_JP_ said:


> Didn't know. "Your example" then.



HAHA LOL, yea I google imaged that pic. My 5770 is installed in my main ATM while I wait on my new 560TI 2GB Card


----------



## Casecutter (Feb 13, 2012)

It's pretty well established, Cape Verde with Graphics CoreNext will replace the X*7*XX line, and with close to a 6870 performance, while lower power.  Pricing will yes be slightly wacky, but it's not Rory... It's no rivals from Nvidia presently or coming soon (GK106), along with the new reality of TSMC 28Nn pricing, that basically negated the normal shrink cost improvement.  

MSRP of 5770 back in November 2009 was set at $160, now some E-tailer have "jumped the gun" and showed a $185 price for the 7770.  If you read the historical comments, folks like yourselves wrote after the 5770 review (almost 2½ years ago) you can probably reuse them in the coming days/week for this.  Except this time we know AMD won't leave the big gap, that's what the 78XX is there to cover and counter the GK104.  AMD will be able to drop price of the Cape Verde and adjust if a GK106 makes the grade, something as of late Nvidia had chosen not to significantly challenged with the like of GTS450 or GTX550ti. 

But will this (?) give Nvidia a perfect picture of what Graphics CoreNext will provide, and will know how to direct AIB’s the clock those GK104 cards.  The problem may well be AMD is... sand-bagging on both the high/low end?  Knowing Nvidia will stick their neck out to take the high-end crown, while holding off on what Cape Verde they don't expose the middle ground.  I say they realize/betting they know what Nvidia can bring at this level with GK106 offering, not much different than the GTS450 or GTX550ti did previously against their rivals.  They know the fight is really going to be with the mainstream-volume GK104/Pitcairn, and they all are playing those cards close to their chest.


----------



## dj-electric (Feb 14, 2012)

Everybody thinks that the HD7770 is worse then the HD5770
Its not, chillax already :shadedshu
About the price... oh boy *grabs popcorn and waits for people's reaction soon*


----------



## ViperXTR (Feb 14, 2012)

if this is using GCN instead of the VLIW5 of the 5770/6770 it could prolly match the performance but the pixel and texel fillrate along with memory bandwidth might hamper it, then again this is a card with (supposed to be) different architechture, would have to wait for test results.


----------



## sergionography (Feb 14, 2012)

R_1 said:


> Since when the initial $160 price  is " well over 200". Maybe that 200 was in currency of People's Bank of China.



thats wierd, I could swear back in 2009-2010 when shopping for graphics cards every other 5770 was over 180 dollars on newegg and i ended up buying a gts 250 which was 120 dollars at the time while the 5750 was around 140 dollars
but that mightve been just newegg raising the prices sinse nvidia was still using the older 200 series


----------



## micropage7 (Feb 14, 2012)

look at the fabrication, it goes from 40nm to 28nm that means the chip would be colder than previous chip


----------



## Kaleid (Feb 14, 2012)

Fits between HD 6850 and HD 6870
http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25936-radeon-hd-7770-scores-p3535-in-3dmark-11
http://chinese.vr-zone.com/10056/amd-radeon-hd-7770-02142012/


----------



## sergionography (Feb 15, 2012)

Kaleid said:


> Fits between HD 6850 and HD 6870
> http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25936-radeon-hd-7770-scores-p3535-in-3dmark-11
> http://chinese.vr-zone.com/10056/amd-radeon-hd-7770-02142012/



then it will be priced according to that, so far amd is pricing cards according to the old gen prices mostly because there is no competition yet.


----------



## jpierce55 (Feb 15, 2012)

Computer Hardware, Video Cards & Video Devices, D...

ASUS HD7750-1GD5 Radeon HD 7750 1GB 128-bit GDDR5 ...

Prices aren't bad after all! 7750 sounds like the generation champ for budget gamers!


----------



## vagxtr (Apr 26, 2012)

natr0n said:


> It looks to be worse than a 5770 or I am wrong?



You're wrong. Dont look with such narrow minded on raw specs



jpierce55 said:


> I show 80gb bandwidth on my 5770 .... yet I do wonder on the downgrade. I DOUBT the higher clock and improved architecture will permit much increase over the old cards considering the shader loss. [...] This cards sounds like a fail .



It's not all in raw memory bandwidth. You compute with a CPU/GPu not the memory buffers  Dont you?

You cant compare kiwis vs. mangos color and shape if you're doing quality comparison. These are different architectures, and theres huge improvement betwen HD4870 and HD5700 series when the latter achieved almost same results on half-width memory bus. Do you remember?

I agree it's a fail when you look at it's HIGH PRICE but there should be huge room for price drops on this cards. Even on 75USD for HD7750 and 90USD for HD7700 long before EOL DAMN would make a considerable profit. (And they're MSRPed 110USD and 160USD respectively)

It's nice to know that two-an-half month later HD 7770 are priced at more reasonable 140USD but still at least 30USD too much. I hope that in next two-and-half month they'll cut them to normal price of 110USD 







sergionography said:


> this will have 640 GCN cores while 6770 and 5770 used the old vliw5 which had 10cu's aswell (except vliw5 has 80 stream processors per cu totaling 800 while vliw4 and gcn has 64 yet perform better than the vliw5's 80)



Different computing approach has nothing to do with raw memory bandwidth during gameplay, but improved texture compression does 

GCN should proof itself better only in easier code optimizations than pretty WaferIncognita VLIW5 even for ATi which developed it and most of their engineers are now exported with benefits from new DAMNs conglomerate. So ATis VLIW5 and code optimizations doesnt play well with each other in the same universe. I still believe VLIW5 is far better approach just it nede far more time for properly implement it. They had crapstart with its firs R600 implementation and ever since they were doing bugfixes ... sucessfully i might add in HD3800/HD4800/HD5800 series

And then they skip back to HD6900series and VLIW4, so it might be another reason why they return back to X900 branding for their GPUs based on high-end chips .... preparing for new NON-BUG-BOTHERED GPU implementation ... GCN (fancy name for 15yrs old SIMD)


----------



## vagxtr (Apr 26, 2012)

Cheeseball said:


> Yup, remember that the HD 5850 has 1440 shaders, but a HD 6870 that has 1120 shaders performs just about the same due to newer VLIW4 architecture.



HD6870 uses same old VLIW5 just they squeeze up maximal throughput to available shader clusters by rejecting unnecessary cluster would remain idle because of limited dual-arbiter implemented in HD5800/HD6800 series but now reducing waste of useful silicon. HD6900 used quad-arbiter for every 384SPs arranged in VLIW4 clusters featuring 64SPs per VLIW4 cluster. So one arbiter for every 6 VLIW4 cluster in HD6900 series or one for every 10 VLIW5 cluster ion HD5800 make significant throughput advantage for the first one.


----------

