# AMD sent HD 4830 samples to reviewers with missing shaders



## W1zzard (Oct 22, 2008)

Show article


----------



## Solaris17 (Oct 23, 2008)

Intriguing ill see if we have a sample.

Do you think their were 2 different batches? 560SP for internal testing until they finally decided on a shippable 640SP?


----------



## wolf2009 (Oct 23, 2008)

interesting . 

How did you disable SIMD ?


----------



## Steevo (Oct 23, 2008)

Pushing the big red button. Might get a fix for opening other doors and getting shaders back.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 23, 2008)

well if its a disable bit, i wonder if its hard disabled or just bios disabled, because you could modify the disable bit to get the 640 shaders, but i think this was the bios encoders fault or something.


----------



## btarunr (Oct 23, 2008)

eidairaman1 said:


> well if its a disable bit, i wonder if its hard disabled or just bios disabled, because you could modify the disable bit to get the 640 shaders, but i think this was the bios encoders fault or something.



Did you read the article?



> The locking mechanism relies on fuses inside the GPU, or on the substrate - a mechanism similar to Intel's multiplier locking. It is not reversible as far as I know. It is however possible to temporarily disable _additional_ fuses to reduce the shader count even further.


----------



## ArkanHell (Oct 23, 2008)

Wiz, you are the man.


----------



## newtekie1 (Oct 23, 2008)

W1zzard said:


> I am also 100% certain that shipping cards with 560 shaders was not intended by AMD at any time. Why should they make their own product slower?



They've done in the past.


----------



## lemonadesoda (Oct 23, 2008)

The King of all Wizards.

THANKS FOR THE INFO!


----------



## thebluebumblebee (Oct 23, 2008)

Did you pull the coolers to see if the chips are labeled the same?


----------



## W1zzard (Oct 23, 2008)

thebluebumblebee said:


> Did you pull the coolers to see if the chips are labeled the same?



look at the two reviews. i took photos of both gpus


----------



## thebluebumblebee (Oct 23, 2008)

oops


----------



## suraswami (Oct 23, 2008)

W1zzard;I am also 100% certain that shipping cards with 560 shaders was not intended by AMD at any time. Why should they make their own product slower?[/QUOTE said:
			
		

> Any chance Powercolor screwed it up with a wrong bios?  If AMD intended to ship with 560 shaders with a reasonable reduced price over 4850 with that kind of performance hit, I think it makes sense.  I believe the 4830 is going to be around $150 and 4850 can be got at that price after rebates.  If the 560 shader one comes in around $110 then it will be a balanced card.
> 
> my 2 cents.


----------



## W1zzard (Oct 23, 2008)

suraswami said:


> Any chance Powercolor screwed it up with a wrong bios?  If AMD intended to ship with 560 shaders with a reasonable reduced price over 4850 with that kind of performance hit, I think it makes sense.  I believe the 4830 is going to be around $150 and 4850 can be got at that price after rebates.  If the 560 shader one comes in around $110 then it will be a balanced card.
> 
> my 2 cents.



why would amd state 640 shaders in their product brief then and risk to be exposed?


----------



## suraswami (Oct 23, 2008)

W1zzard said:


> why would amd state 640 shaders in their product brief then and risk to be exposed?



that part is bit shady.  Had they said 560 and kept the price down with excellent media center capabilities I will jump on this.


----------



## newtekie1 (Oct 23, 2008)

I'm sure it wasn't intentional, really.  The 560 SP cards were more than likely early samples, that probably just got mixed up when sending them out to reviewers.  They certainly wouldn't intentionally send out the lower shader cards to the reviewers.  I just hope none of them got sent out to retail channels.



suraswami said:


> Any chance Powercolor screwed it up with a wrong bios?  If AMD intended to ship with 560 shaders with a reasonable reduced price over 4850 with that kind of performance hit, I think it makes sense.  I believe the 4830 is going to be around $150 and 4850 can be got at that price after rebates.  If the 560 shader one comes in around $110 then it will be a balanced card.
> 
> my 2 cents.



The HD4830 is already available on newegg for $119 after rebate, or at least it was yesterday.

Edit: The PowerColor one is actually available for $114.99 after rebate.


----------



## Kreij (Oct 23, 2008)

W1zzard said:


> why would amd state 640 shaders in their product brief then and risk to be exposed?





> When I added shader count reading support to GPU-Z yesterday



They didn't think you would get GPU-Z to figure it out so quick?


----------



## Polaris573 (Oct 23, 2008)

Kreij said:


> They didn't think you would get GPU-Z to figure it out so quick?



When any product leaves a factory, in this case GPUs, an in depth analysis in not performed on every single unit rather a single unit is selected from that batch (production run of indefinite length) and only that unit is tested. This is generally enough to insure the quality of a batch of product, but if the manufacturing process is for some reason incorrectly producing 1 out of every 4 units a tester can easily miss that when only testing one unit from a batch.  These are common quality control procedures, and while I do not know AMD's precise QC procedure I'm sure a scenario like similar to what was mentioned above is conceivable.  When dealing with corporations there is a tendency for many people, without thinking about the situation, to jump on the "guilty until proven innocent" bandwagon.  While it is entirely possible that it is conspiracy, it is more likely that when producing thousands of units a bad batch escaped.


----------



## Kreij (Oct 23, 2008)

My comment was meant to be tongue-in-cheek 

I do not think AMD is trying to pull a fast one.


----------



## suraswami (Oct 23, 2008)

newtekie1 said:


> I'm sure it wasn't intentional, really.  The 560 SP cards were more than likely early samples, that probably just got mixed up when sending them out to reviewers.  They certainly wouldn't intentionally send out the lower shader cards to the reviewers.  I just hope none of them got sent out to retail channels.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



oops I didn't see that.  hmm I checked yesterday for 4670 but don't remember seeing this.  oh well.


----------



## dwarf (Oct 23, 2008)

Hey, this is Kevin from Neoseeker. I wanted to report that my ATI review sample HD 4830 is missing the shaders. 

When I started work today I was sort of surprised when glancing over some other reviews stating that the HD 4830 kicks the 9800 GT's ass. That wasn't what I found. Now it makes a bit more sense. 

Sort of nullifies my review, which sucks. Ah well; so it goes. 

Great work W1zzard, investigating this. You are the man.


----------



## davidletterboyz (Oct 24, 2008)

I noticed that all the early reviews (that shows GPU-Z screenie) that received HD4830s from AMD have 560sp. If u google a bit for reviews with GPU-Z screenies, those HIS and Powercolor samples have 640sp. I guess it's a human mistake from AMD's side, packing the wrong samples? LOL


----------



## W1zzard (Oct 24, 2008)

bump for updated bios in article


----------



## Wile E (Oct 24, 2008)

Was it AMD that released the BIOS? Or did a third party mod the BIOS? Just curious.


----------



## alexp999 (Oct 24, 2008)

So if I'm reading this right. All HD4830 GPUs are hard locked to 640SP, but for some reason the ati cards shipped with a bios locked to 560SP?
So a simple flash sets it back at 640SP?


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 24, 2008)

no, possible etching of the PCB was done either on purpose or accidentally, that or the cards were locked further because of Shader Flaws in the earliest batches, just managed to slip thru the cracks, but no worries, if the card doesnt meet the specs advertised you can take the part back and ask for your money back, but with this set of cards, i say until AMD gets the bugs out, i say go with the 4850 or 4870.


----------



## W1zzard (Oct 24, 2008)

alexp999 said:


> So if I'm reading this right. All HD4830 GPUs are hard locked to 640SP, but for some reason the ati cards shipped with a bios locked to 560SP?
> So a simple flash sets it back at 640SP?



Yes. Whether some kind of BIOS mod can be used on HD 4830 to go from 640 -> 800 is unknown, but I highly doubt it.


----------



## suraswami (Oct 24, 2008)

W1zzard said:


> Yes. Whether some kind of BIOS mod can be used on HD 4830 to go from 640 -> 800 is unknown, but I highly doubt it.



But you are the Wiz, you can make it


----------



## W1zzard (Oct 24, 2008)

bump for statement by amd


----------



## wolf2009 (Oct 24, 2008)

W1zzard said:


> bump for statement by amd



pheew ... .

btw how do you disable SIMD ?


----------



## lemonadesoda (Oct 24, 2008)

BUMP and thanks to w1zz for identifing the issue, informing AMD, getting a fix, and posting it!

  

What a champ...


----------



## newtekie1 (Oct 24, 2008)

Ah, so it was just a faulty BIOS issue.

Does that mean a re-review of the ATi card is coming?  Or did you already have to send the card back?  Any chance boards slipped into the retail market with the defect?

I wonder if they flashed the BIOS with the locked pipes to possible test an even lower end configuration for the 4800 series.  Maybe we will see an HD4810?


----------



## wolf2009 (Oct 24, 2008)

newtekie1 said:


> I wonder if they flashed the BIOS with the locked pipes to possible test an even lower end configuration for the 4800 series.  Maybe we will see an HD4810?



and flash it to HD4830, or even 4850 !! Yay !!!


----------



## W1zzard (Oct 24, 2008)

newtekie1 said:


> Does that mean a re-review of the ATi card is coming?  Or did you already have to send the card back?  Any chance boards slipped into the retail market with the defect?



nah already had enough troubles with the damn hd 4830 .. look at the powercolor review for the performance, look at the amd review for the rest


----------



## newtekie1 (Oct 25, 2008)

W1zzard said:


> nah already had enough troubles with the damn hd 4830 .. look at the powercolor review for the performance, look at the amd review for the rest



Cool, thats what I figured.

Off Topic: Any tips on overclocking an HD4670?  I bought the same one you reviewed from HIS, but I can't overclock it at all via software.  I tried using AMD's GPU Clock Tool (0.9.8), but any time I adjust the core frequency at all the computer just locks up.


----------



## wolf (Nov 10, 2008)

W1zzard said:


> As you can see, the FPS changes linearly with the number of shaders in the GPU. Please note that this is data from some real empiric testing. All those ten tests were performed with a real running HD 4850 (running at HD 4830 clocks for better comparability), without reboot in between, shader count was changed on the fly.
> 
> It is however possible to temporarily disable _additional_ fuses to reduce the shader count even further.



how did you manage to alter the usable shader count without rebooting W1z?


----------



## rui (Nov 15, 2008)

Hi W1zzard,

Where can I download the "560" shaders 4830 BIOS, or can you share this BIOS with us? Thanks!


----------



## Chicco85 (Nov 23, 2008)

I have a 4830 ES that has only 560 stream processor enabled. Flashed with the bios, i went up to 640 without problem (perlin noise test from 180 to 250 fps...).

Thanks a lot W1zzard.







W1zzard said:


> Yes. Whether some kind of BIOS mod can be used on HD 4830 to go from 640 -> 800 is unknown, but I highly doubt it.



AMD said to me that the alu are physically disable.


----------



## Hayder_Master (Nov 23, 2008)

Solaris17 said:


> Intriguing ill see if we have a sample.
> 
> Do you think their were 2 different batches? 560SP for internal testing until they finally decided on a shippable 640SP?


that is really good point


----------



## Hayder_Master (Nov 23, 2008)

ohh , w1zzard really nice work , ati now very thankful to you im sure


----------



## Betty (Kung Pow) (Feb 9, 2009)

BUMP

Sry for it but this one catched my interest.

When you found this out, did you see if there were any diffrence in heat as well between the cards?

Or even better, if there were any differ in current consumption?


----------



## W1zzard (Feb 9, 2009)

technically there is less heat output and lower power draw. i seriously doubt you will be able to measure the temperature difference with today's in-gpu sensors. the lower power draw should show up on any half decent watt meter


----------



## Betty (Kung Pow) (Feb 12, 2009)

W1zzard said:


> technically there is less heat output and lower power draw. i seriously doubt you will be able to measure the temperature difference with today's in-gpu sensors. the lower power draw should show up on any half decent watt meter



Thx.

I was just thinking if this could be done on laptops to reduce power consumption, or if its already done by the power saving mechanics?


----------



## in_awe (Apr 28, 2009)

W1zzard,

How did you disable SIMD units on the fly?  You mention a register, so I assume you edited that somehow, but what program did you use?  I found it very interesting that the AMD 4830 used significantly less power at idle than the PowerColor 4830.  Only about 25% of my time on my PC is spent on gaming.  My biggest gripe with the 48xx cards (and now the 47xx cards too by the looks of the initial reviews) is their idle power usage in comparison with a 3850 (my current card) or a 4670.  If SIMD units could be turned off on the fly on a 4850 or 4870, say down to 4670 levels, and there was a corresponding idle power usage decrease, that would be perfect, even if a restart was required to re-enable them.  The power of a high end card when needed, the low power usage of a low end card when not.

Thanks in advance for any information you can provide.


----------



## btarunr (Apr 28, 2009)

in_awe said:


> W1zzard,
> 
> How did you disable SIMD units on the fly?



He didn't disable it, he received a sample that came with a defective BIOS that used only 560 SPs.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Apr 28, 2009)

wow bring back a topic that has been dead and over with for some time now. Attn All 4830s have the 640 Shaders. May we please close this topic?


----------



## in_awe (Apr 28, 2009)

btarunr said:


> He didn't disable it, he received a sample that came with a defective BIOS that used only 560 SPs.



Wow... super-fast reply!  Yes, his test unit did come with only 560 SPs enabled, but he then went on to gradually disable SIMD units on a 4850 to see if there was a linear decrease in performance.  I'm wondering how he disabled them on the 4850.


----------



## [I.R.A]_FBi (Apr 28, 2009)

in_awe said:


> W1zzard,
> 
> How did you disable SIMD units on the fly?  You mention a register, so I assume you edited that somehow, but what program did you use?  I found it very interesting that the AMD 4830 used significantly less power at idle than the PowerColor 4830.  Only about 25% of my time on my PC is spent on gaming.  My biggest gripe with the 48xx cards (and now the 47xx cards too by the looks of the initial reviews) is their idle power usage in comparison with a 3850 (my current card) or a 4670.  If SIMD units could be turned off on the fly on a 4850 or 4870, say down to 4670 levels, and there was a corresponding idle power usage decrease, that would be perfect, even if a restart was required to re-enable them.  The power of a high end card when needed, the low power usage of a low end card when not.
> 
> Thanks in advance for any information you can provide.




Couldnt you edit the bios so the idle clocks are lower?


----------



## btarunr (Apr 28, 2009)

in_awe said:


> Wow... super-fast reply!  Yes, his test unit did come with only 560 SPs enabled, but he then went on to gradually disable SIMD units on a 4850 to see if there was a linear decrease in performance.  I'm wondering how he disabled them on the 4850.



No, a comparison between HD 4830 (with the old defective BIOS), the HD 4830 (with its proper BIOS) and HD 4850 was made. End result effectively is the comparison between RV770LE 560, 640, and RV770Pro 800 SP.

To make things ideal, a reference AMD HD 4830 board was compared to the reference HD 4850 board (same PCB layout and components).


----------



## in_awe (Apr 28, 2009)

eidairaman1,

Sorry to have bumped an old post.  I just stumbled on it... late to the party.  I tried to find some discussion of this in other posts or on other sites, but it looks like W1zzard is the only person who took his testing to this level.  I'm not actually interested in how many shaders a 4830 has, but rather in being able to disable shader units on any 48xx card in order to reduce idle power consumption.  W1zzard was able to disable them on a 4850 without even rebooting... I'm just hoping to benefit from his advanced knowledge.


[I.R.A]_FBi,

Lowering the idle clocks does help, but not enough.  I bought a 4850 when they first came out and tried super-low settings.  That was when the BIOSes were shipping with the wrong settings in them.  The idle power usage never came anywhere near 3850 levels though.  W1zzards testing potentially opens up a new way to lower power usage.


----------



## in_awe (Apr 28, 2009)

btarunr said:


> No, a comparison between HD 4830 (with the old defective BIOS), the HD 4830 (with its proper BIOS) and HD 4850 was made. End result effectively is the comparison between RV770LE 560, 640, and RV770Pro 800 SP.
> 
> To make things ideal, a reference AMD HD 4830 board was compared to the reference HD 4850 board (same PCB layout and components).



Check out the second half of the Testing section in the first post of this thread.  W1zzard shows the results of gradually disabling the SIMD units on a 4850.


----------



## W1zzard (Apr 28, 2009)

i still have the card. it doesnt matter for this part of the conversation anyway.

at this time i'm not willing to disclose how to reduce the number of shaders

edit: thread has been cleaned up

edit2: there is no "program" to do it


----------



## lemonadesoda (Apr 28, 2009)

in_awe said:


> W1zzard,
> 
> How did you disable SIMD units on the fly?  You mention a register, so I assume you edited that somehow, but what program did you use?  I found it very interesting that the AMD 4830 used significantly less power at idle than the PowerColor 4830.  Only about 25% of my time on my PC is spent on gaming.  My biggest gripe with the 48xx cards (and now the 47xx cards too by the looks of the initial reviews) is their idle power usage in comparison with a 3850 (my current card) or a 4670.  If SIMD units could be turned off on the fly on a 4850 or 4870, say down to 4670 levels, and there was a corresponding idle power usage decrease, that would be perfect, even if a restart was required to re-enable them.  The power of a high end card when needed, the low power usage of a low end card when not.
> 
> Thanks in advance for any information you can provide.



I welcome your question. Never mind about it being an old thread. It is relevant and topical, and your question is better placed here than starting a new thread and having to do a whole lot of explaining. I hope w1z can share some insights...

And welcome to TPU. 




W1zzard said:


> i still have the card. it doesnt matter for this part of the conversation anyway.
> 
> at this time i'm not willing to disclose how to reduce the number of shaders


Shady dealer


----------



## in_awe (Apr 28, 2009)

W1zzard said:


> i still have the card. it doesnt matter for this part of the conversation anyway.
> 
> at this time i'm not willing to disclose how to reduce the number of shaders
> 
> ...



Thank you for the reply W1zzard (and for cleaning up the thread).  Do you plan to release that information at some point in the future, or perhaps include it as part of a tweaking program?  The low-power freaks like me would greatly appreciate it.  Or are you planning on keeping it to yourself forever? (cue evil laugh)

Of course, I just realized it may be a hardware hack, which would exclude me from using it.  I'm completely inept when it comes to using a soldering iron.


----------



## W1zzard (Apr 28, 2009)

in_awe said:


> Thank you for the reply W1zzard (and for cleaning up the thread).  Do you plan to release that information at some point in the future, or perhaps include it *as part of a tweaking program*?  The low-power freaks like me would greatly appreciate it.  Or are you planning on keeping it to yourself forever? (cue evil laugh)
> 
> Of course, I just realized it may be a hardware hack, which would exclude me from using it.  I'm completely inept when it comes to using a soldering iron.



as tweaking program might be possible in the future.

it's not a hardware hack, it can be done in realtime, even while the card is rendering.

i doubt there is that much to be gained power consumption wise. it is definitely not 50% for going to half the shaders. educated guess might be 5%


----------



## in_awe (Apr 28, 2009)

W1zzard said:


> as tweaking program might be possible in the future.
> 
> it's not a hardware hack, it can be done in realtime, even while the card is rendering.
> 
> i doubt there is that much to be gained power consumption wise. it is definitely not 50% for going to half the shaders. educated guess might be 5%



OK, thanks.  I was just guessing on the idle power usage based on your original AMD 4830 review (with only 560 shaders) versus your PowerColor 4830 review.  The AMD 4830's idle usage was close to 4670 levels.  Achieving 4670 levels with a 4850 or one of the new 4770s would be awesome.


----------

