Friday, September 11th 2009

AMD Cypress ''Radeon HD 5870'' Stripped

Here are the first pictures of the obverse side of Cypress' PCB, and the first pictures of the centre of attraction: the AMD Cypress GPU. CzechGamer dissembled two Cypress "Radeon HD 5870" cards for a quick blurrycam photo-session. The PCB shot reveals quite a bit about Cypress, particularly about the GPU.

To begin with, the GPU is AMD's overhaul on transistor counts, and a bold work of engineering on the 40 nm manufacturing process, given the kind of problems foundry partners had initially. Apparently they seem to have recovered with most of them, as AMD's AIB partners are coming up with new products based on the 40 nm RV740 GPU on a weekly basis. The package holds a "diamond-shaped" die that is angled in a way similar to RV740, RV730, or more historically, the R600. The seemingly huge die measures 338 mm² (area), and for 40 nm, it translates to "huge", and is vindicated by the transistor count of ~2.1 billion. In contrast, AMD's older flagship GPU, the RV790 holds 959 million, and NVIDIA's GT200 holds 1.4 billion.
The PCB has three distinct areas: the connectivity, processing, and VRM. To fuel the GPU is a high-grade 4 phase digital PWM power circuit, while the PCB has placeholders for an additional vGPU phase. The 8 (or 16 on the 2 GB model) memory chips, is powered by a 2 phase circuit. Power is drawn from two 6-pin PCI-Express power connectors, but there seems to be a placeholder for two more pins, i.e., to replace one of those 6-pin connectors with an 8-pin one. Bordering the GPU on two sides are the 8 GDDR5 memory chips, which AMD calls says is generation ahead of present GDDR5, and supports reference frequencies as high as 1300 MHz (2600 MHz DDR, 5.20 GHz effective). In the 2 GB variant, 8 more chips seat on the other side of the PCB. This is what perhaps, the backplate is intended to cool. On the connectivity portion of it, are the two CrossFire connectors, DisplayPort, HDMI and a cluster of two DVI-D connectors. There has been a raging debate about how adversely the small air vent would affect the card, but AMD is promising some energy efficiency breakthroughs, plus given how roomy the card is, the vent seems sufficient.

Finally, information from ArabHardware.net suggests a pricing model on three of the first SKUs based on Cypress: HD 5870 2 GB, HD 5870 1 GB, and HD 5850 1 GB. All three use the same GPU and memory standard (GDDR5), but differ in clock speeds and GPU configurations. While HD 5870 sports 1600 stream processors, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, HD 5850 has 1440 stream processors, 72 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Although 32 ROPs puzzles us for a 256-bit wide memory interface, we suspect low-level design changes that make "32 ROPs" more of an effective count than an absolute count. While HD 5870 features over 800 MHz core clock and 5.20 GHz memory, its little sibling has over 700 MHz core clock and 4.40 GHz memory. Price points expected are US $449 for Radeon HD 5870 2 GB, $399 for HD 5870 1 GB, and $299 for HD 5850. AMD is expected to announce all three models on the coming 23rd. You'll be able to find them at your favourite computer store a little later, availability is a certainty by the time you're ready to buy Windows 7. AMD's newest products will be more than ready to squat under X-mas trees all over.
Sources: Czech Gamer, Arab Hardware
Add your own comment

163 Comments on AMD Cypress ''Radeon HD 5870'' Stripped

#51
air_ii
newtekie1If it is 185w under load, then it is closer to a GTX295, which according to W1z's reviews is at about 181-182w on average under load.
I think peak load is much higher. And the info was 185-190 max power consumption for 5870.

Edit: Just found it, TDP of GTX295 is 289W.
Posted on Reply
#52
toyo
Helllllooo ATI??? We thought (and wanted) the 5870 at 299$...:cry:
Posted on Reply
#53
KainXS
it will be between 350 and 400 dollars more than likely

Posted on Reply
#54
a_ump
toyoHelllllooo ATI??? We thought (and wanted) the 5870 at 299$...:cry:
haha that was indeed my hope. but hey, If these cards have the horsepower that has been speculated then i personally think it's worth $399, i think $349 would be ideal and a sweet spot, but then they need to try and make some cash while nvidia is out of the picture(and yes they will be come the 23rd). I too am weary of how efficient that tiny exhaust will be but no worries here :) got an AC unit 3 feet from my comp.
Posted on Reply
#56
KainXS
Yeah Its definitely worth it, besides the memory its double the specs of the HD4890, its like a 4870X2 with no crossfire performance loss so it could even outperform a GTX295, we will have to wait for benches but its possible
Posted on Reply
#57
mdm-adph
newtekie1And how did I know you would troll my post, and not add anything even remotely relavant to the dicussion?

And if you noticed, I said something positive also...but you do only tend to notice when people say negative things about ATi...but you are an ATi fanboy so it is expected I guess...:shadedshu
You're either a liar or you're getting old:
newtekie1I have a feeling this is still going to be a one loud ass card, the fan is going to have to work at full blast to push all the hot air out of that little openning... And that die size is huge for 40nm!
What part of this was in any way "positive?" Funny, I don't know anyone who likes "loud ass cards" or ones that have to "push all the hot air out of that little openning."

Or do you like the chip for being "huge?" Beats me.

Not to mention:

Rule #33 of the Internet: He who doth quoteth the taunt of "fanboy" first is himself the biggest fanboy.
Posted on Reply
#60
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
erockerI believe all DirectX is based off the previous version. Most likely there is nothing about DX10 in DX11. It's more likely DX11 features on top of DX9. Looking at the features of DX11, regardless if it's based on DX10 or DX9, they will make a significant difference in visual quality. Just look at the wire frames between DX9 and DX11. The DX11 features are significant as DX10 features were not. Either way, it's the horsepower increase I'm more concerned with. DX11 will come either way.
I highly doubt there will be a significan't difference in visual quality, certianly not in the first DX11 game, which is still based on DX9...
air_iiI think peak load is much higher. And the info was 185-190 max power consumption for 5870.

Edit: Just found it, TDP of GTX295 is 289W.
298w is way over what the actual TDP of the GTX295. Real world is closer to 180w average.
mdm-adphYou're either a liar or you're getting old:



What part of this was in any way "positive?" Funny, I don't know anyone who likes "loud ass cards" or ones that have to "push all the hot air out of that little openning."

Or do you like the chip for being "huge?" Beats me.

Not to mention:

Rule #33 of the Internet: He who doth quoteth the taunt of "fanboy" first is himself the biggest fanboy.
The huge die size is a positive, as I've already explained, and I'm sure you didn't notice since you only pay attention when someone is speaking negatively of ATi.

And you did everything but come right out and say it directly, so you cast the first stone there buddy...
Posted on Reply
#61
The Witcher
Hey, could someone remind me of how much was the GTX260 when it was released ?

I bought it after a few months of it release for like $230 as I remember, I won't buy these new graphic cards until they reach a reasonable price point which is for me : $200~$280
Posted on Reply
#62
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
Ok, calm down people.
Posted on Reply
#63
lemonadesoda
btarunr... Secondly I'm hearing it's whisper-quiet.
188W of badness. I wonder how they keep that quiet?

Ummm. 3x 2560x1600 sounds good to me. Time to upgrade my desktop arrangement.
Posted on Reply
#65
KainXS
404 not found, but I think that bench isn't far off, I personally think it will match and probably outperform the GTX295
Posted on Reply
#66
pantherx12
newtekie1298w is way over what the actual TDP of the GTX295. Real world is closer to 180w average.
Aye but bare in mind the 188 is the max on the new atis, real world average is bound to be less aswell right : ]

I'm willing to bet 20 pence that that little opening is enough, how ever ultimately its irrelevent, how many people own cards direct from ATI/Nvidia?

I'm pretty sure most people get cards from the likes of powercolor/xfx/sparkle bollocks like that.
Posted on Reply
#67
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
lemonadesoda188W of badness. I wonder how they keep that quiet?
I'm hearing that not only is it whisper-quiet, but also surprisingly cool (surprising for its ~180W load power consumption). Wait till the 23rd. :)
Posted on Reply
#68
pantherx12
Wiz got some of these cards right? I know he can't publish a review just yet, but can he tell us what the red bits at the end do?
Posted on Reply
#69
a_ump
wahdangunlook at this:

well the only problem with that is it says HD 5870 OC. for all we know they could have it under water with insane clocks. I wish they'd done that at stock instead. However it is impressive none the less.
Posted on Reply
#70
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
pantherx12Wiz got some of these cards right? I know he can't publish a review just yet, but can he tell us what the red bits at the end do?
Just decorative.

Posted on Reply
#71
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
pantherx12Aye but bare in mind the 188 is the max on the new atis, real world average is bound to be less aswell right : ]

I'm willing to bet 20 pence that that little opening is enough, how ever ultimately its irrelevent, how many people own cards direct from ATI/Nvidia?

I'm pretty sure most people get cards from the likes of powercolor/xfx/sparkle bollocks like that.
But most of those companies use the reference design. I fully expect the design to change by the time the retail design is finalized though.
btarunrI'm hearing that not only is it whisper-quiet, but also surprisingly cool (surprising for its ~180W load power consumption). Wait till the 23rd. :)
I hope this is true, because I love my HD4890, but the only thing I dislike is how hot it runs and how loud the fan is.
Posted on Reply
#72
lemonadesoda
I hope the 188W is not actually true... but it a misdirection just like the number of shaders on the 4xxx series that ATi pulled last time prior to launch.

188W might be whisper quiet and cool at the desktop in 2D (and running 27W) but there is no way 188W is going to be cool'n'quiet while gaming, stock or OC.
Posted on Reply
#73
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
My claim includes 'load'. Again, Max ≠ Load. There's a clear difference between the two which you can look up in our latest reviews. Here's a sample: www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Mushkin/GTX_295_Single_PCB/28.html

Trivia includes: GTX 295's max consumption is 320W, and that of GTX 285 is 218W. So Cypress beats them both at max power.

So this is where Cypress will land (red mark), going by AMD's value of 188W max power:

Posted on Reply
#74
lemonadesoda
^ OK, gotya.

Just that newteckie was complaining about the noise from his card that is 190W... so unless something very clever is going on... I would assume similar power, heat, and cooling issues to 4890. Obviously performance per watt has increased significantly... but 188W is still a high figure. Being less than GTX295 is nothing to brag about since GTX295 should be ashamed of itself running at an output enough to start up a commerical jet engine and warm an Olympic swimming pool.
Posted on Reply
#75
sapetto
If OCed is better than GTX295 when its not OCed its almost the same? :laugh:
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 21st, 2024 23:19 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts