XFX Radeon HD 6850 Pictured, Detailed

[btarunr]

After a recent exposé of the XFX Radeon HD 6870, DonanimHaber scored a few pictures of its next HD 6000 series card, the XFX Radeon HD 6850. Unlike the HD 6870 card, the HD 6850 from XFX makes use of XFX' own design for both PCB and cooler. The card is shorter than the HD 6870 by a fair bit, and makes use of typical XFX styling on the cooler shroud and rear panel. The cooler seems to be a circular fan-heatsink over the GPU, it's not known whether the memory and VRM have heatsinks too. Display connectivity includes two DVI, and one each of HDMI 1.4 and DisplayPort 1.2.

The card carries 960 stream cores, contradicting an older report, and 1 GB of GDDR5 memory over a 256-bit wide memory interface. The core is clocked at 775 MHz, and memory at 1000 MHz (4 GHz GDDR5 effective). Expect it to be out on the 22nd of this month, at a highly competitive price for its performance level.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[Imsochobo]

cannot complain about the looks for sure! ;P
benchies benchies, i wanna see benchies!
and cayman.. is what i'm wondering about.

 

[wolf]

more solid specs really give me the hunch that this will be as fast as a 5850, if not a little faster, given the new strem processor design works out swish.

 

[mdsx1950]

The box looks nice!

Awaiting benchmarks!

 

[the_wolf88]

Nice..

The red circle on the box reminds me about Samsung Vibrant Bionix ROM boot screen

 

[Tatty_Two]

So this is in effect Bart Pro?

 

[aCid888*]

I guess the old supposed specs dont mean nothing any more...



Very nice looking card.

 

[wolf]

So this is in effect Bart Pro?

yessir, BartsXT will (reportedly) pack more sp's again, something in the order of 1280 odd I think... and faster clocked memory.

 

[Tatty_Two]

I guess the old supposed specs dont mean nothing any more...



Very nice looking card.

They rarely do, thats why I get so amused over new GPU threads where members spend 50 pages arguing over potential specs and performance just to find out that they argued over nothing

 

[toyo]

It's good there aren't just 800 cores... c'mon, we have this number in the 4800 series. Even with the better efficiency, it's still too low for a meaningful increased performance - especially with this stupid Bart-is-6800-series.

 

[pantherx12]

It's good there aren't just 800 cores... c'mon, we have this number in the 4800 series. Even with the better efficiency, it's still too low for a meaningful increased performance - especially with this stupid Bart-is-6800-series.

This makes no sense, it could be 600 cores and still be a better card by a decent margin.

I mean nvidias top end card uses 480 cores right? And beats 1600 cores in cypress.

The architecture is the important thing not the core amount.




Anywhom! I woke up this morning thinking it was the 22nd and hoping for lots of cool news to read

Oh well the 18th and a few pics are fine too I guess.

 

[DriedFrogPills]

It's good there aren't just 800 cores... c'mon, we have this number in the 4800 series. Even with the better efficiency, it's still too low for a meaningful increased performance - especially with this stupid Bart-is-6800-series.

different shader architecture and diff scheduler etc. so 960 is apparently enough to match the ole 5850 withs it 1440 of the old style

 

[aCid888*]

They rarely do, thats why I get so amused over new GPU threads where members spend 50 pages arguing over potential specs and performance just to find out that they argued over nothing

Exactly why I avoid the rumour threads on cards.

Total waste of time posting in them because its a wild guess on the real specs(Usually).

 

[crow1001]

6850 = 5830 performance - 6870 = 5850 performance.

 

[bear jesus]

First box pic

I like what xfx have done with the 6870/50 bracket and it is good to hear that it has 960sp's not 800 but these next few days are going to kind of suck having to wait for the reviews but more so as barts is not what im really interested in, what i want to know is how cayman fairs against the 5870 and 460 sli so i can finally upgrade from my tierd 4870, it's been running for about 21,000+ hours and could proberley do with taking a rest

 

[N3M3515]

6850 = 5830 performance - 6870 = 5850 performance.

5830 < 6850 <= 5850 < 6870 <= 5870

 

[mdsx1950]

5830 < 6850 <= 5850 < 6870 <= 5870

Thats bullshit. I for one know that the 6870 is better than the 5870. Even W1zzard stated so somewhere in a thread.

 

[W1zzard]

Thats bullshit. I for one know that the 6870 is better than the 5870. Even W1zzard stated so somewhere in a thread.

no i didnt say that

 

[bear jesus]

Thats bullshit. I for one know that the 6870 is better than the 5870. Even W1zzard stated so somewhere in a thread.

no i didnt say that

jamsbong "I've seen the benchmarks and it is slower than the 58xx series"
w1zzard "i've run the benchmarks and your statement is not true"

That's what was said

source

 

[Thrackan]

The fan looks cheapass. The rest looks OK, kinda reminds me of the 5850 but without the Batmobile looks.

 

[Tatty_Two]

Thats bullshit. I for one know that the 6870 is better than the 5870. Even W1zzard stated so somewhere in a thread.

Your right.... It was in one of the 3 recent news threads but he "suggested" that was the case, or near to it.

 

[bear jesus]

Thats bullshit. I for one know that the 6870 is better than the 5870. Even W1zzard stated so somewhere in a thread.

Your right.... It was in one of the 3 recent news threads but he "suggested" that was the case, or near to it.

What was said on the link i provided above was kind of open, it seamed to be denying that the 6870 was slower than something in the 58xx range, that could just mean the 6870 beats the 5830... just a few more days untill we know

 

[Tatty_Two]

What was said on the link i provided above was kind of open, it seamed to be denying that the 6870 was slower than something in the 58xx range, that could just mean the 6870 beats the 5830... just a few more days untill we know

I know, all I was saying was a statement that when W1z simply said "i've run the benchmarks and your statement is not true" In reply to a comment "I've seen the benchmarks and it is slower than the 58xx series" is not the same as W1z saying it is as fast as a 5870. Although my post above was not very clear .

 

[W1zzard]

jamsbong "I've seen the benchmarks and it is slower than the 58xx series"
w1zzard "i've run the benchmarks and your statement is not true"

That's what was said

source

58xx series != hd 5870

 

[mdsx1950]

jamsbong "I've seen the benchmarks and it is slower than the 58xx series"
w1zzard "i've run the benchmarks and your statement is not true"

That's what was said

source

Thanks for that.

no i didnt say that

That was what i was referring to. Because i remembered thanking your post.