HIS Radeon HD 6970 2 GB

[bear jesus]

It is when the card your talking about buying is practicly the same price.

True but then if cost is that much of an issue would it not be logical to be using VGA monitors and a dirt cheap DP to VGA adapter?

 

[newtekie1]

True but then if cost is that much of an issue would it not be logical to be using VGA monitors and a dirt cheap DP to VGA adapter?

Or forgo the whole thing and just use dirt cheap PCI cards like people have been doing for decades?

 

[cdawall]

It is when the card your talking about buying is practicly the same price.

I agree unless you have a display port monitor the eyefinity on cheap cards is stupid...most boards are multi pci-e at least what I buy so I would get another 5450 if I wanted multi display I just can't buy a pci card they are a waste pci is dieing...

 

[newtekie1]

I agree unless you have a display port monitor the eyefinity on cheap cards is stupid...most boards are multi pci-e at least what I buy so I would get another 5450 if I wanted multi display I just can't buy a pci card they are a waste pci is dieing...

Very true, even if the board didn't have two PCI-E x16 slots, I think I'd buy two PCI-E cards and just dremel one down to fit in one of the PCI-E x1 slots.

 

[bear jesus]

Sorry i misunderstood i thought the point being conversed was for using gpu accelerated 3d modeling across multiple monitors thus the use of having a higher powered gpu.

 

[crow1001]

Excellent and honest review.

 

[Red_Machine]

Very true, even if the board didn't have two PCI-E x16 slots, I think I'd buy two PCI-E cards and just dremel one down to fit in one of the PCI-E x1 slots.

You can modify a PCIe x16 card to fit in a PCIe x1 slot?

 

[bear jesus]

You can modify a PCIe x16 card to fit in a PCIe x1 slot?

Yes but you have to hurt it, either the card or the pci-e slot has to be damaged by removing some plastic or PCB.

 

[Red_Machine]

Makes sense, I suppose. People have modded 3dfx cards (which only used AGP 2x) to work with AGP 4x/8x slots.

 

[Steve-007UK]

Can't be bothered to read all the post but i like what i see, early drivers and all that to, This card might get some good improvments later on. It beat the 580 is a few test at high res so thats not to bad and to be honest i never expected this card to be faster, It sits where i thought it would.

Im going to wait till after xmas and see what happens with drivers and stuff then i might just buy one. Nvidia might be faster but it don't make me wan't to go and buy one for a few extra FPS i can probs gain from a small overclock on an ATI card oh sorry that should be AMD.

 

[cherubrock]

Can someone please clarify why some performance numbers vary between when you reviewed the card, and when you're comparing against them? Specifically, when you reviewed the 6850 at 1920 on Metro, it got 18.5fps. But when it's compared in your new review, it shows as 13.4fps.

Here's the 6850's review (the 6850's 18.5fps is in blue):

And here is the 6950's review (the 6850's 13.4fps is at the very top):

Can someone please answer this question?

I'm not asking for speculation on what you think, or your opinion, etc; I'd like to know the real reason why the same card is showing different FPS on different reviews.

 

[bear jesus]

from the review test setup page, which you might have missed: "Benchmark scores in other reviews are only comparable when this exact same configuration is used."

I have added a version number to the test system. right now it's "Test System - VGA Rev. 12", look at that when trying to compare stuff.

for the case of metro 2033: rebench, different level, game patched, new drivers, using benchmark tool, different settings

It was answered by w1zzard the writer of the review.

 

[Red_Machine]

W1zz answered that earlier. I think he said the system he used was slightly different for the second review. And it may have had different drivers, too.

 

[Gjohnst4]

I was hoping this release would drive down 5870 prices, but I figure alot of people will just hold on to them considering the boost is not worth the cash. Guess I will have to shell out for crossfire =/

 

[Josh154]

Wow! The gtx 570 competes with the 6970 it seem's like to me. 570 is cheaper also! AMD dropped the ball on this one.. And as soon as 265.90 drivers hit desktop gpu's you just wait!

 

[Assimilator]

Oh dear. These aren't bad cards, but after the greatness that was the 5000 series they are quite a disappointment. Looks like my 5850 is going to be with me until the GTX 600/HD 7000 series arrive.

Yes but you have to hurt it, either the card or the pci-e slot has to be damaged by removing some plastic or PCB.

Rather trim the end of the PCI-e slot on the mobo, that way the card will still run at full x16 speed if you put it into a full-length slot later.

 

[cdawall]

Oh dear. These aren't bad cards, but after the greatness that was the 5000 series they are quite a disappointment. Looks like my 5850 is going to be with me until the GTX 600/HD 7000 series arrive.



Rather trim the end of the PCI-e slot on the mobo, that way the card will still run at full x16 speed if you put it into a full-length slot later.

$30 video card or $150 mobo which do you want to not be able to rma?

 

[Nokiacrazi]

Hmm...Crossfire 6870 or 6950...

 

[HalfAHertz]

This release is a hard one to judge properly. On one side the performance increase compared to last gen is similar to the one at Nvidia. However the big difference is that Nvidia got their increase without a die increase and at the same time lowered their TDP.
I do realize that Cayman is supposed to be a stepping stone and will have some bad sides but really hope that we see improvements soon.
From AT's review:

The bad news is that it means many of AMD’s VLIW5-centric shader compiler tricks are no longer valid; at the start shader compiler performance is going to be worse while AMD learns how to better program a VLIW4 design. The good news is that in time they’re going to learn how to better program a VLIW4 design, meaning there’s the potential for sizable performance increases throughout the lifetime of the 6900 series. That doesn’t mean they’re guaranteed, but we certainly expect at least some improvement in shader performance as the months wear on.

On that note these VLIW changes do mean that some code is going to have to be rewritten to better deal with the reduction of VLIW width. AMD’s shader compiler goes through a number of steps to try to optimize code, but if kernels were written specifically to organize instructions to go through AMD’s shaders in a 5-wide fashion, then there’s only so much AMD’s compiler can do. Of course code doesn’t have to be written that way, but it is the best way to maximize ILP and hence shader performance.

 

[Robert-The-Rambler]

I really don't get this launch

Now if this is preparation for doubling performance later next year then I guess you have to take the hit now in PR when the cards simply don't do that much better than the 5800 series and the 5970. The new shader structure will probably be the basis for higher performance in the future but right now for me it makes no sense to buy an AMD graphics card because there are Nvidia cards with similar performance at a similar price with Physx support and yes I do use that for several games. I wonder if the new way of doing things for AMD will lead to higher minimum frame rates as in my experience Nvidia has always traditionally had an advantage in smoothness do to higher minimum frame rates. The GTX 460 has leaned my allegiance more towards Nvidia and the experience has been great. I still have a lot of AMD 4800 series cards in play but my I7s for sure will more than likely be housing Nvidia and possibly in SLI if there is any need for higher performance.

 

[Steevo]

I believe this is the first true cooperative effort from AMD/ATI to build a core that is a extension of the CPU for handling more tasks.

Perhaps we will see some increase in performance, but it looks to be clock limited, I'm sure ATI was aiming for much higher clocks but failed to achieve them due to die constraints of 40nm. If it clocked like many of the 5870's do with a little more voltage this card would be a huge win.

 

[HalfAHertz]

I think that it fails at clocking because of the power limiter

 

[Super XP]

Great review Wizzard once again. Though this time I do have a minor beef with your final thumbs Down! I’ve seen it B4 with other reviews but anyway here it is.
The performance increase IMO is not all that disappointing and with newer drivers coming down the pipeline we should see better performance improvements. Overall, The price justifies the performance very nicely indeed. But that’s not my beef.

It’s not a disappointment to “NOT” have NV’s CUDA or PhysX support, it's not a disadvantage for ATI Radeon owners. What we need is OPEN STANDARD Physics and CUDA so that we may all benefit from it. NVIDIA is not willing to work with AMD or Intel to do such a thing, so all three will continue their separate ways with gamers paying the price.

•No support for CUDA / PhysX
If you can omit this line from your future ATI/AMD Radeon reviews it would be nice, if not no prob.

 

[horik]

Good price here in Spain and the card is awailable,the 6950 is at 286 €.
http://www.coolmod.com/list/1772/4/2/1/TARJETAS-GRAFICAS.htm

 

[Benetanegia]

Good price here in spain View attachment 39558

Nice price indeed, but it's the only store carrying those prices according to what I see. Alternate sells them for 360-380 euros. That's probably a limited deal, it won't last too much.