AMD HD 6950 and 6970 released

[Cilus]

Vickybat, you are sticking with PhysX and that's why you are so much complaining against Radeon. The thing is PhysX is nothing at all in all current generation games. If an experience person does not tell you what are the differences coming for enabling PhysX, you probably won't be able to see it actually.
I'm telling it because Batman Arkum Asylum and Mafia II both I've checked in my friend's machine @ 1440X900 resolution with a GTX285 and in my system with my 6870. Believe me, ico is right, the difference is so so small and not at all worth the FPS drop and reduced playability.
It does not worth even your fighting over here... :
Even at Tom's Hardware, they explicitly mentioned that if you have a Nvidia PhySX enable card lying on dust, then only go for PhysX. Otherwise... no need at all. They are highly technical site and they reviewed it quite well and the conclusion..Nothing for must have PhySX.

 

[skeletor]

From indian sites, we see 6950 to be costing around 20k or more which is in 570's league and the latter is a much better card.

They'll get revised.

Amd has never matched nvidia in driver support.

More like a big myth. nVidia is better overall, I agree but only on Linux, AMD is no match for nVidia.

What i meant to say was if nvidia sort of disables or that mod doesn't work in a future driver release, where will the amd owners prioritizing physx will go with their second physx card?

A patch will be out again. Cat and mouse. I suggest you to start a poll. You'll know how many people prioritize PhysX. Not as many as you are thinking or making out to be. It is neither a deal maker nor a deal breaker for most. Only two average games came out in 2010 which utilized PhysX. Hardly anyone prioritizes PhysX. If someone thinks that playing only countable games with extra effects is important to him, you again know what he will have to do. Sell off the AMD card and get nVidia.

I know amd is a chipmaker but it should offer better software support for proper utilization of its chips.

Do you know what DirectX API and OpenGL are for?

Does amd has an answer to cuda?

It does actually in the form of STREAM but where is the support? This is where AMD lags and physx is just another example but as you say not so much like cuda.

CUDA can be a deal maker and breaker if you are into rendering like I already posted thrice.

The thing is, CUDA again is a proprietary standard, not an "open" standard. FireStream utilizes OpenCL which is "open." nVidia supports both CUDA and OpenCL.

And heck, both are in infancy.

 

[vickybat]

Vickybat, you are sticking with PhysX and that's why you are so much complaining against Radeon. The thing is PhysX is nothing at all in all current generation games. If an experience person does not tell you what are the differences coming for enabling PhysX, you probably won't be able to see it actually.
I'm telling it because Batman Arkum Asylum and Mafia II both I've checked in my friend's machine @ 1440X900 resolution with a GTX285 and in my system with my 6870. Believe me, ico is right, the difference is so so small and not at all worth the FPS drop and reduced playability.
It does not worth even your fighting over here... :
Even at Tom's Hardware, they explicitly mentioned that if you have a Nvidia PhySX enable card lying on dust, then only go for PhysX. Otherwise... no need at all. They are highly technical site and they reviewed it quite well and the conclusion..Nothing for must have PhySX.

No buddy i am not fighting for physx but just wish amd having a better software support. Not just physx but cuda and others as well.

Don't you agree its no match for nvidia in this department?

 

[Cilus]

AMD can't have CUDA, it is Nvidia patent, but they do have ATI Stream. Which may be not as mature as CUDA (read mature not less powerful) but currenly showing significant growth. Initially number of software supported CUDA but not ATI Stream was higher but now a days most of the major software like Adobe, Cyberlink, Corel, 3D Studio etc support ATI Stream support.
In fact in vido encoding ATI cards are faster.

 

[vickybat]

They'll get revised.


More like a big myth. nVidia is better overall, I agree but only on Linux, AMD is no match for nVidia.

A patch will be out again. Cat and mouse. I suggest you to start a poll. You'll know how many people prioritize PhysX. Not as many as you are thinking or making out to be. It is neither a deal maker nor a deal breaker for most. Only two average games came out in 2010 which utilized PhysX. Hardly anyone prioritizes PhysX. If someone thinks that playing only countable games with extra effects is important to him, you again know what he will have to do. Sell off the AMD card and get nVidia.

Ok lets see if we can start a poll but i guess i understand what you are trying to tell.

Do you know what DirectX API and OpenGL are for?

Ofcourse i know what they are for. DirectX is a set of application programming interfaces that handle game codes and videos. It belongs to microsoft.

Opengl is similar but as the name suggests , its not propritery and supports cross platform api. Doom3 is the best example of an opengl supporting game.

Both the camps support them so whats the big deal?

The thing is, CUDA again is a proprietary standard, not an "open" standard. FireStream utilizes OpenCL which is "open." nVidia supports both CUDA and OpenCL.

And heck, both are in infancy.

Its good nvidia supports both open computing language and ofcourse their own cuda but don't you think amd should move beyond and develop its own framework? This is what i was saying all the time about support and development.

AMD can't have CUDA, it is Nvidia patent, but they do have ATI Stream. Which may be not as mature as CUDA (read mature not less powerful) but currenly showing significant growth. Initially number of software supported CUDA but not ATI Stream was higher but now a days most of the major software like Adobe, Cyberlink, Corel, 3D Studio etc support ATI Stream support.
In fact in vido encoding ATI cards are faster.

Its good stream is maturing but cuda is still way ahead. And nvidia has improved a lot in video playback and 3d blueray capabilities and even providing the ability to bitstream lossless audio through HDMI.

Check this buddy.

And also this.

 

[skeletor]

Its good nvidia supports both open computing language and ofcourse their own cuda but don't you think amd should move beyond and develop its own framework? This is what i was saying all the time about support and development.

You just don't seem to understand one thing. AMD doesn't believe in reinventing the wheel. It will support something if it is "open" and common to all i.e. standards which are truly "open and universal" and are not proprietary. AMD supports OpenCL (should I again repeat it 10 times?) which is "open" and not proprietary like CUDA.

If a company X believes in fragmentation, the other doesn't have to follow the same route. Get over it. What you want is both companies coming up with their own competing technologies/frameworks on simple things which should rather be common to a developer and cause fragmentation + stupid confusion.

Check this buddy.

And also this.

This thing by any means is NOT related to the discussion which we are heaving here.

Both the camps support them so whats the big deal?

The big deal is your understanding. Those two things are universally accepted and hence supported by both camps. AMD is supporting the universally used standards and it is MORE than enough. It doesn't have to go beyond and cause fragmentation. End of discussion.

 

[Joker]

vickybat

i suggest u to sell off your hd 5750 and get a gts 450...be satisfied and stop this useless discussion.

both companies have different idelogies and are managed differently. so **** it and get over it.

 

[Cilus]

vickybat, your 5750 also support loss less bit-stream audio over HDMI and if you would buy a old HD 4850 card, then also you can get Bit stream audio over HDMI.
All the 6XXX series cards support 3D bluray playback and you don't need any specific Display like Nvidia specified to watch bluray. A normal 3DTV can be used with the Radeon 6XXX series cards.

However it is off the topic discussion.

 

[vickybat]

You just don't seem to understand one thing. AMD doesn't believe in reinventing the wheel. It will support something if it is "open" and common to all i.e. standards which are truly "open and universal" and are not proprietary. AMD supports OpenCL (should I again repeat it 10 times?) which is "open" and not proprietary like CUDA.

If a company X believes in fragmentation, the other doesn't have to follow the same route. Get over it. What you want is both companies coming up with their own competing technologies/frameworks on simple things which should rather be common to a developer and cause fragmentation + retarded confusion.

AMD's silly ideologies are not taking us anyhere. I don't have a personal grudge but i am not satisfied with the support thats all. That is just a personal opinion though.

This thing by any means is NOT related to the discussion which we are heaving here.

Thats not for you but was for cilus.

The big deal is your understanding. Those two things are universally accepted and hence supported by both camps. AMD is supporting the universally used standards and it is MORE than enough. It doesn't have to go beyond and cause fragmentation. End of discussion.

AMD is simply limiting itself sticking to universally accepted standards which is also done by the other camp so it doesn't matter. Developers are getting paid to develop and not doing it freely i.e their job is not "open".lol Maybe its more than enough for you but not everyone's cup of tea.

Same things also happen in consoles when you compare a multiplatform games with an exclusive one. The differences are somewhat big. Thats because the developers put more stress into a proprietary engine. Eg. uncharted 2. Had it been a multiplatform , it wouldn't even had been a masterpiece that it is today. So universally accepted objects are not necesarily the way to follow but thinking out of the box sets new benchmark and raises the bar(if thought properly).

Guess its not taking us anyhere so surely we end this discussion right here.

 

[vickybat]

vickybat

i suggest u to sell off your hd 5750 and get a gts 450...be satisfied and stop this useless discussion.

both companies have different idelogies and are managed differently. so **** it and get over it.

No buddy i'm not that rich. I have to be content with what i have currently.

But in future upgrades if things stay the same or atleast follow this trend , then it will always be NVIDIA.

 

[asingh]

End of the day I do not care two hoots what the GPU does as long as it is spinning out games to me quick and fast -- with all the eye-candy cranked up. My summary of this thread so far has been:

Drivers:
Both are equally fine. If one browses other forums nVidia and ATI have just the same amount of problems. Saying ATI drivers are worse than nVidia is a pure myth. People are equally happy and just as dissatisfied. ATI does not have profiles as of now, but they release CAP installers which are tweaked to enhance the driver for games. And instead of whining about drivers there are various tools out there which you let tweak and enhance driver functions (not OC) which are not available. Example profiling is available on CCC using RadeonPRO developed by a kewl dude on guru3d.com.

XfireX/SLI:
It is really easy to read up reviews and run comments. Once a user has used a multi-GPU subystem they will understand the pro and cons of two GPUs installed. Real experience counts here. I never comment on SLI cause I never used it. Sounds good though. XfireX of course I know what I am talking about.

PhysX/Physics:
Well it looks nice. If my GPU can render it WHY NOT. Again, I club tessellation and physics in one bucket. If the VGA can do it and I still get quick rates (since I only play FPS/TPS) I am fine. Nothing to run after and be all crazy about it. This thread sounds like PhysX is more important than FPS.

CUDA/STREAM:
Okay, what is this used for. How many of us have really used this, or will use it exclusively that we use it as a differentiator..? It just another on-side addition to the CPU via GPU. Again, not a killer or maker for GPUs.

Honestly when I bought my GPUs and the ones before I never even look at these factors. Pure gimmick and marketing tricks by BOTH camps. Its only the FPS I want my GPUs to run nothing else...! And that is what I will pay for.

 

[vickybat]

Well said asingh and that is how it should be.

Currently we are getting more FPS from the green camp in the topend segment and that makes them highly recommended.

 

[damngoodman999]

End of the day I do not care two hoots what the GPU does as long as it is spinning out games to me quick and fast -- with all the eye-candy cranked up. My summary of this thread so far has been:

Drivers:
Both are equally fine. If one browses other forums nVidia and ATI have just the same amount of problems. Saying ATI drivers are worse than nVidia is a pure myth. People are equally happy and just as dissatisfied. ATI does not have profiles as of now, but they release CAP installers which are tweaked to enhance the driver for games. And instead of whining about drivers there are various tools out there which you let tweak and enhance driver functions (not OC) which are not available. Example profiling is available on CCC using RadeonPRO developed by a kewl dude on guru3d.com.

XfireX/SLI:
It is really easy to read up reviews and run comments. Once a user has used a multi-GPU subystem they will understand the pro and cons of two GPUs installed. Real experience counts here. I never comment on SLI cause I never used it. Sounds good though. XfireX of course I know what I am talking about.

PhysX/Physics:
Well it looks nice. If my GPU can render it WHY NOT. Again, I club tessellation and physics in one bucket. If the VGA can do it and I still get quick rates (since I only play FPS/TPS) I am fine. Nothing to run after and be all crazy about it. This thread sounds like PhysX is more important than FPS.

CUDA/STREAM:
Okay, what is this used for. How many of us have really used this, or will use it exclusively that we use it as a differentiator..? It just another on-side addition to the CPU via GPU. Again, not a killer or maker for GPUs.

Honestly when I bought my GPUs and the ones before I never even look at these factors. Pure gimmick and marketing tricks by BOTH camps. Its only the FPS I want my GPUs to run nothing else...! And that is what I will pay for.

Yes , everything u say Is correct

physx - its depends on what so ever with the nvidia .But still Ati can give awesome FPS & eyecandy

Cuda - It doesn't take big part in games

Xfire/Sli - Xfire has superb'ly improved from 2008 to 2010 all games which utilizes sli also uses Xfire ,, gr8 work ATI


DRIVERS here comes my problem which i faced myself ,

1. ATI-Upgrade of drivers gives poor performance than previous [ Thats weird]
2. Upgrading drivers without removing OLD drivers Gives BSOD , Which never Happens in NVIDIA !!
3. CCC disappears / wont function sometimes
4. Heat increased after drivers update ??

 

[skeletor]

[*]Upgrading drivers without removing OLD drivers Gives BSOD , Which never Happens in NVIDIA !!

It happened with me only a week ago!

 

[asingh]

@ICO;DGMan:
Well you have the option to uninstall right. Why not use that..?

Drivers need to be understood. At times there is no need to update. I am stilling using 10.5a, it is good enough.

 

[skeletor]

@ICO;
Well you have the option to uninstall right. Why not use that..?

well, in my case it was Apple's Boot Camp which had an update so it had to upgrade all my Windows drivers.

 

[vickybat]

^^
Do you have a mac?

 

[Piyush]

^^yup he does

 

[mohiuddin]

6950 is taking a new place- no one to compete!!!as 5xx gtx r revised version if gtx 4xx, (their alu,simd,sps pattern is almost same), i guess driver updates will not effect that much like 6900 driver updates.becoz, 6900 r totally different in VLIWs pattern...amd has a long way to go with their driver updates.....

guyz,may be old, but didn't see any link of it here, so posting it.

Radeon HD 6950 CrossfireX review

if i did something wrong, pardon me.

 

[vickybat]

@ MOHIUDDIN

Well don't say there's no one to compete as you can see the 570 beating it in all the benchmarks both in single and multigpu avatars. VLIW belongs to amd architecural representation of placing stream processors and the special function sp has been removed in VLIW4.

Driver updates will happen and continue to improve performance in both the camps.GF 100 is not completely similar with GF110 and there are differences.

In the benches gtx 570 is also scaling almost twice as its score in metro was 27 and in sli is 54 at 1920x1080 & physx off whereas 6950 was 25 and in xfire it was 50.

So both are scaling well and expect these numbers to improve.

What makes 6950 sweet is its estimated price but we have to wait for indian prices.

Technically 6950 was made to compete with gtx 570 as they are their respective company's 2nd flagship models. and we are seeing the 570 as a clear winner here.