AMD Radeon 7000 series to be unveiled Dec 5 - first with 28nm again
- Thread starter artist
- Start date
- Status
LabouredSubterfuge
Member
Don't think I'll upgrade from a GTX 580 for a good while. And unless AMD's driver support gets better, it probably won't be for one of theirs either.
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
SR3's issues are mainly with certain AMD cards it appears. Works perfectly smooth on my rig at highest settings and 1920x1200. It's clearly the definitive version and nowhere close to SR2's outsourced port job.
Again, beside the point. Proper API support should not be determined by its use in "AAA" games, and issues in OpenGL-powered games shouldn't take almost two months to fix.
Even if you believe OpenGL support isn't at all important, there's still the matter of seemingly sloppy support for DX-based games at release.
Ryoma-Echizen
Member
A single 7950 should be faster than your CF(and a lot faster in min. fps) with less than half the power consumption.
7950 ~150w
HD5870 ~175w / 320w CF
I have 6870 and i think that i will pass 7xxx generation. But, in 2013 when first revision of 28nm process comes, then i will bite and get awesome game processing improvement. By then, new generation of consoles will be looming, and multiplatform PC games will require new hardware.
Was I the only one who was confused about a thread title that seemed to be talking about a 9 year old budget-line video card?
Not to be dismissive of the driver problems (seeing as many of the ones described are a real problem and if they had happened to me with any consistency I would probably buy NVidia) but I've been using Radeons for so long that the numbers have actually looped back around for me (My first Radeon was a 7500, since then I've had two 8500LEs, 9600XT, an x700, an x1300(?), a 4870, and now a 4870x2) and I have never had any driver issues. This will probably be the generation that I buy so I'll be watching it closely.
I'm probably going to buy whichever dual-GPU-on-one card solution is better on paper due to how satisfied I am with the performance and longevity of the one I have now (would recommend to all of my friends, etc.); a big deal-breaker for me will be if AMD continues with their dual BIOS format.
I'm probably going to buy whichever dual-GPU-on-one card solution is better on paper due to how satisfied I am with the performance and longevity of the one I have now (would recommend to all of my friends, etc.); a big deal-breaker for me will be if AMD continues with their dual BIOS format.
I'm thinking in makin the jump too and not cause nvidia cards are better, just because I don't want to waste time in solving all the ATI issues I found in games.
RukusProvider
Banned
Apart from Dragon Age 2, nvidia simply tends to have better drivers and more consistant performance than ATI.
If you look at Hardocp's graphs you'll notice that often nvidia cards get their avg fps by hovering around the same range where as ATI might be close in numbers but lots of peaks and valleys to get there. The nvidia cards with less fluctuations make for a better gaming experience. Even Hardocp, who do tend to give ATI a fair bit of leniency have been pointing this out recently.
If you look at Hardocp's graphs you'll notice that often nvidia cards get their avg fps by hovering around the same range where as ATI might be close in numbers but lots of peaks and valleys to get there. The nvidia cards with less fluctuations make for a better gaming experience. Even Hardocp, who do tend to give ATI a fair bit of leniency have been pointing this out recently.
Necronomikon
Member
Was I the only one who was confused about a thread title that seemed to be talking about a 9 year old budget-line video card?
I thought of that too, but easily regain conscience of the situation (as I have a 6870 right now).
But I did enjoy that card (ATI Radeon 7500):
I was in the All in Wonder wagon and since then I've been in the ATI/AMD side for video cards, but sadly the AiW Series died and I was left disappointed.
Anyway, I'll be watching closely this thread but as I mentioned early, there is no reason for me to upgrade when everything I want/need to play is more than acceptable to me, and since I don't play almost anything day 1 (except Nintendo stuff) I don't suffer to much about drivers stuff (but want to be Nvidia for better support and for Physx sadly).
I haven't had any driver issues with AMD/ATI, but at the same time I haven't played a lot of new releases day 1 (except BF3... and no problems there) lately. I'm running with a 5770, and it's still performing admirably.
I'll likely wait though for nvidia's offering before upgrading, I don't really hold an allegiance to one company, I just buy what gives me the best bang for my buck.
lol. AMD, and in some respects Nvidia, really should rebrand their cards by now. Sure the old 7000 series is way old (and unlikely to cause much confusion), but it's time to come with a new product name besides Radeon. You know, kinda like how intel basically mothballed Pentium.
I'll likely wait though for nvidia's offering before upgrading, I don't really hold an allegiance to one company, I just buy what gives me the best bang for my buck.
lol. AMD, and in some respects Nvidia, really should rebrand their cards by now. Sure the old 7000 series is way old (and unlikely to cause much confusion), but it's time to come with a new product name besides Radeon. You know, kinda like how intel basically mothballed Pentium.
Dreams-Visions
Member
My 6950 is still waiting for there to be more than 2 games on the fucking market that tax it.
Rodney McKay
Member
I wish they would just name cards by year and some indication of the relative power.
ATI 2012 Budget
ATI 2012 Max Performance
etc.
Same thing with CPU's. The only thing I know about those is that higher GHz is good. All the other hyperthreading and cache size is all Greek to me.
ATI 2012 Budget
ATI 2012 Max Performance
etc.
Same thing with CPU's. The only thing I know about those is that higher GHz is good. All the other hyperthreading and cache size is all Greek to me.
Necronomikon
Member
I just thought of something... could it be possible that it's not entirely AMD's fault about the performance situation, but maybe vendors have something to do too?
Why my question, because a friend of mine has an AMD from XFX whereas I have an AMD from Sapphire, and we sometimes differ from performance (although I know there are other factors like RAM clocks, RAM Quantity, Motherboard BUS Bandwidth, CPU, Cooling, etc) could it be that this have something to do with performance/bugs problems?
Just a thought! What do you think??
Why my question, because a friend of mine has an AMD from XFX whereas I have an AMD from Sapphire, and we sometimes differ from performance (although I know there are other factors like RAM clocks, RAM Quantity, Motherboard BUS Bandwidth, CPU, Cooling, etc) could it be that this have something to do with performance/bugs problems?
Just a thought! What do you think??
Baconsaurus Rex
Member
Are the 6000 series cards likely to drop in price when the 7000 series releases? Was thinking of buying a 6950, but I can wait a little longer.
Fallout-NL
Member
Sometime during middle of 2012. The release-spectrum is quite wide so I guess anything from a march-sep release window is feasible.
Here's hoping nvidia waits and releases during the latter half of 2012...
BFIB
Member
I've always been an nvidia buyer, but decided to try out AMD on my last build. My 5850 has been going strong, but this year I have had constant issues with game patches. Bought Rage, couldn't play it for over a week, and ended up loading an old driver just to be able to play the game. Bought Skyrim, and while it runs the game on high settings, my FPS is all over the place.
I like what AMD has to offer spec wise, and card wise, but if I'm going to spend $300 on a card, I expect updates for the new games that are released.
I like what AMD has to offer spec wise, and card wise, but if I'm going to spend $300 on a card, I expect updates for the new games that are released.
plagiarize
Banned
Serious Sam 3 has some minor issues. they got better with the 11.11b performance drivers but still exist.
but yeah, Arkham City has no specific AMD issues that i've seen, Crysis 2 was just fine, as were most of the other PC games i was playing day one this year.
Rage was a clusterfuck. AMD really dropped the ball on that, complete with the calamity of uploading the wrong drivers and telling people to use those ones for it, when they ran it even worse.
Wolf Akela
Member
But that's pretty much how it already works.
"HD 6850"
6 -- card generation, higher can mean more features, less power/heat, etc
8 -- performance level, higher means better performance.
5,0 -- performance sublevel, higher means stronger but not as much as above
Card generation is preferable over year because card generations don't really last a year or less
Doc Holliday
SPOILER: Columbus finds America
Currently i have 2 6850s. Game driver issues are only part of the story. For a long time i couldnt use photoshop cs 5s 3D features because of shitty drivers. I've had issues with maya, 3ds max and good luck installing/removing the drivers too. Amd drivers are crap!
Gully State
Member
Wow an estimated 70% performance increase? That's pretty huge. I wonder if my Core 2 Quad Q9550 would bottleneck it. So far, it's been more than enough for running games on high or highest settings at 1080p even at stock.
I game at 1920x1080 as i do it on my TV. Right now i have a 6870 which is more than enough for most games i play. My biggest deciding factor when buying is Heat, and power draw. Anything that lets me put on more bells and whistles, draw less power, put out lesser heat is what im going to buy. Currently i just bought some parts for an 17 2600k build, but was planning on keeping my 6870. So, hopefully these new cards will kick some serious ass.
Its just GAF hyperbole. AMD had some issues recently, public memory is short.
Doc Holliday
SPOILER: Columbus finds America
I've had many driver issues with AMD cards going as far back as the 9800 pro. Look up Radeon + photoshop, 3ds Max, Maya issues on google.
All of the specs you've seen in regards to the 7000 series desktop cards from AMD have been proven fake. Especially in regards to power consumption.
Woah woah, I thought we were talking gaming related issues. Should I bring up Nvidia's show stopping issues with Vista?
FWIW, AMD's driver support for GPGPU stuff is very lacking, which is what you listed.
edit: Just to add to it, AMD admitted that a lot of it came down to the complex compiler and their arch (VLIW) compared to Nvidia's SIMD arch. Which is why AMD is now making switching architectures, the compiler should be easier to work with and I guess it will not require a lot of hand holding from AMD to 3rd party devs.
Hyperbole?
This thread is as bad as the stupid console war threads I try to avoid, jeez.
Are we going to pretend AMD drivers and the support for their own hardware is good?
Shit. They have their monthly driver, which they have constantly been releasing iterations of by lettering them which is done because of late game support or critical fixes for big titles. So you constantly have to check up on drivers. Then they have their preview line of drivers, they have their Crossfire profiles that seem to get updated as the wind blows as well as monthly releases - Their CF support is horrendous, they remove functionality from their drivers without notice and a month later it's back ( Like the ability to turn off CF via Cataclyst AI, that disappeared in a driver a while back and suddenly, it was back ).
And let's not get started on all the god damn issues the drivers have, tend to be stuff like shadows and AA / AF performance. Oh and bad AA support isn't really driver exclusive, AMD / ATI cards have always been really poor at AA, cards just tend to go belly up compared to the competition. When it comes to Crossfire, the microstuttering and piss poor support just kills.
I love AMD but they have some serious issues.
Shit. They have their monthly driver, which they have constantly been releasing iterations of by lettering them which is done because of late game support or critical fixes for big titles. So you constantly have to check up on drivers. Then they have their preview line of drivers, they have their Crossfire profiles that seem to get updated as the wind blows as well as monthly releases - Their CF support is horrendous, they remove functionality from their drivers without notice and a month later it's back ( Like the ability to turn off CF via Cataclyst AI, that disappeared in a driver a while back and suddenly, it was back ).
And let's not get started on all the god damn issues the drivers have, tend to be stuff like shadows and AA / AF performance. Oh and bad AA support isn't really driver exclusive, AMD / ATI cards have always been really poor at AA, cards just tend to go belly up compared to the competition. When it comes to Crossfire, the microstuttering and piss poor support just kills.
I love AMD but they have some serious issues.
yeah, but we have already had Radeon:
7000
7500
8500
9000
9200
9250
9500
9700
9600
9800
And all of those are much older (and most slower) than a Radeon HD 2400, 2600, 2900...6850,6970 etc
I guess they added the "HD" moniker but still just looking at the numbers it could be confusing for anyone not familiar with Radeon history.
AMD driver problems are not overblown, not bullshit, not fanboyism. It was always a talking point back in the day during the height of the Nvidia vs ATI war, and I treated it as such and always just went for the best value in any given hardware cycle, but my personal experiences with AMD in the past year have completely soured me on their products.
Unstable crashing drivers, broken day 1 game performance, wonky issues with HMDI audio that change with every driver update but refuse to actually work properly. I am not going by what other people are saying, I'm going by my own experiences. AMD will need 1-2 years of clean track record (and a priceerformance advantage) before I give them another shot.
Unstable crashing drivers, broken day 1 game performance, wonky issues with HMDI audio that change with every driver update but refuse to actually work properly. I am not going by what other people are saying, I'm going by my own experiences. AMD will need 1-2 years of clean track record (and a price
erformance advantage) before I give them another shot.Doc Holliday
SPOILER: Columbus finds America
Also good luck trying to find the preview drivers on their website. Most people are complaining are AMD owners not sure why they would do that unless they had genuine issues.
They already have the priceerformance advantage over Nvidia.
I'm no proponent of either company (I run 560 SLI and 260 SLI, as well as 5850 crossfire on my machines). But the machine (HTPC w/5850 Crossfire) I do most of my gaming on nowadays hasn't had very many issues with most games on Crossfire even, aside from Crysis 2. BF3 on Ultra has been OK. I guess I've been lucky?
erformance advantage over Nvidia.I'm no proponent of either company (I run 560 SLI and 260 SLI, as well as 5850 crossfire on my machines). But the machine (HTPC w/5850 Crossfire) I do most of my gaming on nowadays hasn't had very many issues with most games on Crossfire even, aside from Crysis 2. BF3 on Ultra has been OK. I guess I've been lucky?
Danny Dudekisser
I paid good money for this Dynex!
Obviously having ATI around as a competitor is a good thing. Their products are thoroughly busted, but they do force Nvidia to get shit done.
BoobPhysics101
Banned
Yes and no. The mid-range 7000 series are essentially going to be 6950's and 6970's on 28nm so they'll be much cooler, overclock better, use far less power and be smaller/cheaper. Does that make sense as to why it's yes/no?
Personally, never had problems with AMD hardware ever. Had a 9800 Pro, X850 XT PE, 5870m, and 6970m. All have been rock solid in drivers/hardware.
- Status