Could the Radeon HD 6770 be a re-badged 5770?

There’s some strange inconsistency in rumors about AMD’s upcoming Radeon HD 6700 series. Last week, one report hinted that the cards would have 256-bit memory interfaces and meaty performance. Now, a story by ATi-Forum says the Radeon HD 6770 will be nothing but a re-badged 5770, which would mean a 128-bit memory interface and not-quite-as-meaty benchmark results.

Interestingly, the ATi-Forum report goes on to explain the move as a simple name reshuffling by AMD. The product that was previously supposed to launch as the Radeon HD 6770, code-named Barts XT, will now appear in stores as the 6870. The former 6870, Cayman XT, will now be dubbed 6970, and the top-of-the-line offering will see the light of day as the Radeon HD 6990, the report says.

That would be interesting, if true, since AMD has stuck pretty tightly to its existing naming scheme since the Radeon HD 3000 series: x800 for the high end, x700 for the mid range, and so forth. Who knows, though? Perhaps this "Barts XT" part will be quick enough to fill in as a high-end product.

Comments closed
    • Flickshots
    • 9 years ago

    I don’t think they would do such thing and name the 5770 card 6770, but slightly changing the 5770 and naming it 6670 or 6570 wouldn’t be a big deal.

    • agawtrip
    • 9 years ago

    change the name increase the price
    whatheck

    • Dingmatt
    • 9 years ago

    Sounds perfectly reasonable to me…
    Come on the 5000 series was only a leaner overclocked 4000 chip, do you really believe that AMD could design a next-gen chip in just under a year?

    Everyone saying that Nvidia’s a generation behind but I’m not convinced that’s true, they might be a series behind (i.e. 5000>6000) but there now at the beginning of a chips lifecycle while AMD’s at the end.

    I’m predicting that AMD will rehash the cypress chip for at least another series before they can get a new design out the door… We may all be surprised when we realise that Nvidia might have lost this years battle but are now posed to win the war.

      • LoneWolf15
      • 9 years ago

      /[https://techreport.com/articles.x/17618<]ยง

      • DaleLaRoy
      • 9 years ago

      Of course AMD could not design a whole new generation in a year. They released the K6-2 in 1998 then the Athlon in 1999, but the Athlon design was begun in 1996. Designs for successive generations are done in parallel.

      Cayman is to Cypress as Northwood was to Willamette, but without the shrink. Cypress was crippled because the TSMC 40nm process had/has such a high defect density that fully functional large core chips are so scarce the original Cypress design had to be cut down to reduce die size, just as the original Willamette design was crippled because it was cut down to reduce die size.

      Fortunately, ATI was working on a respin of the smaller Juniper core to migrate DP floating point to the midrange prior to Northern Islands, with part of the goal being matching the per cycle FP performance of the RV790 so the high end Barts could replace the 5830, probably with two extra execution units rather than a 256-bit interface. When 32nm was cancelled, so was the RV740 style refresh of Juniper. Cancellation of NI resulting from cancellation of 32nm resulted in engineers being reassigned from NI to Barts/Cayman in order to derive Cayman from Barts, while adapting Barts from 32nm to 40nm. The result was Barts being reduced to 800 shaders to make it a viably small building block of Cayman, and given a 256-bit bus to compensate for the missing execution units, some NI features, such as enhanced tessellation units and for Cayman a 384-bit memory interface, migrating to Barts/Cayman, further delay of Barts, and probably a speed bin bump for Barts.

      The increased die size of Cayman versus Cypress at 40nm is made possible by two developments. One is decreased defect density of the 40nm process, and the other is moving away from the practice of shipping fully functional parts at the high end. Indeed, designing Cayman using Barts as a building block probably means that the granularity for disabling execution units with Cayman is 80 shaders, rather than 160 shaders, which means that a 1440 shader Cayman part would tolerate up to two defects, versus just one for the 5850. I initially suggested 1520 shaders for the high end Cayman, but considering the difficulty of adapting drivers to this shader width, I think 1440 is more probable.

      Hopefully, the reason for the rumors of Barts being bumped up to the 68xx designation result from the high end Barts not just matching 5830 level performance, but 5850 level performance. The 5830 only managed to provide performance equivalent to a 4890 downclocked to the same 800 MHz clock rate as the 5830, but it achieved this level of performance with half its ROPs disabled in order to reduce its performance relative to the 5850. In theory, a 5830 would only have to reach 932 MHz with all 32 ROPs active in order to exceed the performance of the 5850 by virtue of its ROPs operating at 932 MHz versus just 725 MHz with the 5850. Barts should only need 16 ROPs to match the performance of the 5830 at 800 MHz, but will have 32 ROPs, and quite possibly ship at 950 MHz, echoing the step up from 750 MHz with RV770 to 850 MHz with RV790. If ATI targeted 5830 level performance for the 6770 and 5770 level performance for the 6750, but is getting 5850 level performance for the 6770 and 5830 level performance for the 6750, it would be tempting to reposition Barts as a Cypress replacement.

      My guess is that ATI would like to position the Radeon HD 5850 as the competitor to the Geforce GTX 460. Indeed, with the Cypress core being just 324mm2 versus the GF104 core being 368mm2, and the 5850 being tolerant of one defect, just as the 460 is tolerant of one defect, ATI probably gets more 5850 GPUs per wafer than nVidia gets 460 GPUs per wafer, and might even be pricing the 5850 GPU the same or less than the 460 GPU. But, while prices for board producers are determined by contract, and board level prices for OEMs are also determined by contract, street prices for boards are determined by demand versus supply. As long as TSMC can not meet the demand for Cypress GPUs, street prices will remain high.

      My guess is that ATI wants to bring 5850 level performance to the 5830 price point, but board vendors are resisting this. If ATI is already pricing the 5850 GPU as cheap as the GTX 460 GPU, and is planning on charging vendors the same for the high end Barts as the GTX 460, while counting on increased supply resulting from the much smaller die size of Barts versus Cypress to ease the supply versus demand situation, thus resulting in board level pricing to fall, vendors might not be happy. Thus, board vendors might be pushing for Barts to be repositioned as a Cypress replacement rather than a Juniper replacement. It seems likely that the Juniper rebranding rumor originated with board vendors.

        • khands
        • 9 years ago

        Wall of text r[

    • spigzone
    • 9 years ago

    I sense a presence … a Fuadian presence …

    • jdaven
    • 9 years ago

    If AMD rebrands any of their GPU products like Nvidia did, they should be held to the same scrutiny and criticism as Nvidia received. I will be the first to lead the charge.

    Unfortunately, my only choices at this point become Intel, SIS, VIA and Matrox. I guess I’ll have to give up games, video watching, flash animation and porn. ๐Ÿ™

      • MadManOriginal
      • 9 years ago

      Hooold on a minute. Your only choice at this point or any other point is whatever Apple tells you you should have!

    • Ryu Connor
    • 9 years ago

    It’s surreal to me how riled people get about these naming schemes. So contentious that it warrants front page news posts.

    What a product is named or if it’s an old design carried forward has always been irrelevant. People need to step outside this community, this bastion of computer geekery, and realize the real world doesn’t care.

    • LaChupacabra
    • 9 years ago

    According to Nordic Hardware (http://www.nordichardware.com/news/71-graphics/41060-amd-barts-launches-in-october-as-radeon-hd-6800.html) it’s not re-badging. The 68xx series will be the mid range (old 57xx). Nordic Hardware has been rock solid on ATI rumors since the 3xxx series, I’d believe them.

    • FuturePastNow
    • 9 years ago

    Crazy, but, crazier things have happened.

    • sweatshopking
    • 9 years ago

    You guys are crazy. ATI has done this a million times. don’t ask for examples. i don’t have any. I just KNOW it. Nvidia is the king, and they’ll rise to the top soon enough. the 460 is easily the best gpu to buy right now, and the 500 series is going to DESTROY the 6k series. yay yah, they were a little late, but that’s cause the improvements are so huge. you guys just wait. Jen is going to smash AMD.

      • khands
      • 9 years ago

      They’ll be a generation and a half behind by the end of the year if they don’t hurry up and get the rest of the mid/bottom rung cards out the door.

      • jtsmith581
      • 9 years ago

      What, PRIME1’s back from the dead? (jk, but’s that’s too subtle for sarcasm, in the wrong venue for trolling, and a bit founded on blind wishes otherwise …)

        • sweatshopking
        • 9 years ago

        uhhh it was sarcasm. you new here?

      • designerfx
      • 9 years ago

      clearly that’s the most factual response. did you take that from the ICP video? “I don’t want facts and scientists, it must be a mystery”?

      what a waste, even as sarcasm.

        • sweatshopking
        • 9 years ago

        listen poopy pants. i don’t understand which side you’re on. so i’ll assume you’re agreeing with me.

        Thanks for your support

    • jdcope
    • 9 years ago

    It wouldnt surprise me, tech companies are suffering through this economy like everyone else. I could see them rebadging GPUs to save money, but make it look like they are producing new stuff.

    • toyota
    • 9 years ago

    I don’t recall ATI ever rebadging anything before. if anything ATI always seems to deliver a newer and better product then rumors indicate. Nvidia will simply do a bios flash and sticker change on a video card and call it new though.

      • ew
      • 9 years ago

      I think they’ve done it before with some really low end 42xx and 51xx cards before. Nobody really cares about them though.

        • Flying Fox
        • 9 years ago

        8500 -> 9200 AFAIK

          • TheEmrys
          • 9 years ago

          Pretty sure it was the 9000 and 9100, too.

            • A_Pickle
            • 9 years ago

            Pfft. Low-end cards don’t count.

          • swaaye
          • 9 years ago

          Radeon 7500 = shrink of Radeon 1
          Radeon 9100 = 8500
          Radeon 9000 = 9200/9250
          Radeon 9600 = 9550/X300/X550/X600/X1050 (some were PCIe reworks)
          Radeon X1300 = X1400/1550
          Radeon 3450 = shrink of 2400
          Radeon 3650 = shrink of 2600

          740G IGP = 690G shrink

          It’s a grey area. I couldn’t really care less because I am able to educate myself on what each chip is. If they can take advantage of lazy morons, I don’t have a problem with that. ๐Ÿ™‚

          That some enthusiasts here don’t even remember all of this “controversy” tells volumes of how little it matters out in the real world.

      • Deanjo
      • 9 years ago

      LOL, ATi has done it many times before, most notably one their IGP’s and mobile parts.

        • OneArmedScissor
        • 9 years ago

        Eh…the “rebadged” IGPs are all slightly different chips. Their labeling scheme there is pretty conservative and kept within the actual series they’re from. It’s not like they took the 3200 and renamed it the 5300 or something like that once the 5000 series cards came out.

        As for the laptop cards, no telling. Fortunately, they weren’t prevalent.

      • OneArmedScissor
      • 9 years ago

      They gave a few random 4000 series chips weird designations like 530v and 5145 for laptop makers who requested it. I’m not sure I’ve ever even seen one, though, which I assumed would be the case. It was just weird, more than misleading.

      • jtsmith581
      • 9 years ago

      IFAIK, this was done only once, where the Radeon 9100 (ca 2003) was a slightly lower-clocked Radeon 8500 (ca 2001). This caused some frustration as the 9100 was substantially faster than the 9200/9250 released around the same time (2 GT/s, 8 GB/s vs. 1 GT/s, 6.4 GB/s), further exasperated by 64-bit memory interface versions of the 92xx series (~2.6 GB/s).

      • Deanjo
      • 9 years ago

      Heard inside AMD:

      “Hey lets add two display connectors to the V8800 and call it the V9800 series…..”

        • jdaven
        • 9 years ago

        Dont’ forget the added memory! ๐Ÿ™‚

          • Deanjo
          • 9 years ago

          Right, that justifies it. I love my new GTX 560 that extra 256 megs of ram made it a totally different class of card then my GTX 460 with only 768 Megs of ram but I still should have waited for that Gainward GTX 860 with the 2 Gigs of ram.

    • Bauxite
    • 9 years ago

    I smell FUD

    • crsh1976
    • 9 years ago

    Hrm, let’s hope they don’t start playing the Nvidia rebadging game, look where it got there.

    • SomeOtherGeek
    • 9 years ago

    Whatever, as long as the 5xxx line up come down on prices.

      • sydbot
      • 9 years ago

      Ditto, gimme that 5850 for $200!

    • Malphas
    • 9 years ago

    Why are some of you sounding so shocked by this? nvidia did this with the G80/G92 for like three years.

      • khands
      • 9 years ago

      It just doesn’t make any sense, also, AMD is not Nvidia.

      • KikassAssassin
      • 9 years ago

      It’s stupid and annoying and people complain every time nVidia does it, and I’ve always appreciated that AMD/ATI hasn’t resorted to this kind of deceptive marketing trickery. I’m pretty sure this is just a baseless rumor, but I would be annoyed if it turned out to be true.

    • StuG
    • 9 years ago

    This would be really stupid. If Barts was to move to anything it should be the 6830, I will be very upset if they actually rename their entire line-up for no reason. They have already affirmed x870 as one of their high end parts. They have just recently affirmed that x970 is a dual-gpu part. I feel that moving away from that when there is no need would be pretty bad marketing.

      • LovermanOwens
      • 9 years ago

      I hope that you won’t get “really upset” over this little tiny thing. What would happen if something truely important in your life.

      Before you declare that you might explode in rage, I would wait and see what they actually do. Things aren’t finalized over there yet and I would think that the naming scheme that they currently have and have used for years will carry on until we hit the 9000’s.

      On the other hand sometimes change is good. Don’t discount it.

        • flip-mode
        • 9 years ago

        Do not take his remark out of context. He obviously would not be getting “very upset” on a life altering scale. It’s obvious he meant he would be very upset with AMD, and I’d be right there with him. We’ve all had enough product renaming by the grace of Nvidia and any of us that have scowled upon Nvidia for doing it should be scowling upon any hint of it from AMD or whomever.

    • DaleLaRoy
    • 9 years ago

    This could actually be good news. If the rumors are true, Barts should be about 220mm2. Replacing a 170mm2 core with a 220mm2 core would negatively impact GPU availability.

    The Radeon HD 5830 is generally accepted as being slower than the Radeon HD 4890. If the Barts shaders are as fast as those of the 4890, and the 6870 were to have the same 850 MHz clock, 16 ROPs, and the same 975 MHz memory clock with a 256-bit bus as the Radeon HD 4890. it would beat the Radeon HD 5830. I would expect the 6870 to be clocked at 950 MHz, have 32 ROPs, and memory clocked at no less than 1 GHz, and more probably at least 1.1 GHz. With an estimated yield of 56% for defect free GPUs, and a 220nm die size, the number of 5830 class GPUs obtainable from Barts should be higher than the number obtainable from Cypress.

    Keep in mind that the TSMC process has matured since the launch of Juniper, and should be binning higher. If ATI relaunches the 57xx series as the 67xx series, I would expect the 6770 to either have a core clock of 900 MHz, with all 800 shaders active, and priced the same as the 5770, or be clocked at 950 MHz with just 720 shaders active and be priced lower than the 5770.

    I think however, the rumor is only half true. All 6xxx series processors, including Caicos, are supposed to support double precision FP, which Juniper lacks. Keep in mind the 4730 was a totally different core than the 4770. ATI could rename the high end Barts processor the 6830, while having the top end salvage Barts called the 6770. At the same time however, ATI could reaffirm their commitment to the smaller Juniper core by launching a Radeon HD 5775 with a 900 MHz core speed, or a Radeon HD 5780 with a 950 MHz core speed at the same time Barts is launched.

    • Fragnificent
    • 9 years ago

    God I love/hate knowing the truth about this already. ๐Ÿ™‚

    • flip-mode
    • 9 years ago

    If so, it would be pure insanity. I’m leaning strongly towards disbelief at the moment, but it is not impossible.

    Such a move would make no sense at all. The 5770 is already a lackluster midrange offering – carrying that exact product forward with nothing but a rename would be reputation suicide and there would be massive disappointment.

    I just plain dislike renaming. I don’t care if they renamed it from 5770 to 6550.

      • DaleLaRoy
      • 9 years ago

      The 5770 a lackluster part? The 5770 is almost as fast as the 5830. If you ask me, the most serious flaw with the 57xx series is that there is no member with a TDP of under 75 watts so it wouldn’t need a 6-pin connector. Although the lack of DP floating point is a close second.

      According to my calculations, the shaders of Juniper deliver at least 85%, and possibly 100% of the performance of RV790, while the shaders of Cypress deliver only 70% of the performance of the RV790 shaders. If Cayman has 1600 shaders of RV790 level performance it will have a 40% increase in shader performance. Combine this with a 50% increase in memory bandwidth and ROPs and improved cache and I would expect a 40% increase in per cycle performance over Cypress. Having said that, I expect the top of the line Cayman part to have 1520 active shaders at 950 MHz, with a modest increase in memory clock, providing nearly a 50% performance boost.

        • flip-mode
        • 9 years ago

        q[

          • TheEmrys
          • 9 years ago

          The only way I could maybe sorta kinda see this working is if its a 256 bit bus and high clocks.

          • swaaye
          • 9 years ago

          Well it does have mostly the same level of hardware as the 4870 so it’s not all that surprising how it performs. It has more bandwidth than a 4850 but less than a 4870. It’s a card designed for the midrange price range, but is an attempt to match the clearly more expensive 4870/4890. I thought that was on target.

          Apparently the 4870 and 4890 had more bandwidth than they could ever take advantage of. HD 2900 XT was perhaps the most ludicrous card of all time in this way. ๐Ÿ™‚

          Renaming the 5770 as 6770 would be pretty cheesy if there are zero changes. Maybe they will drop in some faster GDDR5 and pump up the core clocks a bit. I’m not sure that 256-bit is likely though because that would definitely bump up the cost to build the whole product.

    • KikassAssassin
    • 9 years ago

    This sounds like the rumors of the Radeon 4800’s we were hearing right before they launched, that pegged them at half the performance they actually ended up being. I just can’t see AMD doing this, especially with the strong position they’re currently in with the Radeon 5000’s. They’re not in a position where they need to be tricking people into thinking they’re getting faster cards in order to sell them.

      • jtsmith581
      • 9 years ago

      Seconded. Like SemiAccurate’s “old shaders, new other stuff” predictions made months ago and echoed everywhere since (and now almost completely reversed), I suspect that AMD encourages overly pessimistic rumors to precede stronger than usual releases, as was certainly the case with the HD 5000 series. Best case, 6700 series performs around the level of the 5830-5850, worst case … who really knows? Frankly, the 5000 series could still be pretty damn competitive for another year as is.

    • MadManOriginal
    • 9 years ago

    A rebadge wouldn’t be terrible if they move the card down a slot in the lineup, but this is NV-like renaming lameness. Ultimately the blame lies with TSMC though because they cancelled their next process node which took Southern Islands away and means that chips can’t be shrunk like they would have been. The result: likely not much change in price/performance (which is often a proxy for die size unless there’s a price war) for yet another product cycle.

    • Shinare
    • 9 years ago

    Sure sounds like a lot of hooie to me.

    • khands
    • 9 years ago

    That would be quite odd, I don’t think they’ll do this, and if they’re still pushing the 6770’s out first that’d be just plane stupid. Unless it’s the old 6770’s which are now 6870’s, but weren’t they supposed to make up for the gap between the 5830 and 5870? This would make the 6870 worse than the 5850. I don’t see this happening.

    • can-a-tuna
    • 9 years ago

    No.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This