Anyone getting the AMD 8000 series?

  • 69 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by Jermone123 (803 posts) -

Word is they are coming out January maybe even December, right around the corner. I have been searching for any news about these cards for months and news has been few and far between. I gotta think the rumor mill is going to start turning soon since the supposed release is so soon. Anyone else planning to upgrade to the 8000 series? I am going to build an 8970 rig with Windows 8. Only decision I am debationg on is to get 1 or 2. I think this would be a good card to get going into the next gen, with x box 720 coming out next year

#2 Posted by trastamad03 (4859 posts) -

Word is they are coming out January maybe even December, right around the corner. I have been searching for any news about these cards for months and news has been few and far between. I gotta think the rumor mill is going to start turning soon since the supposed release is so soon. Anyone else planning to upgrade to the 8000 series? I am going to build an 8970 rig with Windows 8. Only decision I am debationg on is to get 1 or 2. I think this would be a good card to get going into the next gen, with x box 720 coming out next year

Jermone123

I might... Either getting AMD 8000 or GTX 700... whichever impresses me more.

But I'll definitely ditch one of my GTX 560Tis and use the other as a dedicated PhysX card.

#3 Posted by GummiRaccoon (13647 posts) -

[QUOTE="Jermone123"]

Word is they are coming out January maybe even December, right around the corner. I have been searching for any news about these cards for months and news has been few and far between. I gotta think the rumor mill is going to start turning soon since the supposed release is so soon. Anyone else planning to upgrade to the 8000 series? I am going to build an 8970 rig with Windows 8. Only decision I am debationg on is to get 1 or 2. I think this would be a good card to get going into the next gen, with x box 720 coming out next year

trastamad03

I might... Either getting AMD 8000 or GTX 700... whichever impresses me more.

But I'll definitely ditch one of my GTX 560Tis and use the other as a dedicated PhysX card.

I'm in the same boat. If performance is awesome, I may pick one of either series up. I've been wanting to upgrade my wife's 550Ti for a while and my 6950 would make a nice upgrade.

#4 Posted by PCgameruk (1512 posts) -

Never heard until now of the 8xxx series. I have a 7950 and play at 5760x1080 in eyefinity. It holds up nicely. The price and performance would have to impress for me to upgrade.

#5 Posted by Amster_G (4290 posts) -

Well it'd be nice to see some details and pricing first...

#6 Posted by djdarkforces (810 posts) -

i bought a 7850 which im using in my new rig atm but i bought that to replace my gtx260 in my 2nd rig when the 8series is out ill look at the price performance between red and green then decide

#7 Posted by Jermone123 (803 posts) -

I would be interested in the Nvidia 700 series, but that sounds like its gonna be a long wait. Middle of summer is what I am hearing. Thats 8-9 months away. No thank you. My 5870's need an upgrade now.

#8 Posted by General_X (9083 posts) -

[QUOTE="Jermone123"]

Word is they are coming out January maybe even December, right around the corner. I have been searching for any news about these cards for months and news has been few and far between. I gotta think the rumor mill is going to start turning soon since the supposed release is so soon. Anyone else planning to upgrade to the 8000 series? I am going to build an 8970 rig with Windows 8. Only decision I am debationg on is to get 1 or 2. I think this would be a good card to get going into the next gen, with x box 720 coming out next year

trastamad03

I might... Either getting AMD 8000 or GTX 700... whichever impresses me more.

But I'll definitely ditch one of my GTX 560Tis and use the other as a dedicated PhysX card.

I'm in the exact same boat, I know by the time the AMD 8000s or the Nvidia 700s role around my GTX 460 will be quite outdated, then it would be a good time to relegate it to a dedicated Physx card!
#9 Posted by JohnF111 (14107 posts) -
More performance with no increase in power draw? I'm certainly interested but won't be getting any upgrades soon I'm more than happy with my current build and have no need for bigger or better.
#10 Posted by Yagnav (6107 posts) -

Maybe, but mostly i'll end up getting a second 7970 for a crossfire. Unless ofcourse there is over a 15% performance increase over the 7900 's. What is AMD claiming about the 8xxx how much increase in performance and/or power ???

#12 Posted by kraken2109 (13201 posts) -

AMD doesn't have on card physX so no I will not be getting an AMD video card.

DeViLzzz
But barely any games use physx...
#13 Posted by Toxic-Seahorse (4318 posts) -
I just bought a 7950 not too long ago so I think I'm set for a few years.
#14 Posted by ionusX (25716 posts) -

[QUOTE="DeViLzzz"]

AMD doesn't have on card physX so no I will not be getting an AMD video card.

kraken2109

But barely any games use physx...

yeah to may knowledge less than 10 games worth playing this year use physix

crysis 2

batman AC

borderlands 2

transformers: FoC

#15 Posted by way2funny (4570 posts) -

[QUOTE="kraken2109"][QUOTE="DeViLzzz"]

AMD doesn't have on card physX so no I will not be getting an AMD video card.

ionusX

But barely any games use physx...

yeah to may knowledge less than 10 games worth playing this year use physix

crysis 2

batman AC

borderlands 2

transformers: FoC

Maybe those happen to be all the games he likes lol. AMD(ATIs) hardware is good, probably much better than NVidias, but NVidias support and software is why I stick with them

#16 Posted by BPoole96 (22811 posts) -

I'm still torn whether or not I want to stay with AMD or go NVidia. I currently have 2 6950s and was looking into buying a 7970, but after looking at some benchmarks, it would hardly be an upgrade at all. I'm definitely curious of teh 8000 series andm ay go ahead and upgrade once those are out.

#17 Posted by ferret-gamer (17364 posts) -

[QUOTE="kraken2109"][QUOTE="DeViLzzz"]

AMD doesn't have on card physX so no I will not be getting an AMD video card.

ionusX

But barely any games use physx...

yeah to may knowledge less than 10 games worth playing this year use physix

crysis 2

batman AC

borderlands 2

transformers: FoC

Crysis 2 doesn't use Physx, and neither will Crysis 3. Crytek have their own proprietary physics engine.
#18 Posted by ronvalencia (15509 posts) -

Word is they are coming out January maybe even December, right around the corner. I have been searching for any news about these cards for months and news has been few and far between. I gotta think the rumor mill is going to start turning soon since the supposed release is so soon. Anyone else planning to upgrade to the 8000 series? I am going to build an 8970 rig with Windows 8. Only decision I am debationg on is to get 1 or 2. I think this would be a good card to get going into the next gen, with x box 720 coming out next year

Jermone123

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1669426&postcount=457

Weve learned that, right now, partners are planning to show off the Radeon HD 8970 XT at CeBIT in March with a full launch at Computex in June. However, the products are actually ahead of schedule, giving AMD the option to launch early if something new comes along from nVidia. If AMD is as far down the line as we suspect with its development, there will be some behind closed doors displays for key customers in a secret hotel room in Vegas come the first week in January

There's very little need for 8850/8870 when FireGL W8000 is effectively similar i.e. Tahiti level GPU with a cheaper PCB with 256bit external bus.

#19 Posted by blaznwiipspman1 (6090 posts) -

AMD doesn't have on card physX so no I will not be getting an AMD video card.

DeViLzzz

u dont need video card for physx...the cpu can do it no prob

#20 Posted by way2funny (4570 posts) -

[QUOTE="DeViLzzz"]

AMD doesn't have on card physX so no I will not be getting an AMD video card.

blaznwiipspman1

u dont need video card for physx...the cpu can do it no prob

Youd need a $500+ CPU to do physics as well as a gpu

#21 Posted by blaznwiipspman1 (6090 posts) -

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

[QUOTE="DeViLzzz"]

AMD doesn't have on card physX so no I will not be getting an AMD video card.

way2funny

u dont need video card for physx...the cpu can do it no prob

Youd need a $500+ CPU to do physics as well as a gpu

and vice versa. CPU's are getting better and better and adding more and more cores. We will soon see cpus handle physics engines like physx easily for very affordable prices.

#22 Posted by ronvalencia (15509 posts) -

AMD doesn't have on card physX so no I will not be getting an AMD video card.

DeViLzzz

http://http.developer.nvidia.com/GPUGems3/gpugems3_ch16.html

Vegetation in games has always been mainly static, with some sort of simple bending to give the illusion of wind. Our game scenes can have thousands of different vegetations, but still we pushed the envelope further by making vegetation react to global and local wind sources, and we bend not only the vegetation but also the leaves, in detail, with all computations procedurally and efficiently done on the GPU.

This is without NVIDIA's PhysX

#23 Posted by hartsickdiscipl (14787 posts) -

I'm sure the HD8000 series will be groundbreaking, cure cancer, and all that. I still won't upgrade until I feel that I need an upgrade.

#24 Posted by way2funny (4570 posts) -

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

u dont need video card for physx...the cpu can do it no prob

blaznwiipspman1

Youd need a $500+ CPU to do physics as well as a gpu

and vice versa. CPU's are getting better and better and adding more and more cores. We will soon see cpus handle physics engines like physx easily for very affordable prices.

Yes, cpus will get faster, as they always do. But a GPU will always be better in intense physics computations because of high parallelism capabilities of gpus

#25 Posted by blaznwiipspman1 (6090 posts) -

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

Youd need a $500+ CPU to do physics as well as a gpu

way2funny

and vice versa. CPU's are getting better and better and adding more and more cores. We will soon see cpus handle physics engines like physx easily for very affordable prices.

Yes, cpus will get faster, as they always do. But a GPU will always be better in intense physics computations because of high parallelism capabilities of gpus

if thats true then why can a core i7 3930k paired with a 7970 outperform a 680 gtx in borderlands 2 WITH physx on high for both.

PhysX.png

#26 Posted by lulmont (670 posts) -

nope good with my 7970 I say until 2014 to 2015

#27 Posted by ronvalencia (15509 posts) -

nope good with my 7970 I say until 2014 to 2015

lulmont
If PS4 has 7850 level GPU, it could be good for another 7 years,
#28 Posted by JohnF111 (14107 posts) -

I'm sure the HD8000 series will be groundbreaking, cure cancer, and all that. I still won't upgrade until I feel that I need an upgrade.

hartsickdiscipl
Yeah I'm with you, my rig won't see a new component until games dip below 30 FPS on medium, even then I won't rush to buy new stuff.
#29 Posted by Toxic-Seahorse (4318 posts) -
[QUOTE="lulmont"]

nope good with my 7970 I say until 2014 to 2015

ronvalencia
If PS4 has 7850 level GPU, it could be good for another 7 years,

The PS4 won't have anything near a 7850. That would be way too expensive.
#30 Posted by GummiRaccoon (13647 posts) -

word on the street is ps4s will be running a modified 5800k

#31 Posted by way2funny (4570 posts) -

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

and vice versa. CPU's are getting better and better and adding more and more cores. We will soon see cpus handle physics engines like physx easily for very affordable prices.

blaznwiipspman1

Yes, cpus will get faster, as they always do. But a GPU will always be better in intense physics computations because of high parallelism capabilities of gpus

if thats true then why can a core i7 3930k paired with a 7970 outperform a 680 gtx in borderlands 2 WITH physx on high for both.

PhysX.png

Because the 3930k is a $500 dollar CPU and the physics is being done by the CPU, while the 680 is doing the physics in these tests. That benchmarks just supports what I've been saying.

Take an CPU less than 500 dollars, and try physics on your CPU and GPU with the same hardware, and see which one you get a higher FPS with

#32 Posted by topgunmv (10334 posts) -

[QUOTE="Jermone123"]

Word is they are coming out January maybe even December, right around the corner. I have been searching for any news about these cards for months and news has been few and far between. I gotta think the rumor mill is going to start turning soon since the supposed release is so soon. Anyone else planning to upgrade to the 8000 series? I am going to build an 8970 rig with Windows 8. Only decision I am debationg on is to get 1 or 2. I think this would be a good card to get going into the next gen, with x box 720 coming out next year

trastamad03

I might... Either getting AMD 8000 or GTX 700... whichever impresses me more.

Ditto.

My 5870 is still chugging along fine, but I figure the top of the line version of the next series of cards will probably be the best I'll be able to get without my i7 950 becoming a serious bottleneck problem.

#33 Posted by ronvalencia (15509 posts) -

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"][QUOTE="lulmont"]

nope good with my 7970 I say until 2014 to 2015

Toxic-Seahorse

If PS4 has 7850 level GPU, it could be good for another 7 years,

The PS4 won't have anything near a 7850. That would be way too expensive.

HD 7850's die size already smaller than 1st gen NVIDIA RSX.

---

1st gen NVIDIA RSX = 258 mm^2

1st gen IBM CELL = 230 mm^2

Total: 488 mm^2


---

Option 1

AMD Radeon HD 7850 (16 CU, Pitcairn) = 212 mm^2

AMD Trinity (quad core PD + 6 CU) = 246 mm^2

Total: 458 mm^2

---

Option 2

Semi-custom AMD Trinity (quad core PD) with AMD Radeon HD 7850 (16 CU, Pitcairn) = ~335 mm^2

---

Option 3

Semi-custom AMD Trinity (quad core PD) with AMD Radeon HD 7750 (8 CU) = ~246 mm^2 (similar to AMD Kaveri APU)

AMD Radeon HD 7750 (8 CU) = 123 mm^2.

Total : 369 mm^2.


---

GPU centric topology i.e. other components surrounds the the GPU complex.

Update

1. AMD Xenos into AMD Pitcairn

2. IBM PPE X3 to AMD Piledriver X4

X360BlockDiaAnnotated1.gif

The above GPU centric topology was recycled for Wii U.

#34 Posted by Toxic-Seahorse (4318 posts) -

[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"][QUOTE="ronvalencia"] If PS4 has 7850 level GPU, it could be good for another 7 years, ronvalencia

The PS4 won't have anything near a 7850. That would be way too expensive.

HD 7850's die size already smaller than 1st gen NVIDIA RSX.

1st gen NVIDIA RSX = 258 mm^2

1st gen IBM CELL = 230 mm^2

Total: 488 mm^2

Option 1

AMD Radeon HD 7850 (16 CU) = 212 mm^2

AMD Trinity (quad core PD + 6 CU) = 246 mm^2

Total: 458 mm^2

Option 2

Semi-custom AMD Trinity (quad core PD + 16 CU) with AMD Radeon HD 7850 = ~335 mm^2

I have no idea what your post had to do with the 7850 being too expensive for console manufacturers to consider...
#35 Posted by ronvalencia (15509 posts) -

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"] The PS4 won't have anything near a 7850. That would be way too expensive.Toxic-Seahorse

HD 7850's die size already smaller than 1st gen NVIDIA RSX.

1st gen NVIDIA RSX = 258 mm^2

1st gen IBM CELL = 230 mm^2

Total: 488 mm^2

Option 1

AMD Radeon HD 7850 (16 CU) = 212 mm^2

AMD Trinity (quad core PD + 6 CU) = 246 mm^2

Total: 458 mm^2

Option 2

Semi-custom AMD Trinity (quad core PD + 16 CU) with AMD Radeon HD 7850 = ~335 mm^2

I have no idea what your post had to do with the 7850 being too expensive for console manufacturers to consider...

The total die size (i.e. smaller = better) and TDP has a major influence on the chip and cooling cost.

Quad-core Piledriver (~50 watts) + Radeon HD 7850 (~130 watts) has less TDP than the combined 1st gen CELL+RSX TDP.

Anyway, the leaked Xbox 720 Durango includes MSI branded Radeon HD 6870/6950 level GPU.

#36 Posted by Toxic-Seahorse (4318 posts) -

[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"][QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

HD 7850's die size already smaller than 1st gen NVIDIA RSX.

1st gen NVIDIA RSX = 258 mm^2

1st gen IBM CELL = 230 mm^2

Total: 488 mm^2

Option 1

AMD Radeon HD 7850 (16 CU) = 212 mm^2

AMD Trinity (quad core PD + 6 CU) = 246 mm^2

Total: 458 mm^2

Option 2

Semi-custom AMD Trinity (quad core PD + 16 CU) with AMD Radeon HD 7850 = ~335 mm^2

ronvalencia

I have no idea what your post had to do with the 7850 being too expensive for console manufacturers to consider...

The total die size and TDP has a major influence on the chip (i.e. smaller = better) and cooling cost.

Quad-core Piledriver (~50 watts) + Radeon HD 7850 (~130 watts) has less TDP than the combined 1st gen CELL+RSX TDP.

Anyway, the leaked Xbox 720 Durango includes MSI branded Radeon HD 6870/6950 level GPU.

You do realize that that is most likely fake, right?
#37 Posted by ronvalencia (15509 posts) -

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"]

I have no idea what your post had to do with the 7850 being too expensive for console manufacturers to consider... Toxic-Seahorse

The total die size and TDP has a major influence on the chip (i.e. smaller = better) and cooling cost.

Quad-core Piledriver (~50 watts) + Radeon HD 7850 (~130 watts) has less TDP than the combined 1st gen CELL+RSX TDP.

Anyway, the leaked Xbox 720 Durango includes MSI branded Radeon HD 6870/6950 level GPU.

You do realize that that is most likely fake, right?

Read http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=31379

In the 360 @90nm

IBM Xenon = ~170 mm^2

AMD Xenos = ~180 mm^2

edram = ~70mm^2

Total: 420 mm^2

Semi-custom AMD Trinity with Radeon HD 7850 still has a die size smaller than 1st gen Xbox 360.

#38 Posted by Toxic-Seahorse (4318 posts) -

[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"][QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

The total die size and TDP has a major influence on the chip (i.e. smaller = better) and cooling cost.

Quad-core Piledriver (~50 watts) + Radeon HD 7850 (~130 watts) has less TDP than the combined 1st gen CELL+RSX TDP.

Anyway, the leaked Xbox 720 Durango includes MSI branded Radeon HD 6870/6950 level GPU.

ronvalencia

You do realize that that is most likely fake, right?

Read http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=31379

In the 360 @90nm

IBM Xenon = ~170 mm^2

AMD Xenos = ~180 mm^2

edram = ~70mm^2

Total: 420 mm^2

Semi-custom AMD Trinity with Radeon HD 7850 still has a die size smaller than 1st gen Xbox 360.

I was talking about the "leaked" Xbox 720 stuff. It's probably fake.
#39 Posted by ronvalencia (15509 posts) -

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"] You do realize that that is most likely fake, right?Toxic-Seahorse

Read http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=31379

In the 360 @90nm

IBM Xenon = ~170 mm^2

AMD Xenos = ~180 mm^2

edram = ~70mm^2

Total: 420 mm^2

Semi-custom AMD Trinity with Radeon HD 7850 still has a die size smaller than 1st gen Xbox 360.

I was talking about the "leaked" Xbox 720 stuff. It's probably fake.

AMD already stated that the next gen consoles will be using semi-custom parts i.e. "reusable IP and semi-custom work"

#40 Posted by Guppy507 (17398 posts) -
Maybe. Depends on how appealing the 8850 or 8870 are for the price.
#41 Posted by V4LENT1NE (12895 posts) -
[QUOTE="lulmont"]

nope good with my 7970 I say until 2014 to 2015

ronvalencia
If PS4 has 7850 level GPU, it could be good for another 7 years,

Pretty stupid comment to be honest. Consoles have much better optimization then a PC game, comparing the two is ridiculous.
#42 Posted by ronvalencia (15509 posts) -

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"][QUOTE="lulmont"]

nope good with my 7970 I say until 2014 to 2015

V4LENT1NE

If PS4 has 7850 level GPU, it could be good for another 7 years,

Pretty stupid comment to be honest. Consoles have much better optimization then a PC game, comparing the two is ridiculous.

Crysis 2 on Radeon X1950 Pro runs like Xbox 360's Crysis 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHWPGmf_A_0

Wii U's multi-platfrom game results are like any mobile Radeon HD @35 watts e.g. Radeon HD 4670M(320 SPs) to E6760 (480 SPs).

"Console optimizations" doesn't automatcially promote it's GPU to another level.

HD 7970 has 3789 GFLOPs while HD 7850 has 1761 GFLOPs.

#43 Posted by V4LENT1NE (12895 posts) -

[QUOTE="V4LENT1NE"][QUOTE="ronvalencia"] If PS4 has 7850 level GPU, it could be good for another 7 years, ronvalencia

Pretty stupid comment to be honest. Consoles have much better optimization then a PC game, comparing the two is ridiculous.

Crysis 2 on Radeon X1950 Pro runs like Xbox 360's Crysis 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHWPGmf_A_0

Wii U's multi-platfrom game results are like any mobile Radeon HD @35 watts e.g. Radeon HD 4670M(320 SPs) to E6760 (480 SPs).

"Console optimizations" doesn't automatcially promote it's GPU to another level.

HD 7970 has 3789 GFLOPs while HD 7850 has 1761 GFLOPs.

It sorta does take it to a new level though, Xbox also has like what 500mb of RAM or something, a 7 year old CPU and GPU and then you see something like Halo 4 in 1080p and it looks amazing. PC is also so hit and miss nowadays, look at GTA4 for example, runs great on Xbox all be it at pretty low settings, but lags like **** on some PCs even on uber hardware, consoles will always have that optimization advantage because devs know exactly what the hardware is. No way in hell I would say that GPU will be fine in even 4 years, PC game optimization is to hit and miss.
#44 Posted by o0squishy0o (2772 posts) -

[QUOTE="V4LENT1NE"][QUOTE="ronvalencia"] If PS4 has 7850 level GPU, it could be good for another 7 years, ronvalencia

Pretty stupid comment to be honest. Consoles have much better optimization then a PC game, comparing the two is ridiculous.

Crysis 2 on Radeon X1950 Pro runs like Xbox 360's Crysis 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHWPGmf_A_0

Wii U's multi-platfrom game results are like any mobile Radeon HD @35 watts e.g. Radeon HD 4670M(320 SPs) to E6760 (480 SPs).

"Console optimizations" doesn't automatcially promote it's GPU to another level.

HD 7970 has 3789 GFLOPs while HD 7850 has 1761 GFLOPs.

I think the cross over term of horsepower is quite useful in this discussion. The bugatti veyron only needs 60bhp or something to reach 60 mph. However it needs 1000bhp to get to 252 mph. So you need more horse power to go quicker, but because of the extra overhead stuff (air in the cars case) you dont go as fast as you should be going. So fair enough the old graphics card can run stuff at "consoles level", but if you want that then just stick with a console imo. However if you want the awesome visuals, smoother gameplay experience etc then you need to invest in a more powerful graphics card down the line. Because simply put the level of console output doesnt really change, however the gap of the PC always increases, thus a more powerful card is needed to keep at the top.
#45 Posted by kraken2109 (13201 posts) -
[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

[QUOTE="V4LENT1NE"] Pretty stupid comment to be honest. Consoles have much better optimization then a PC game, comparing the two is ridiculous.V4LENT1NE

Crysis 2 on Radeon X1950 Pro runs like Xbox 360's Crysis 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHWPGmf_A_0

Wii U's multi-platfrom game results are like any mobile Radeon HD @35 watts e.g. Radeon HD 4670M(320 SPs) to E6760 (480 SPs).

"Console optimizations" doesn't automatcially promote it's GPU to another level.

HD 7970 has 3789 GFLOPs while HD 7850 has 1761 GFLOPs.

It sorta does take it to a new level though, Xbox also has like what 500mb of RAM or something, a 7 year old CPU and GPU and then you see something like Halo 4 in 1080p and it looks amazing. PC is also so hit and miss nowadays, look at GTA4 for example, runs great on Xbox all be it at pretty low settings, but lags like **** on some PCs even on uber hardware, consoles will always have that optimization advantage because devs know exactly what the hardware is. No way in hell I would say that GPU will be fine in even 4 years, PC game optimization is to hit and miss.

Halo 4 isn't 1080p Run GTA4 at xbox settings on an average pc and it will run better, the console version of gta4 is sub 720p, about 25fps most of the time and blurry as hell. Chances are the next consoles will have GPUs way slower than a 7850 and it will last a good few years.
#46 Posted by ronvalencia (15509 posts) -

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

[QUOTE="V4LENT1NE"] Pretty stupid comment to be honest. Consoles have much better optimization then a PC game, comparing the two is ridiculous.V4LENT1NE

Crysis 2 on Radeon X1950 Pro runs like Xbox 360's Crysis 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHWPGmf_A_0

Wii U's multi-platfrom game results are like any mobile Radeon HD @35 watts e.g. Radeon HD 4670M(320 SPs) to E6760 (480 SPs).

"Console optimizations" doesn't automatcially promote it's GPU to another level.

HD 7970 has 3789 GFLOPs while HD 7850 has 1761 GFLOPs.

It sorta does take it to a new level though, Xbox also has like what 500mb of RAM or something, a 7 year old CPU and GPU and then you see something like Halo 4 in 1080p and it looks amazing. PC is also so hit and miss nowadays, look at GTA4 for example, runs great on Xbox all be it at pretty low settings, but lags like **** on some PCs even on uber hardware, consoles will always have that optimization advantage because devs know exactly what the hardware is. No way in hell I would say that GPU will be fine in even 4 years, PC game optimization is to hit and miss.

Define "on some PC" when running GTA IV. Core 2 Duo 2Ghz + Radeon X1950 Pro can run it just fine.

Halo 4 renders at 720p http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-09-26-frank-oconnor-on-how-halo-4-gets-the-most-out-of-the-7-year-old-xbox-360

#47 Posted by kraken2109 (13201 posts) -

[QUOTE="V4LENT1NE"][QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

Crysis 2 on Radeon X1950 Pro runs like Xbox 360's Crysis 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHWPGmf_A_0

Wii U's multi-platfrom game results are like any mobile Radeon HD @35 watts e.g. Radeon HD 4670M(320 SPs) to E6760 (480 SPs).

"Console optimizations" doesn't automatcially promote it's GPU to another level.

HD 7970 has 3789 GFLOPs while HD 7850 has 1761 GFLOPs.

ronvalencia

It sorta does take it to a new level though, Xbox also has like what 500mb of RAM or something, a 7 year old CPU and GPU and then you see something like Halo 4 in 1080p and it looks amazing. PC is also so hit and miss nowadays, look at GTA4 for example, runs great on Xbox all be it at pretty low settings, but lags like **** on some PCs even on uber hardware, consoles will always have that optimization advantage because devs know exactly what the hardware is. No way in hell I would say that GPU will be fine in even 4 years, PC game optimization is to hit and miss.

Halo 4 renders at 720p http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-09-26-frank-oconnor-on-how-halo-4-gets-the-most-out-of-the-7-year-old-xbox-360

As for GTA IV PC, this game only runs on a single CPU core.

GTA runs on far more than one core...
#48 Posted by ronvalencia (15509 posts) -

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

[QUOTE="V4LENT1NE"] It sorta does take it to a new level though, Xbox also has like what 500mb of RAM or something, a 7 year old CPU and GPU and then you see something like Halo 4 in 1080p and it looks amazing. PC is also so hit and miss nowadays, look at GTA4 for example, runs great on Xbox all be it at pretty low settings, but lags like **** on some PCs even on uber hardware, consoles will always have that optimization advantage because devs know exactly what the hardware is. No way in hell I would say that GPU will be fine in even 4 years, PC game optimization is to hit and miss.kraken2109

Halo 4 renders at 720p http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-09-26-frank-oconnor-on-how-halo-4-gets-the-most-out-of-the-7-year-old-xbox-360

As for GTA IV PC, this game only runs on a single CPU core.

GTA runs on far more than one core...

You are forgetting DirectX9c's GPU command buffer generation limitations i.e. single CPU core. DirectX11 enables multi-threaded GPU command generation on the PC.

Xbox 360 doesn't have this DirectX9c issue. The PC has to rely on powerful heavy out-of-order CPU designs instead of Intel Atom level CPU designs.

Xbox 360's PPE X3 is like having three Intel Atoms @ 3.2Ghz with 1.6Ghz L2 cache i.e. both are dual instruction issue per cycle in-order CPU designs.

Intel X86 PCs always has the option for four instruction issue per cycle with heavy out-of-order CPU designs with synchronized L2 clock speed. Mainline PC CPUs are more advance than the PowerPC G1 type(PPE) CPU designs in the Xbox 360.

It's unlikely, that an entry level gaming PC would be based on Intel Atom X3 CPU i.e. the minimium would be AMD Llano (AMD K10) or Trinity (AMD Piledriver) APUs.

PS4's AMD's Trinity CPU selection would be a big jump in the CPU (as a command role processor unit) power i.e. PowerPC G5 (similar to AMD K8) type design instead of PowerPC G1 (similar to PPE) type design.

#49 Posted by ronvalencia (15509 posts) -

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

[QUOTE="V4LENT1NE"] Pretty stupid comment to be honest. Consoles have much better optimization then a PC game, comparing the two is ridiculous.V4LENT1NE

Crysis 2 on Radeon X1950 Pro runs like Xbox 360's Crysis 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHWPGmf_A_0

Wii U's multi-platfrom game results are like any mobile Radeon HD @35 watts e.g. Radeon HD 4670M(320 SPs) to E6760 (480 SPs).

"Console optimizations" doesn't automatcially promote it's GPU to another level.

HD 7970 has 3789 GFLOPs while HD 7850 has 1761 GFLOPs.

It sorta does take it to a new level though, Xbox also has like what 500mb of RAM or something, a 7 year old CPU and GPU and then you see something like Halo 4 in 1080p and it looks amazing. PC is also so hit and miss nowadays, look at GTA4 for example, runs great on Xbox all be it at pretty low settings, but lags like **** on some PCs even on uber hardware, consoles will always have that optimization advantage because devs know exactly what the hardware is. No way in hell I would say that GPU will be fine in even 4 years, PC game optimization is to hit and miss.

NVIDIA Geforce 8800 is more than 4 years old and still runs multi-platform games better than Xbox 360.

NVIDIA Geforce 8800 has about twice the raw power over AMD Xenos.

Radeon HD 7970 has about twice the raw power over AMD Radeon 7850 e.g. 7970 can sustained Eyefinity (5760x1080p, thats three 1920x1080 monitors) gaming better than 7850 (mostly in 1920x1080p).

#50 Posted by GummiRaccoon (13647 posts) -

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

[QUOTE="V4LENT1NE"] Pretty stupid comment to be honest. Consoles have much better optimization then a PC game, comparing the two is ridiculous.V4LENT1NE

Crysis 2 on Radeon X1950 Pro runs like Xbox 360's Crysis 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHWPGmf_A_0

Wii U's multi-platfrom game results are like any mobile Radeon HD @35 watts e.g. Radeon HD 4670M(320 SPs) to E6760 (480 SPs).

"Console optimizations" doesn't automatcially promote it's GPU to another level.

HD 7970 has 3789 GFLOPs while HD 7850 has 1761 GFLOPs.

It sorta does take it to a new level though, Xbox also has like what 500mb of RAM or something, a 7 year old CPU and GPU and then you see something like Halo 4 in 1080p and it looks amazing. PC is also so hit and miss nowadays, look at GTA4 for example, runs great on Xbox all be it at pretty low settings, but lags like **** on some PCs even on uber hardware, consoles will always have that optimization advantage because devs know exactly what the hardware is. No way in hell I would say that GPU will be fine in even 4 years, PC game optimization is to hit and miss.

What you are thinking is 1080p isn't 1080p