• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Will there be a 5890 ?

Associate
Joined
5 Mar 2009
Posts
1,137
Location
Essex
I dunno about the 5890, the 5850x2 and 5870x2 should take care of the performance points above the current 5870. However, I think the real question should be is there going to be a 5790 ? there is currently quite a big gap in the DX11 GPU line up between the 5770 and the 5850. In my humble opinion I think certainly in the current market a 5790 half way between the 5770 and the 5850 would be the choice card for many.
 
Associate
OP
Joined
15 Nov 2008
Posts
1,911
Location
Scotland / Blairgowrie
I dunno about the 5890, the 5850x2 and 5870x2 should take care of the performance points above the current 5870. However, I think the real question should be is there going to be a 5790 ? there is currently quite a big gap in the DX11 GPU line up between the 5770 and the 5850. In my humble opinion I think certainly in the current market a 5790 half way between the 5770 and the 5850 would be the choice card for many.


i think i agree with you on that. Iv ordered a 5770 and people say its not much better than a 250GTS, and the 5850 is a huge leap. Maybe something inbetween the 5770 and the 5850 might happen in the near future.
 
Associate
Joined
5 Mar 2009
Posts
1,137
Location
Essex
Actually, thinking about it I guess a 5830 would make more sense, simply using binned slower 58 series chips or ones with reduced SP's. Rather than the alternative of trying to make a 5790, cos from what I have read the 128bit wide memory bus is the crippling factor on the 57 series and doing anything about that would be a major change to the architecture.
 
Soldato
Joined
11 Oct 2007
Posts
2,597
The 57xx seriese most probably has the ability to support 256bit memory.

AMD should have released a 56xx and 57xx seriese side by side using exactly the same chips and memory (ddr5) but with one main difference, the 57xx seriese should have had a 256bit interface.

With the 256bit interface they could have also used cheeper ddr5 memory on both the 57/56. the 57xx wouldnt need it quite so fast as the greater bus would greatly compensate and slower memory on the 56xx seriese would increase the performance gap by a healthy ammount as to compeate in different price segments.

The 256bit 57xx seriese would fit perfectly into the price bracket they are now at and perhaps slightly more and the 56xx seriese would have gone nicely into a price range slightly bellow where they are at now.

Also only the 56xx series should be supplied with defective or disabled cores (idealy).

This is not without president using the same core in different ranges has been done many times as far back as the 9500/9700 that i can remember anyway ;)

Is anyone with me on this?
 
Associate
Joined
11 Oct 2007
Posts
1,287
5890 is certainly possible given the headroom for overclocking.

There were some rumours stating that RV870 shader count is more than 1600 so we may get to see a 5890 with more shaders in addition to higher clocks.

a 5830 or a 5790 is also a given. Timing is the question and whether they will use binned RV870 for it or a Juniper chip.
 
Associate
Joined
24 Aug 2009
Posts
290
There are rumours that ATI are due to launch an entirely new GPU architecture late next year. If this is the case, then it is very likely that they will produce a tweaked 5870 around Easter time next year. Will it be called a 5890? No idea.
 
Associate
Joined
3 Sep 2009
Posts
419
Location
Nottingham
I'd like for them to put out a 5890, if it tackles dx11 like my 4890 tackles dx 10 I would be a happy man.

Still considering the potential 2010 new gpu architecture, they might just use this series to force nVidia to bring out 'fermi' series, then respond with the new architecture.
 
Back
Top Bottom