AMD just sent over a bunch of shots of an upcoming product that we may or may not be presently benchmarking: the Radeon HD 6990. Check out the gallery for the pics.

Update: AMD accidentally gave us a shot of the Radeon HD 6990 without the fan shroud attached. Apparently that image reveals a bit too much about the product and AMD asked us to remove it. Sorry guys :)

 

 

POST A COMMENT

61 Comments

View All Comments

  • mariush - Tuesday, March 1, 2011 - link

    Don't forget the motherboard also gives some juice through the PCI Express slot, otherwise cards without additional connectors would not work.

    According to the PCI-SIG (the guys that standardise PCI Epress), you have:

    1. 75w in total though the slot (5.5A @ 12v) (+/- 8% voltage difference from 12v)

    2. 2x3 pin connector 6.25A @ 12v = 75w
    or
    3. 2x4 pin connector 12.5 @ 12v = 150w

    The pdf is payware (members only) but a copy of it is here: wenku.baidu.com/view/5c3e83eb81c758f5f61f67e8.html (see page 13)

    Page 15 also gives some additional details (such as a card being allowed to be powered using 3 x 6 pin connectors) but overall, a card is not allowed to go over 300 watts.

    So it's 12.5 Amps divided into 4 wires but this doesn't mean each wire will carry only 12.5 A / 4 = ~ 3 A.
    Anyway, the wire thickness is usually big enough that it usually doesn't matter.
    Reply
  • fausto412 - Tuesday, March 1, 2011 - link

    lol

    they testing one right now...lol

    can we get a best video card for the resolution series of articles please?

    we know a super high end card is wasted even on the most demanding games if the resolution is 1680x1050 like i play on.

    at what point does the video card get bottle necked by the resolution? that is a very important quetion to answer....and can anything be done to improve performance when you are bottleneck by the resolution?
    Reply
  • mariush - Tuesday, March 1, 2011 - link

    If you're buying a 6990 for 600-800$ , i'd figure you'd be able to pay at least 130$ for a 22" monitor running at 1920x1080

    Yes, such series of articles would be useful, but I'd say it would make more sense to pair cards like the less expensive cards at around 150-200$, like AMD's 6850.
    Reply
  • marraco - Wednesday, March 2, 2011 - link

    Not if you want max eye candy like antialiasing, dx11, physx, etc and also want reliable minimum FPS. Reply
  • digitalw - Tuesday, March 1, 2011 - link

    With 2x 6990 you got 8GB RAM and 4 GPUs.. i think in OpenCL this is cheaper, less power hungry than Tesla?!?! But the quality is maybe concern if those cards have to work 20 hours under 100% utilization... can somebody comment this? Reply
  • sean.crees - Wednesday, March 2, 2011 - link

    On something that is significantly faster than my 8800GT under a 100w power envelope, preferably in a PCB package under 8" in length.

    All they've done since then is increase the power envelope. Its the same thing Intel did back with the P4. Can't wait till the conroe of the GPU world comes to fruition.
    Reply
  • tim851 - Wednesday, March 2, 2011 - link

    Don't know what you'd consider "significant", but the Radeon 5750 was faster than a 8800GT and Powercolor had a passive version (GoGreen or something) that didn't require an additional power connector and thus was in a 75w power envelope. Reply
  • m.amitava - Wednesday, March 2, 2011 - link

    may or may not? I vote for may... Reply
  • EmmetBrown - Wednesday, March 2, 2011 - link

    What about the Radeon HD 6450, 6570 and 6670?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_ATI_Gra...

    Why they are available for OEM only? They looks interesting, especially the 6670, which with its 480 SP should be faster than the 5670 which has 400 SP and lower frequency. Do you plan to review them?
    Reply
  • Mugur - Wednesday, March 2, 2011 - link

    If you can, I would be very glad to see Crysis 2 benchmarked. I know it will be out on 25th this month, but maybe you can get one early... The beta only had DX9 path if I remember well.

    Also please do not disregard 1600x900, 1920x1080 and 1920x1200 resolutions, just to emphasize 2560x1600 or other godly resolution instead. :-)
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now