Featured Articles

IHS teardown reveals Galaxy S5 BOM

IHS teardown reveals Galaxy S5 BOM

Research firm IHS got hold of Samsung’s new flagship smartphone and took it apart to the last bolt to figure out…

More...
Galaxy S5, HTC One M8 available selling well

Galaxy S5, HTC One M8 available selling well

Samsung’s Galaxy S5 has finally gone on sale and it can be yours for €699, which is quite a lot of…

More...
Intel lists Haswell refresh parts

Intel lists Haswell refresh parts

Intel has added a load of Haswell refresh parts to its official price list and there really aren’t any surprises to…

More...
Respawn confirms Titanfall DLC for May

Respawn confirms Titanfall DLC for May

During his appearance at PAX East panel and confirmed on Twitter, Titanfall developer Respawn confirmed that the first DLC pack for…

More...
KFA2 GTX 780 Ti Hall Of Fame reviewed

KFA2 GTX 780 Ti Hall Of Fame reviewed

KFA2 gained a lot of overclocking experience with the GTX 780 Hall of Fame (HOF), which we had a chance to…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Thursday, 14 July 2011 19:35

AMD HD 6990M not much faster than GTX 580M

Written by Slobodan Simic
radeon_logo_new

AMD expected less, but priced it right
We stumbled upon a rather intriguing post over at PCPerspective regarding recently released AMD HD 6990M performance slides as it appears that HD 6990M is not that much faster than the GTX 580M.

In case you missed it, the recently introduced AMD Radeon HD 6990M is based on Barts XT architecture and has nothing to do with its desktop dual-GPU counterpart. It is a single GPU solution that has 1120 stream processors, GPU clock set at 715MHz and up to 1.6TFlops of computing power. The GPU is paired with 2GB of GDDR5 memory clocked at 900MHz which is enough for over 115GB/s of memory bandwidth.

Apparently, AMD contacted pcper.com to let them know that benchmark results need to be changed and that new one show that the difference between the HD 6990M and the HD 6970M, and the difference between Radeon HD 6990M and GTX 580M is not that high. You can check out the article here.

After asking around, our birdies have told us that it appear that AMD was using a desktop configuration based on the HD 6870 card clocked at the same clocks as the HD 6990M for those slides and have expected the results to be identical, but unfortunately they aren't. This time around AMD's inteligence service didn't do its homework well.

The bottom line is that the HD 6990M is still faster than the GTX 580M and it all comes down to the price, which is, by the way, still on AMD's side. We checked out some prices and AMD's HD 6990M is around US $300 cheaper than the GTX 580M at least that's what we have seen on the Origin site and its EON17-S notebook and Alienware site and its M17x notebook.

So this round still goes to AMD. Of course, we are still waiting to see the "correct" slides that AMD is talking about.

Last modified on Thursday, 14 July 2011 20:20
blog comments powered by Disqus

Comments  

 
+72 #1 Bors Mistral 2011-07-14 20:59
So, the 6990M is $300 cheaper and still faster than the 580M?

The 580M is "not much faster than" the 6970M, but I don't remember seeing a headline about it.
 
 
-52 #2 maroon1 2011-07-14 21:22
AMD slides doesn't prove anything. AMD usually cherrypick their results. So, we need to wait for independent review to confirm than HD6990m is faster than 580m
 
 
+59 #3 dan 2011-07-14 22:32
EVERYONE cherry picks their results, don't throw mud at AMD. The fact is that their mobile card is faster than the competition, cheaper, cooler, more efficient, etc etc.

Nvidia fail all ends up.
 
 
+45 #4 spigzone 2011-07-15 00:49
This headline SHOULD have read ... "AMD 6990M DEMOLISHES Nvidia's 580M on price/performance"

That is, after all, the REALITY.
 
 
+28 #5 TechHog 2011-07-15 03:34
Wow. How biased can an article get? This isn't mud-slinging; it's diarrhea spewing.
 
 
-5 #6 hoohoo 2011-07-15 05:51
Very interesting. I do question the reason for putting such heavy metal in a notebook though. It just results in a heavy notebook, yes?
 
 
+7 #7 TechHog 2011-07-15 05:58
Quoting hoohoo:
Very interesting. I do question the reason for putting such heavy metal in a notebook though. It just results in a heavy notebook, yes?

I know it sounds insanely stupid to everyone here, but not everyone is like you guys. Notebooks aren't just for simple tasks. Th type of person who would buy one of these notebooks either doesn't have space for a desktop, or travels a lot and wants to take their games with them. You guys need to stop being so close-minded when it comes to laptops...
 
 
-11 #8 Warrior24_7 2011-07-15 12:55
"it appear that AMD was using a desktop configuration based on the HD 6870 card clocked at the same clocks as the HD 6990M for those slides and have expected the results to be identical, but unfortunately they aren't."

I don't believe $h!t the DOO DOO machine says!! :D
 
 
+3 #9 hoohoo 2011-07-16 01:34
Quoting TechHog:
Quoting hoohoo:
Very interesting. I do question the reason for putting such heavy metal in a notebook though. It just results in a heavy notebook, yes?

I know it sounds insanely stupid to everyone here, but not everyone is like you guys. Notebooks aren't just for simple tasks. Th type of person who would buy one of these notebooks either doesn't have space for a desktop, or travels a lot and wants to take their games with them. You guys need to stop being so close-minded when it comes to laptops...


Fair enough, different strokes for different folks. I can accept when I do not see the entire picture. :-)
 
 
-4 #10 JEskandari 2011-07-16 06:46
I don't get it GTX580m is faster than HD6970m
but why in the article at pcper.com when you
look at the slides that compare HD6990m with
HD6970m and GTX580m it seems that the performance
of HD6970m is closer to HD6990m while in reality
it's GTX580m that must have a closer power
to HD6990m
 

To be able to post comments please log-in with Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments