Forgot your password?
Graphics Software Upgrades Hardware

AMD Breaks 1GHz GPU Barrier With Radeon HD 4890 144

Posted by timothy
from the sheer-necessity dept.
MojoKid writes "AMD announced today that they can lay claim to the world's first 1GHz graphics processor with their ATI Radeon HD 4890 GPU. There's been no formal announcement made about what partners will be selling the 1GHz variant, but AMD does note that Asus, Club 3D, Diamond Multimedia, Force3D, GECUBE, Gigabyte, HIS, MSI, Palit Multimedia, PowerColor, SAPPHIRE, XFX and others are all aligning to release higher performance cards." The new card, says AMD, delivers 1.6 TeraFLOPs of compute power.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

AMD Breaks 1GHz GPU Barrier With Radeon HD 4890

Comments Filter:
  • by Yvan256 (722131) on Thursday May 14, 2009 @03:25PM (#27955141) Homepage Journal

    As you may have seen from the sales of netbooks and low-power computers, the future is... wait for it... low-power devices!

    Where are the 5W GPUs? Does the nVidia 9400M require more than 5W?

  • by mdm-adph (1030332) <> on Thursday May 14, 2009 @03:27PM (#27955177) Homepage

    GPU's have recently become massively parallel -- not as much need to go too fast in overall clock speed.

  • by wjh31 (1372867) on Thursday May 14, 2009 @03:41PM (#27955421) Homepage
    wikipedia ( suggests the 4890 comes in at 190w, go to s little under double that if they make an x2 version. entry level 4000 series comes in at 25W.

    if you want TFlops, try the 4870x2 at 2.4TFlops, or NVideas tesla ( series, made just for GPGPU which reach over 4TFlops
  • "Barrier" (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Burning1 (204959) on Thursday May 14, 2009 @04:10PM (#27955989) Homepage

    AMD Breaks 1GHz GPU Barrier []

    You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 14, 2009 @04:21PM (#27956199)
    Speak for yourself, some of us enjoy being able to play crysis/project origin at high res with detail quality maxed out. If the only thing you use a computer for is email and beating off to pictures of drunken sluts on facebook, go get yourself a mac. I hear you can get SHINY ones now.
  • by Pulzar (81031) on Thursday May 14, 2009 @04:46PM (#27956717)

    They've never needed to get the clock speed up that high before, remember Ghz != Performance

    Err... It's not that black and white, you can't just say that GHz != performance. If you take a card and raise its clock, you'll usually get more performance. If you raise memory speed you'll usually get more performance. The only time you won't is when the one is bottlenecking the other.

    All we're learned from CPU wars is that within two different architectures, the faster one isn't necessarily the one with more GHz. But, between two identical designs, more GHz means more performance.

  • Re:It Was Epic (Score:3, Insightful)

    by yabos (719499) on Thursday May 14, 2009 @05:00PM (#27956933)
  • Re:Not first ?? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by JackARot (1554025) on Thursday May 14, 2009 @05:20PM (#27957279)

    Also, 1 GHz is the core speed without overclocking.

    False. It's overclocked alright, it just doesn't have to be overclocked by users or the third party manufacturers to run at 1 ghz. From their press release:

    Nine years after launching the world's first 1 GHz CPU, AMD is again first to break the gigahertz barrier with the factory overclocked, air-cooled ATI Radeon(TM) HD 4890 GPU -

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 14, 2009 @06:32PM (#27958577)

    Modern GPUs including every single Nvidia GPU since the G80 series has had a full integer instruction set capable of doing integer arithmetic and bit operations.

    CPUs aren't designed to be good at everything, they're designed to be exceedingly good at executing bad code, which is the vast majority of code written by poor programmers or in high level languages.

    You can write code for a CPU without worrying specifically about the cache line size, cache coherency, register usage, memory access address patterns and alignment or memory latency on branches or pipeline stalls and the difference in performance compared to optimized code will significant but not unbearable.

    GPUs devote significantly less (or in some cases no) die space to things like branch prediction and automatically managed caches. Poorly written GPU code is sometimes almost 2 orders of magnitude slower than well written GPU code, but well written GPU code has much higher potential than what is achievable on modern CPUs. See: CUDA.

The superior man understands what is right; the inferior man understands what will sell. -- Confucius