Strange that they would change from their normal naming scheme of adding X2 to the end. This way just adds confusion.
I thought it was a little unusual as well, I guess because they lowered the clocks of the 5870 they felt that it might be deceptive to call it the 5870 X2.
I contend that graphics cards have always had really strange model naming methodology's.
Not just graphics cards... Intel's CPU naming conventions for the past several years have been extremely confusing. Core 2 model numbers are difficult to get a good grasp on, and now they've called their Lynnfield 1156 chips "Core i7", even though the first Core i7s go in a completely different socket...
It occurs to me after reading our first look at the 5870 that the wattage figures on Hemlock are pretty impressive: 294W load/49W idle consumption. The Radeon HD 4870 (with a four) consumed just 4 less watts at idle, with 3-4x less GPU horsepower. At load, the 5970 consumes ~84% more power than the 4870, but again at 3-4x the GPU horsepower.
Even with fuzzy math, Hemlock has outrageous performance/watt characteristics.
Thrax
🐌Austin, TX Icrontian
Comments
I thought it was a little unusual as well, I guess because they lowered the clocks of the 5870 they felt that it might be deceptive to call it the 5870 X2.
I contend that graphics cards have always had really strange model naming methodology's.
Even with fuzzy math, Hemlock has outrageous performance/watt characteristics.