One, er, Hub to Rule them All?

With R500 AMD introduced its first ring bus, a high speed, high bandwidth bus designed to move tons of data between consumers of memory bandwidth and the memory controllers themselves. The R600 GPU saw an updated version of the ring bus, capable of moving 100GB/s of data internally:

On R600 the ring bus consisted of two 512-bit links for true bi-directional operation (data could be sent either way along the bus) and delivered a total of 100GB/s of internal bandwidth. The ring bus was a monster and it was something that AMD was incredibly proud of, however in the quest for better performance per watt, AMD had to rid itself of the ring and replace it with a more conventional switched hub architecture:

With the ring bus data needed to be forwarded from one ring stop to the next and all clients got access to the full bandwidth, regardless of whether or not they needed it. For relatively low bandwidth data (e.g. UVD2 and display controller data), the ring bus was a horrible waste of power.

With the RV770 all that exists is a simple switched hub, which means that sending data to the display controller, PCIe and UVD2 (AMD's video decode engine) traffic are now far less costly from a power standpoint. Another side effect of ditching the ring bus is a reduction in latency since data is sent point to point rather than around a ring. With the move to a hub, AMD increased their internal bus width to 2kbits wide (which is huge). Maximum bandwidth has increased to 192GB/s (in 4870) but this depends on clock speeds.

With nearly double the internal bandwidth and a point to point communication system, latency between memory clients should be decreased, and huge amounts of data can move between parts of the chip. Certainly getting enough data on to the GPU to feed 800 execution units is a major undertaking and AMD needed to make a lot of things wider to accommodate this.

The CrossFire Sideport

Although AMD isn't talking about it now, the CrossFire Sideport is a new feature of the RV770 architecture that isn't in use on the RV770 at all. In future, single-card, multi-GPU solutions (*cough* R700) this interface will be used to communicate between adjacent GPUs - in theory allowing for better scaling with CrossFire. We'll be able to test this shortly as AMD is quickly readying its dual-GPU RV770 card under the R700 codename. 

One thing is for sure, anything AMD can do to assist in providing more reliable consistent scaling with CrossFire will go a long way to help them move past some of the road blocks they currently have with respect to competing in the high end space. We're excited to see if this really makes a difference, as currently CrossFire is performed the same way it always has been: by combining the output of the rendered framebuffer of two cards. Adding some sort of real GPU-to-GPU communication might help sort out some of their issues.

Wrapping Up the Architecture and Efficiency Discussion Fixing AMD's Poor AA Performance
Comments Locked

215 Comments

View All Comments

  • NullSubroutine - Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - link

    It scaled more than 100% in a few games?
  • DerekWilson - Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - link

    greater than 100% scaling is due to margin of error combination for both single card and dual card tests in the vast majority of cases.

    we also tested single card performance on an nvidia system and crossfire performance on an intel system, so the different computers will also add margin of error.

    two card solutions generally don't scale at greater than 100% except in extraordinarily odd situations (where rebalancing loads might help with scaling on both individual cards -- but that's odd and rare).
  • Sind - Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - link

    Why no 260 and 280 SLI?
  • ImmortalZ - Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - link

    Because, with that kind of money, one can an entire system with one 48xx :P

    Also, page 10 appears to be broken.
  • Lifted - Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - link

    No 260 or 280 SLI in the benchmarks, but they included them in the power charts. Odd.
  • Anand Lal Shimpi - Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - link

    The power data was simply taken from the GTX 280 review, we just added to the list.

    As for the GTX 280 SLI numbers, we didn't include them as it it's mostly out of the price range of the Radeon HD 4870 ($1300 vs. $600 for two 4870s). We can always go back and redo the graphs to include them if you guys would like, but in the interim I would suggest looking at the GTX review to get comparison numbers.

    Take care,
    Anand
  • DerekWilson - Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - link

    we actually only have one GTX 260, so we can't test that
  • Clauzii - Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - link

    Yes, and the click to enlarge doesn't work.
    And believe it or not, posting right now from a AT page that looks like 1994...!
  • ImmortalZ - Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - link

    Insert a buy in there. Need edit!
  • TonyB - Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - link

    but can it play crysis?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now