GTX10xx, Polaris and Vega discussion.

ATMINSIDE · May 12, 2016

bob4933 said:
Plenty of leaked information on polaris out there.

"The hallmark of AMD’s next generation Polaris architecture is the highly anticipated move to the revolutionary FinFET process technology and considerable engineering focus on innovations to push architectural efficiency.
AMD describes Polaris as an architecture that will deliver a “historic” leap in performance per watt"

"14nm FinFET transistors are also drastically more power efficient than 28nm. Resulting in chips that are not only faster but also consume a lot less power than before."

"Early AMD Polaris GPU Samples Are Already More Than Twice As Power Efficient As Nvidia’s GTX 900 Series Maxwell GPUs"

Add in that polaris 10 is supposed to cost around 300 USD, and is targeted at power efficiency over raw power.

I dont see where Im "Grasping at straws" here, unless Raja Koduri is a bad source of information...

- - - Updated - - -

Cool

Twice as power efficient as the 900 series... okay?
So it may hit 1080 performance/watt...

1080 vs TitanX you're around twice as power efficient.

I get your point, but nVidia is also making yet another giant leap in performance/watt with the 10xx series.

bob4933 · May 12, 2016

EarthDog said:
Yep, nothing on performance. Its going to be more efficient per watt, but that doesn't really mention how its going to perform.

Damnit... Im splitting hairs again Bob... Sorry.

I need to stop that... as I do see what you are saying, but, personally just can't make the leap that some do with the given information . "Its me, not you"

EDIT: Also, who said you were grasping at straws (it was quoted)? I was with you on it being a "logical leap".

I mentioned nothing about raw power. Just performance/watt. Polaris 10 is supposed to be a 300$ card, I think those expecting "1080ti" levels of performance are in for heart break. There's quite a bit of bias on both sides of the fence, but looking at the stuff we do know about both sets of architecture, this is going to be an exciting year for GPU's. Nvidia will likely remain king, and AMD will probably steal back a huge lions share of the market with a brutal 300$ card.

But largely, on the cuff, i am directly comparing the architectures alone, and for that, AMD wins. Its completely objective, 14nm is superior to 16nm.

Edit: AND THE ONLY reason for those comparisons in the first place was due to the "omg amd is dead in the water" style comments all over the place around here. (not just this thread, but still here).

EarthDog · May 12, 2016

With you here...

I mentioned nothing about raw power. Just performance/watt. Polaris 10 is supposed to be a 300$ card, I think those expecting "1080ti" levels of performance are in for heart break. There's quite a bit of bias on both sides of the fence, but looking at the stuff we do know about both sets of architecture, this is going to be an exciting year for GPU's. Nvidia will likely remain king, and AMD will probably steal back a huge lions share of the market with a brutal 300$ card.

Lost me here, LOL:

Its completely objective, 14nm is superior to 16nm

There is more that goes into it.

Only time will tell... great thought exercise!

M@rk · May 12, 2016

I should change the thread name to GTX10xx, Polaris and Vega discussion :ROFL:
And move it to general GPU discussion somehow.

DefiantReaper · May 12, 2016

M@rk said:
I should change the thread name to GTX10xx, Polaris and Vega discussion :ROFL:
And move it to general GPU discussion somehow.

We are still talking about the 1080.

We are all hyped up! Lol

Janus67 · May 12, 2016

M@rk said:
I should change the thread name to GTX10xx, Polaris and Vega discussion :ROFL:
And move it to general GPU discussion somehow.

Haha, we have the power if that is your wish, or we can really show our mod muscles and make sure things stay on topic, lol.

M@rk · May 13, 2016

Janus67 said:
Haha, we have the power if that is your wish, or we can really show our mod muscles and make sure things stay on topic, lol.

Its fine if people talk about Polaris and Vega, That means people care about AMD and what they have/will have for us.
If the people here keep talking about Polaris and Vega then i will change the name and try to move it (to the general GPU discussion) if i can.

magellan · May 13, 2016

bob4933 said:
But largely, on the cuff, i am directly comparing the architectures alone, and for that, AMD wins. Its completely objective, 14nm is superior to 16nm.

Edit: AND THE ONLY reason for those comparisons in the first place was due to the "omg amd is dead in the water" style comments all over the place around here. (not just this thread, but still here).

14nm vs. 16nm, sounds like case of epeen if there ever was one.

EarthDog · May 13, 2016

Remeber, it's not the size of the process, but how you use it.

DaveB · May 13, 2016

bob4933 said:
But largely, on the cuff, i am directly comparing the architectures alone, and for that, AMD wins. Its completely objective, 14nm is superior to 16nm.

14nm is a process, not an architecture. Polaris is the architecture implemented on a 14nm FinFET process. So possibly AMD's process is superior, but that can only be confirmed if the yields are good and it performs well. I doubt you could ever deem Polaris superior to Pascal since Polaris is a mid-range GPU with nowhere near the same performance. They are not really comparable products. Vega is AMD's next high-end architecture and not enough is known about it (or Pascal for that matter) to make any comparisons. Best case scenario for non-fans such as myself would be that AMD's Vega eclipses Nvidia 1080 Pascal this fall and Nvidia scrambles to release the 1080Ti early to leap frog ahead again. For me, Polaris is irrelevant. But I love competition (a true capitalist am I) and have regularly switched back and forth between ATI/AMD and Nvidia for many years.

JrClocker · May 13, 2016

DaveB said:
14nm is a process, not an architecture. Polaris is the architecture implemented on a 14nm FinFET process.

What he said!

bob4933 · May 13, 2016

DaveB said:
14nm is a process, not an architecture. Polaris is the architecture implemented on a 14nm FinFET process. So possibly AMD's process is superior, but that can only be confirmed if the yields are good and it performs well. I doubt you could ever deem Polaris superior to Pascal since Polaris is a mid-range GPU with nowhere near the same performance. They are not really comparable products. Vega is AMD's next high-end architecture and not enough is known about it (or Pascal for that matter) to make any comparisons. Best case scenario for non-fans such as myself would be that AMD's Vega eclipses Nvidia 1080 Pascal this fall and Nvidia scrambles to release the 1080Ti early to leap frog ahead again. For me, Polaris is irrelevant. But I love competition (a true capitalist am I) and have regularly switched back and forth between ATI/AMD and Nvidia for many years.

As eloquent as you state this, it changes nothing about previous points. We don't have physical cards to compare, and the "14nm FinFET PROCESS" is superior to a "16nm FinFET process" by its very merits of being smaller. Obviously the differences aren't as black as white as "its smaller so its superior", but the smaller transistor size is more appreciable to consider power/watt. Whether or not amd chooses to put out a high range card isn't the question, because as much as we all love our big boy gpu's, the market is primarly dictated in the sub 300 market. While the 1080 might be the knees of the bees, I doubt sincerely its going to pull big numbers like the lower end cards. I don't have access to 2015's numbers, but in 2014, integrated graphics were the monstrous lions share, with nvidia having a lower market share than amd actually. Nvidia crushed AMD on discrete gpu sales obviously, but the bigger picture will have to wait till be seen. As mentioned, I am merely playing devils advocate for those crying about "Amd is toast", because they wont have a 'high end card'. Those are almost a negligble portion of the market, and I think nvidia will be in serious trouble if polaris 10 is faster than the 1070. the 1060, or whatever their low-mid card will be, will need to be outstanding.

We will find out in a couple weeks.

edit: Looking at your sig, youre rocking a 280x and a 7950. Polaris should be floating your boat based on claims. Why the split here?

EarthDog · May 13, 2016

You know what milkshake brings all the boys to the yard? Damn right, its high end GPUs.

NVIDIA won't be in serious trouble if Polaris is faster than the 1070. They will, as they tend to do, lower the price to compete.

Relax man... JrClocker just agreed with the post (but should have simply used the thanks button instead of posting). :beer:

bob4933 · May 13, 2016

EarthDog said:
You know what milkshake brings all the boys to the yard? Damn right, its high end GPUs.

NVIDIA won't be in serious trouble if Polaris is faster than the 1070. They will, as they tend to do, lower the price to compete.

Relax man... JrClocker just agreed with the post (but should have simply used the thanks button instead of posting).

no worries

I really wish i could recall the interview I saw with Jen-Hsun from nividia, and he spoke of his sales. The low end cards have the overwhelming majority of sales. IIRC, high end cards were like 7% of the market. For amd to gain market share back, they need to crush the mid range market, and I still feel they will. I can speculate till the cows come home, just going by leaked specs and stuff for now. Couple more weeks, we'll all know better

I cant help but feel polaris 10 is going to be a freak beast monster card for the price.

That said, I might still be grabbing a 1080 with that price, holy crap.

Janus67 · May 13, 2016

EarthDog said:
You know what milkshake brings all the boys to the yard? Damn right, its high end GPUs.

NVIDIA won't be in serious trouble if Polaris is faster than the 1070. They will, as they tend to do, lower the price to compete.

Relax man... JrClocker just agreed with the post (but should have simply used the thanks button instead of posting).

What he said

But ultimately, AMD needs to have a competitive product across multiple price points to compete with nVidia (and to different extent, Intel for iGPU).

EarthDog · May 13, 2016

bob4933 said:
no worries

I really wish i could recall the interview I saw with Jen-Hsun from nividia, and he spoke of his sales. The low end cards have the overwhelming majority of sales. IIRC, high end cards were like 7% of the market. For amd to gain market share back, they need to crush the mid range market, and I still feel they will. I can speculate till the cows come home, just going by leaked specs and stuff for now. Couple more weeks, we'll all know better I cant help but feel polaris 10 is going to be a freak beast monster card for the price.

That said, I might still be grabbing a 1080 with that price, holy crap.

We all hope you are right!!!!

magellan · May 13, 2016

bob4933 said:
I don't have access to 2015's numbers, but in 2014, integrated graphics were the monstrous lions share, with nvidia having a lower market share than amd actually. Nvidia crushed AMD on discrete gpu sales obviously, but the bigger picture will have to wait till be seen. As mentioned, I am merely playing devils advocate for those crying about "Amd is toast", because they wont have a 'high end card'. Those are almost a negligble portion of the market, and I think nvidia will be in serious trouble if polaris 10 is faster than the 1070. the 1060, or whatever their low-mid card will be, will need to be outstanding.

Doesn't Intel own the lion's share of integrated GPU sales?

- - - Updated - - -

EarthDog said:
You know what milkshake brings all the boys to the yard? Damn right, its high end GPUs.

NVIDIA won't be in serious trouble if Polaris is faster than the 1070. They will, as they tend to do, lower the price to compete.

Relax man... JrClocker just agreed with the post (but should have simply used the thanks button instead of posting).

It's a good thing Nvidia does have to compete -- unlike, say, Intel.

EarthDog · May 13, 2016

magellan said:
Doesn't Intel own the lion's share of integrated GPU sales?

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

M@rk · May 13, 2016

EarthDog said:
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

Hmmm, most people use mid tear GPUs from 2011,2012 and 2013.
AMD is making the right choice focusing on the mid tear GPU market.

I guess AMD will kill it with power consumption in the Polaris GPUs, But some people like me don't care about power consumption and just want the most power with the lowest price, But if this low power consumption will mean it will OC well then I don't care much.

EarthDog · May 13, 2016

I don't think it's lost on NVIDIA. If any of these rumors are true, a '980ti' for $380 in the 1070 bodes well for performanice AND price for NVIDIA. They are just starting out with their upper midrange offerings first, before lower tier.

GTX10xx, Polaris and Vega discussion.

Sim Racing Aficionado Co-Owner

Member

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner

Member

Member

Benching Team Leader

Member

Member

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner

Senior Member

AKA: JrMiyagi

Member

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner

Member

Benching Team Leader

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner

Member

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner

Member

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner

Similar threads