GTX10xx, Polaris and Vega discussion.

[bob4933]

Reaper, you're making a LOT of assumptions based on absolutely no information.

AMD's architecture is (finally) superior to Nvidia's this go around. They may not have "faster" cards, but they certainly will have more efficient cards based on the nature of transistor architecture alone. AMD has always competitively priced their cards to slot nicely between nvidia's gaps. A 400$ nvidia card? That doesn't even exist. The furyX is an amazing card, they simply got outshadowed by the gtx 980ti.

note: I am not including the artificial price inflation for the initial gcn cards for bitcoin mining, as that was a supply-demand thing, not really a performance-price thing.

 

[ATMINSIDE]

Reaper, you're making a LOT of assumptions based on absolutely no information.

AMD's architecture is (finally) superior to Nvidia's this go around. They may not have "faster" cards, but they certainly will have more efficient cards based on the nature of transistor architecture alone. AMD has always competitively priced their cards to slot nicely between nvidia's gaps. A 400$ nvidia card? That doesn't even exist. The furyX is an amazing card, they simply got outshadowed by the gtx 980ti.

note: I am not including the artificial price inflation for the initial gcn cards for bitcoin mining, as that was a supply-demand thing, not really a performance-price thing.

Link to said superior performance?
FuryX is equal to a 980Ti on a good day, loses by 10% in most games.
The FuryX costs more ($90 right now, per Newegg) while using 25W more also...
You also have to be able to put the radiator somewhere.

Oh and it is only 4GB as well.

 

[DefiantReaper]

Reaper, you're making a LOT of assumptions based on absolutely no information.

AMD's architecture is (finally) superior to Nvidia's this go around. They may not have "faster" cards, but they certainly will have more efficient cards based on the nature of transistor architecture alone. AMD has always competitively priced their cards to slot nicely between nvidia's gaps. A 400$ nvidia card? That doesn't even exist. The furyX is an amazing card, they simply got outshadowed by the gtx 980ti.

note: I am not including the artificial price inflation for the initial gcn cards for bitcoin mining, as that was a supply-demand thing, not really a performance-price thing.

Umm I didn't mean to hurt anyone's feelings.

Just AMD is the underdog and has been for years. Their cards can't catch up with nvidia.

And now it seems that you're the one making assumptions? Where's those links?

 

[EarthDog]

Fury X vs 980Ti...: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X/31.html

Low res (1080p), the 980Ti averages 11% faster (this is taking out two anomalous games or it would be higher). At 4K, they tie or 2% faster without those anomalous games.

Not sure where they are more efficient being slower and using more power though...

 

[Soulcatcher668]

I think what Bob is talking about is that Polaris is 14 nm while pascal is 16nm. Will this make a difference? Don't know.

There was some talk from AMD a month or two ago about them not wanting to compete in the high end of GPU's but I can not find a link now...... maybe I just dreamed it.

 

[EarthDog]

I recall that as well RE: AMD not wanting to compete there... but also think that was talking CPUs? Not sure.

I have seen some sites post up that AMD is considering moving Vega up in order to compete with the 1070 and 1080...depending on why that is... that may not be a good thing... or it can be a great thing. Only time will tell.

 

[wingman99]

AMD not wanting to compete was on this forum somewhere, However they have to compete they sell Video cards.

 

[EarthDog]

AMD not wanting to compete was on this forum somewhere, however they have to compete they sell Video cards.

Compete in the HIGH END segment is what we are all saying.

 

[wingman99]

Compete in the HIGH END segment is what we are all saying.

LOL so AMD is not going to make High End video cards or CPUs.

 

[Soulcatcher668]

Found it....

AMD’s Polaris will be a mainstream GPU, not high-end

 

[EarthDog]

LOL so AMD is not going to make High End video cards or CPUs.

You saw it here too man...

That said... google : http://www.pcworld.com/article/2919...gh-end-pc-market-again-from-cpus-to-gpus.html

AMD has been forced to pick its battles, wary of going toe-to-toe with Intel and its mighty manufacturing machine. But AMD chief executive Lisa Su said Wednesday that it’s time for AMD to re-enter the ring and again commit to high-end, premium products.

That quote says they were/intended to be out of it and now they are getting back into it.

Found it....

But Vega..........

 

[Soulcatcher668]

You saw it here too man...

I did?

So now we are seeing Vega in October. Polaris is only for a couple of months or is it like nVida's 800 series?

I don't know..... Until we have hardware in hand I am not believing anything anymore.

 

[EarthDog]

Sorry Soul... your post snuck in after Wingmans... was talking to him.

 

[wingman99]

Sorry Soul... your post snuck in after Wingmans... was talking to him.

This is so funny, what were you saying to me EarthDog?

 

[EarthDog]

Post 51... But, just forget it...

Anyway, the Vega moving up thread at TPU - http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/amd-pulls-radeon-vega-launch-to-october.222403/

 

[bob4933]

Link to said superior performance?
FuryX is equal to a 980Ti on a good day, loses by 10% in most games.
The FuryX costs more ($90 right now, per Newegg) while using 25W more also...
You also have to be able to put the radiator somewhere.

Oh and it is only 4GB as well.

You know austin, sometimes a little contextual understanding would be nice from you. I was clearly talking about polaris/pascal for the architecture differences (soulcatcher saw it clearly, as did others im sure) (I mean jesus christ, Im even using future tensed verbs here...).

And i was directly comparing the 980ti to the furyX because he specifically said the furyx "is overhyped" and implied its no good (it is, the 980ti is just a beast).

- - - Updated - - -

I think what Bob is talking about is that Polaris is 14 nm while pascal is 16nm. Will this make a difference? Don't know.

There was some talk from AMD a month or two ago about them not wanting to compete in the high end of GPU's but I can not find a link now...... maybe I just dreamed it.

Thank you. Here I was thinking future tense verbs and speaking of direct architecture changes would be more on the 'obvious' side.


As I mentioned though, I doubt they will make "Faster" cards, but they are severely hunting that performance/watt ratio... Thats just what i think's gonna happen based on leaked info, but we wont really know for a few more weeks.

 

[EarthDog]

I took that as the existing/Fiji architecture too (because of your first line in the present tense.. "this go around" versus 'next/future/upcoming etc').

After that, you seemed to jump to future architecture. I can see why he and defiant thought that way. Regardless, Polaris and Vega isn't even out, not even a rumor on performance, so talking in future tense, his question about your assertions on their performance still seems valid, no?? They are "finally" there, but, we don't know that?

Logical leap? Surely, with you 100%.

.......and I will stop splitting hairs!

 

[ATMINSIDE]

You know austin, sometimes a little contextual understanding would be nice from you. I was clearly talking about polaris/pascal for the architecture differences (soulcatcher saw it clearly, as did others im sure) (I mean jesus christ, Im even using future tensed verbs here...).

And i was directly comparing the 980ti to the furyX because he specifically said the furyx "is overhyped" and implied its no good (it is, the 980ti is just a beast).

- - - Updated - - -




Thank you. Here I was thinking future tense verbs and speaking of direct architecture changes would be more on the 'obvious' side.


As I mentioned though, I doubt they will make "Faster" cards, but they are severely hunting that performance/watt ratio... Thats just what i think's gonna happen based on leaked info, but we wont really know for a few more weeks.

You start out in present tense, then later make one small sentence in future tense. Sorry for presuming the starting, and prevailing, tense was the one you were attempting to speak in.
Also, again sorry, I put factual information to the statement you made about exact model numbers.

I'm not the only one who interpreted your post the way I did, maybe try making it clear you're talking about upcoming hardware next time.

If you want contextual understanding, actually post the context, capisce?

 

[bob4933]

I took that as the existing/Fiji architecture too (because of your first line in the present tense).

After that, you were talking about future architecture. I can see why he and defiant thought that way. Regardless, Polaris and Vega isn't even out, not even a rumor on performance, so talking in future tense, his question about your assertions on their performance still seems valid, no??

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...

edit: Yes yes yes, I was typing on my phone, didn't feel like writing a huge novel tapping out a letter at a time. I could have been more clear, but the point was there as soulcatcher grasped. I am merely referring to the architecture at this point, as we have no cards to directly compare. 14nm > 16nm. Theres no confusion or ambiguity with that.

- - - Updated - - -

You start out in present tense, then later make one small sentence in future tense. Sorry for presuming the starting, and prevailing, tense was the one you were attempting to speak in.
Also, again sorry, I put factual information to the statement you made about exact model numbers.

I'm not the only one who interpreted your post the way I did, maybe try making it clear you're talking about upcoming hardware next time.

If you want contextual understanding, actually post the context, capisce?

Cool

 

[EarthDog]

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".