>AMD's biggest fanboy shits on Vega https://www.you

File: yes.gif (355KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

355KB, 500x281px

>you've lived long enough to see adoredpoojeet shit on ayymd

Respect, at least he's being honest

>AdoredTV

AYYMDSHILL

File: 1468429384131.jpg (168KB, 1600x1067px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 1600x1067px

You niggas need to watch more of the videos. While liking AMD, he's objective and gives credit where it's due.
Vega is turning out to be a disaster given how the bigger chip is only 1080 performance with a cap of 8GB HBM2. They can say whatever they want about HBCC, being that slow after an entire year is just a disaster waiting to happen. I would be surprised if it was cheaper than $800. I'm not even angry, I'm just sad that this generation turned out so shit for the higher end. At least the RX 480 was great, better binning of it is amazing.

File: =.png (42KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 653x726px

B-BUT DX12 WILL SAVE IT RIGHT

RIGHT?

>>>/v/

>>58423342
>buttmad ayymdrone

I'm wary of AMD stock now. Zen looks great, but Vega does not.
Should buying now be the option? Zen might push it to the moon on the long run, but Vega might drag it down. APUs next year will bring in massive shekels in those interested in just one chip and no hassles for mobile devices and prebuilt desktops.

>>58422985
>talks 10 minutes about VRAM size like it's important in any way outside enterprise

no wonder people make fun of him

what if AMD is building counter-hype so when Vega releases and we see the benchmarks we will feel like it is better than expected

Is vega gonna be only new high end cards or are we getting any rebrands?

>barely competing with year old gpu
>poor volta
ayyymd is a joke

>>58423253
>performance on par with 1080

>one costs 1000$
>one costs 500$

oh boy, which one am i gonna buy

>>58423545
Theres Vega 10 and 11; there is also Polaris 12 that's been spotted in the drivers.

My guess is Polaris is kept as the mid-low while Vega does high-mid

Nvidia will keep the performance crown with GP102, but considering the yields that motherfucker is getting, I don't expect too much out of it.

File: 1483193560378.jpg (66KB, 568x612px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 568x612px

>>58422985
>>58423147
wow lol it's fucking over if that fag is hating on vega

>>58422985
Get the fuck out of here, AMD is doing just fine. You think the 1080ti is going to be that much faster than the 1080? Get ready to pay $799 just to find out. Have fun logging into your botnet gpu.

>honda won the grand prix
>every other car sux buy honda buy civic buy buy!
/g/ logic

If it performs the same as a 1080 cheaper it seems fine to me. we'll see when people actually start using them

>>58423579
Fuck you shitposter. Vega has a bigger die than GP104 and has HBM2. There is no way it's going to be cheap. Again, I would be surprised if it was cheaper than $800.

>>58423564
That's impossible

The fury x is already performing better than an 980 ti

vega is going to perform better upon release than it did in the demo, that's a certainty

by how much though, impossible to know right now

>>58423579
>1080
>$1000
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125936&cm_re=gtx_1080-_-14-125-936-_-Product
dumb amdrone
>vega
>$500
your dad apparently works at amd if you already know their pricing

>>58423606
Yes, GP102 is noticeably faster than GP104. Nvidia is running into scaling issues on their GPU's again ala GK110, but it's still quite a bit faster.

>>58423609
>HBM2
>cheaper
pick one
Also 1080 would hit 1 year on the market by the time vega is released and will be cheaper for sure.

>>58423579
>vega chip is almost twice the size of the 1080
>uses HBM2 which is more expensive than GDDRX5
>hurr it will be twice as cheap

>>58423627
dude might be canadian, be more understanding.

>>58423657
accurate. we've probably got another fury x on our hands with vega. hopefully they can fix the CU under-utilization issues and actually put all this silicon to use for once.

>>58423684
>vega chip is almost twice the size of the 1080
it's bigger by about 20mm2

>>58423711
Yeah the scaling problems AMD ran into on Fiji were brutal. At least the NCU shit will improve power efficiency, at the cost of die area.

>>58423632
http://www.gamestar.de/hardware/grafikkarten/nvidia-titan-x/news-artikel/nvidia_titan_x,1010,3276621.html
just look at the benchmarks, a titan P is a little less than 20% faster than an overclocked 1080

>>58423744
GP104 is 314mm2, GP102 is 471mm2, GP100 is 610mm2

Vega 10 from the chip shown is in the 510mm2 ballpark

Note 102 and 100 have the same shader count and such, but different memory controllers and very little DP capability on GP102

>>58423786
Yep, quite a bit faster

>>58423786
Why don't you overclock the Titan XP too and put water cooling on it?

File: amd.jpg (138KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 653x726px

>>58422985
FUCKING TRAITOR

File: 1448884226001.jpg (132KB, 1300x976px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 1300x976px

>>58423608
>not riding Honda

Also reminder that the Vega 10 ASIC is aiming to compete with the Titan X Pascal.

>>58423814
You not getting a Titan P with the 1080ti(actually I don't know what your buying), but Vega was already shown to be at least 10% faster than the 1080 with fury x drivers. I don't think the 1080ti is going to be faster than Vega, and most likely they will compete neck and neck

>>58423843
My point is Vega will be competitive with the 1080ti based on information we've already seen, since we know the 1080ti won't be faster than the titan P, and the vega card shown is at the very least 10% than a gtx 1080.

>>58423927
>since we know the 1080ti won't be faster than the titan P,
Nvidia might go and fuck everyone up by going full retard releasing cut down GP100, fucking up Pascal Titan X owners.

File: 1483752685982-pol.jpg (29KB, 476x513px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 476x513px

>>58423927
This

>>58422985
Ok time for summary:

Vega is the biggest fundamental architecture change since they switched from Terascale to GCN 1.0
The new NCU means a massive boost to efficiency in the shader core and a much easier ability to fully saturate the GPU with work.
The biggest problem with Fiji(furyX) is that its 4096 shaders didnt mean very much because of large bubbles in the pipeline and large ammounts of shaders idling and doing no work each cycle.
Even with a low Level API like Vulcan which is best case scenario the FuryX is still not running with all cylinders firing because Vulkan only solved the Driver overhead problem. There is still bubbles in the workload because of the fundamental design of the GCN architecture itself.

AMD is switching from standard 4x16-bit blocks of a normal GCN CU(compute unit) to This new design of a variable 8+4+2+2 block and either four of these or a mix of these and standard 16-bit blocks in this new NCU(next compute unit)

They could not Do this in the past because they did not have the technology to build a Hardware Scheduler and Memory Scheduler Complexed enough to run this kind of architecture.

We have test samples of Vega with NCU's disabled and with very low clockspeeds and its beating a 1900mhz overclocked gtx 1080 in DOOM. Now there is a gain from using Vulcan over DX11 and OpenGL for AMD but thats on the Driver Overhead side not on the fundamental shader operations side. IT just means the CPU is feeding draw calls to the GPU at peak efficiency.

Alot of people dismiss the test because its vulcan but they dont know what they are looking at. The Vega sample is running FIJI 1.2 drivers Which means the instructions are running through the Vega NCU's like they are standard fixed 16-bit blocks like you have on a FuryX card.

So you need to look at it from this perspective.

This New architecture is more advanced than Maxwel/Pascal. You are going to see unreal performance from Vega when its finally released. Poor Volta

>>58423943
Even tho vega will beat the 1080ti it wont keep up with Volta.

Navi and Zen+ will be the interesting response from AMD.

>>58423273
kek

>>58423962
>poojeet pasta

>>58423974
>Even tho vega will beat the 1080ti
We don't know that yet goddammit. There is a reason why Nvidia didn't unveil their 1080Ti on CES. They either knew that Vega wasn't going to be a problem, or they knew it was going to steal the thunder from their high end line. The latter sounds highly unlikely and it would just be Titan Black -> 780Ti all over again.
Navi sounds very interesting in that I want to see multiple small dies on a MCM, but that's far away. Zen looks good, so Zen+ might be stellar.

>>58423614
Only in that delusional head of yours that thinks that two AMD shilling Vulkan titles are only games released in 2016.

>>58423943
the gp100 in its full spec isn't faster than the titan p though. I think AMD is pulling a fucking miracle this year and 2017 is going to be great for everyone

>>58423604
>>58423147

Can you stop samefagging this shit in every thread? It's pathetic.

>>58424019
The last few years all Nvidia has shown at CES is Tegra and car shit. Implying in any way that the lack of a 1080ti demo has to do with AMD is 100% fallacious.
Nvidia shows off their GPUs at GDC.

>>58423962
>This New architecture is more advanced than Maxwel/Pascal. You are going to see unreal performance from Vega when its finally released. Poor Volta
You can stop this pasta. The Vega we're seeing right now is big Vega and it's only slightly faster than a 1080. It's sadly over, the release looks like a repeat of the Fury X.

>Vega will destroy 1080 Ti

But it can't even destroy 1080? Or are you guys those AMD kind of retards that think that because Fury X has beaten 980 Ti by 2 fps in Vulkan it means that it automatically becomes better card while being 20 fps behind in 99,9% of other GPU heavy titles?

>>58424046
we didn't see an engineering sample Fury X beating a 980ti by 10% with unfinished drivers either. This doesn't look anything like the release of Fury

File: lotrzyk.webm (277KB, 202x360px) Image search: [Google]

277KB, 202x360px

>>58424044
no

I seriously think they showed lower performance on purpose. Maybe they want to show nvidia that vega its shit an make them postpone the release of the 1080ti so Amd can catch nvidia by suprise when vega actually overpowers 1080ti.

>>58424089
Genuine AMD fanboys that aren't thinking rationally or Nvidia false flaggers. Both are bad. That or just genuine shitposters, it's more likely that it's this. I'm being very pessimistic. If I'm right, then I win, if I'm wrong and they release a golden card, then I still win.

>>58424089
the fury x isn't 20 fps behind the 980ti in 99% of titles. even at launch it was at most 3-5 fps slower in all benchmarks. With AMD' s driver improvements it is now faster than the stock 980ti. sorry you fell for the memes, they can be quite persuasive

AYYYYMD IS FINISHED AND BANKRUPT

File: 0034 - 1qfwZyT.jpg (67KB, 709x765px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 709x765px

>>58422985

>nvidia is clearly going to COMPLETELY btfo AMD
>once they've done this they will have no competitors and Jew everyone beyond measure

>>58423927
How do you know it won't be faster than a Titan XP? Titan XP has locked shaders - nvidia could release Ti with 100% unlocked shaders. Since they will probably also allow partner boards for the Ti, it can easily be faster than the Titan XP even if it has the same or slightly less shaders enabled than the Titan.

Assuming there is any reason to release a faster card.

>>58424177
>Jew everyone beyond measure
implying it isn't already happening, rx 480 sold just >25% of gtx 1060s

>>58423805
>Vega 10 from the chip shown is in the 510mm2 ballpark
from all the photos it looks more like 370mm2

>>58424142
If AMD didn't think they had a real ace up their sleeve they wouldn't have shown Vega at all. They had engineering samples on the floor at CES. Engineering samples running on old drivers, test boards that had hardware debug modules attached to them.

Ryzen test systems with 3.6ghz base clocks was impressive enough, the NDA on the Vega arch, and showing the die package was big enough. They didn't have to show early samples and have them available for testing.
They clearly think they have something good on their hands.

70fps avg, 35fps min in DOOM at 4K/Ultra in a segment where a Titan X P gets 80fps avg and 50fps min. Vega 10 was shown with a 225w TDP, and the Titan X P is 250w.
Thats pretty good for an engineering sample.

>nvidia shills panicking before the card is even released
It's amazing how much you care about a GPU you aren't going to buy.

File: vegachip.jpg (95KB, 620x410px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 620x410px

>>58424229
lol no.
The HBM2 die stack is 7.75mm x 11.87mm.
Its just under 92mm2

The Vega 10 die is in the range of 500mm2~

>>58424284
92x4=368

as far as I can see only four stacks fit into that area, or are you counting HBM as part of the chip?
then add all GDDR5 packs to 1080 it will fall under 1700mm2 category

>>58424207
titan xp has locked shaders for performance and power draw reasons, it's already clocked 200Mhz slower than a stock 1080. They can't unlock more shaders without lowering the clocks even more. It is just physics, pascal is a die shrunk maxwell, nothing fancy.

>>58424019
That is where you are wrong read. >>58423962
Vega is the uncucked Fury. A complete architecture overhaul. Navi will hone Vega into a 10nm monster like the 1080 did to the 980.

>>58424340
>as far as I can see only four stacks fit into that area
go see a doctor

>>58424277
Not really, anon. I'm genuinely worried. The RX 480 is great, but Vega doesn't seem to follow. On paper it should be a monster, but the performance we're seeing points to it being not the case.
The only reason I even have a 970 right now is because I'm still waiting for the huge driver merge on the Linux kernel. The RX480 looks great on open drivers.

>>58424360
>Navi will hone Vega into a 10nm monster
You know nothing. GloFo is skipping 10nm altogether.

>>58424340
You're fucking retarded. Kill yourself.

>>58424340
The entire package. Understand hbm2 is on the same package as the gpu.

>>58424342

>They can't unlock more shaders without lowering the clocks even more

They sure as fuck can - it just becomes a matter of TDP. However Nvidia are prime jews so they refuse to use a proper fucking cooler for the thing as well as give the pcb the sort of vrms required to feed 300w into the gpu core.

Generally speaking AMD builds their top end pcbs to really take abuse. The 290x reference pcb for example is good for over 300w if you keep the vrms at a sensible temperature (70-80c territory). The reference blower would never be able to handle that though.

>>58424342
Titan XP has power consumption well below R9 290X, R9 390X and R9 Fury X, so how does AMD do it? Do they have some magical space age cooling technology that nobody else has access to?

Also more shaders unlocked generally means same performance at lower clocks and lower power consumption.

>Q3 2017 AMD card barely beats Q2 2016 Nvidia card
>lol Nvidia is ded
>All hail Vega
As someone who bought a 1070 last July, a card that AMD so far hasn't showed us any real competition for the price range and who will not be upgrading for at least another year and a half since I only do very light gaming (therefore I have no horse in this race is what I mean).
Why do you guys do this to yourselves?

>>58424393
No, retard. 500mm2 is just the gpu die. You can compare it to the P100 package, if you can't calculate simple proportions.

>>58424393
it doesn't matter if it's part of the package if it doesn't do any computing
only the part that computes matters

AMD cant compete with Nvidia in he GPU range because Nvidia has 10x the funds for R&D, drivers, and paying off devs to optimize for their stuff

AMD could make the best gpu on paper but itll never come close

>>58424394
I really don't think they can, 16nm can't run at the tdp of 28nm cards. Transistor size is too small compared making it even more sensitive to heat. Since temps scale linearly with power draw, and each nanowire and transister can't take as much heat i say it's impossible that the 1080ti can be faster than a titan xp. They would have to completely redesign their chips for 16nm, which amd did.

>>58424447
it's not 500mm2, you all are blind
why would you compare it completely unrelated photo with different zoom, angle?

>>58424494
Because p100 also uses HBM2 which are fixed size, you fucking retard.
>zoom
again what are proportions

>>58424342
Titan XP locked shaders more likely because of yields. Perfect dies go in Quadro P6000

>>58424441
>since I only do very light gaming
>buying a low high end card
For what purpose? Post your main monitor, I'm curious.

>>58424419
die shrinks enable higher clocks by shortening the total path length and reducing the voltage/current needed to drive the chip. But at the same time a larger process node can take a higher heat load because the wires and chips are more "robust", meaning the likelihood of electron tunneling occurring is less at larger nodes than smaller nodes. Hence you can get away with 400w gpus at 40nm and 28nm but not 16nm.

>Vega = Fermi confirmed

Ahahahahaha

>>58423611
>Vega has a bigger die than GP104 and has HBM2. There is no way it's going to be cheap.

Thinking that those are related is one of the most retarded thing I've ever seen on /g/, you know nothing about semiconductors and their pricing you faggot.

>>58424489

Nvidia disables the cores in the XP because the full fat chip goes into their fuckoff huge enterprise stuff - the consumer version really is just the rejects. Clocks are low(er) than the smaller chips simply because Nvidia can do so - it has nothing to do with the nuances of 16nm given pascal is a relatively high clocking design.

If you slapped a aftermarket 1080 pcb and cooler onto a titan xp it sure as fuck would clock up (especially given how current GPU boost is so tied into temperature and power draw algorithms). Nvidia really is just fucking people because of their premium image on the titan range.

At least AMD got something right with the fury x and this same sort of premium bullshit - they at least bolted a cooler onto the thing that can handle the chip.

>>58424563
I have a 4k monitor for work related things, I play most games at 1440p on it with very little noticeable blur and 2160p for older games.
I bought the 1070 as opposed to the 1060 or the amd 480 because this one will give me better mileage in comparison since I only buy new video cards every 2-3 years.

>>58424543
and some 300MHz slower in clock speed than the stock 1080, you see what I was saying earlier? if they increased clockspeed AND shaders they would have a TDP they gpus can't handle and would fault.

>>58424585
>bigger chip
>less yields
>more expensive
That's how it works, you fucking retard. Also HBM2 is expensive compared to ddr5x. Just kill yourself.

That's why they are not releasing any cards yet.

They try to squeeze some more performance out of it with drivers.

With that big of a chip size, I doubt it is gonna be as efficient as the GTX1080.

>>58424622
yes high clocking, when they disable shaders. look at the shader count and clock speeds of all three models that we were talking about, then you will see. Then look at the TDP.

>>58423905
See you keep saying it's Fiji drivers in your pastebin, but I've seen nothing to indicate that from any other source. Thinking a driver can be that general is absurd.

It's gonna be the same old story again, not with the Fiji but with Vega now.

>>58424585
Mount stupid in action.

>>58424717
well not if the internal gpu instructions are the same, but seeing how Vega isn't GCN your probably right. I should just say their drivers aren't finished because Vega is six months away, but still it has good performance.

>>58424624
Ok then, fair enough. Seeing so many spec images on /g/ with high end cards and 1080p monitors not even on high refreshes makes my blood boil.

>>58424631
Get P6000 and watercool it to get that +300Mhz. Extra a few thousand bucks shouldn't matter to likes of Titan XP buyers.

>>58424744
The sheer number of nvidicucks in the throws of the Dunning-Kruger effect is always astounding tbqh

>>58424489
You can say whatever you want, but you're wrong.

>>58424568
There are no 400W GPUs. The Titan XP is a ~250W GPU and the Tesla P100 is a 300W GPU. Overclocked Titan XP on stock cooling, which is inadequate for the heat output, is approx 300W.

>>58424697
Titan XP can do 2100MHz 24/7 boost clocks with water loop. How high do you expect it to clock? That's not significantly less than a 1080 or a 1070. The only limiting factor is the ability to cool the damn thing and the clock ceiling which is more or less the same across the range.

>>58424441
>Vega
>Q3 2017
are you retarded? launch date is 1H 2017.

>inb4 "b-b-b-but amd never keeps their launch dates!!!"

>>58424761
except the retard is amdrone, just like you

File: 1476979013197.jpg (540KB, 1100x1002px) Image search: [Google]

540KB, 1100x1002px

>>58422985
AMD FANS ARE FALLING 1 BY 1. Finally. They been jewing and selling memes for the longest to loyal customers

>>58424812
Someone please post the Nvidia version. I love these.

>>58424792
you sound upset dude

>>58424837
and you can't follow links

>>58424866
cry about it

>>58424874
I laugh at dumb amdrones like you actually

>>58424885
I'm literally lmaoing@your life right now dudester. cry about it

>>58424918
im doing ur mum atm ;^)
do you want me to tell her something

>>58424770
nice rebuttal lol.
my Fury X hits 400w under load.
and you are proving my point about cooling and clockspeed. a gtx 1080 can run at 2300MHz all day under a water loop, some 200MHz faster than a titan xp. Do you still not see the way clocks, shaders, and power/temp relate to each other?

>>58424946
ask her why you're crying 8^0

>>58424946
>>58424963


/g/ in a nutshell

>>58424986

/g/ knows considerably more about sodomy than it does about cpus and gpus.

>>58424960
No it doesn't. Unless it's overclocked massively.

Also, you're the retard who suggested that it would be impossible for a 1080Ti to be faster than a Titan XP so perhaps you should take your own suggestion and study the relation of clocks and shaders. Because a fully enabled GP-102 would be faster than Titan X even if it was clocked 100MHz lower. Yet there is no reason to clock it 100MHz lower if it's fitted with a higher capacity cooler.
So your statement is pants on head retarded. It can be faster than Titan XP if that's necessary. It probably won't be unless AMD is really really competitive as they say they are going to be, but that remains to be seen.

>>58424585
>thinking those aren't related
GTFO you stupid motherfucker

I just want an actually good gpu from amd for once now that I have a freesync monitor to upgrade from my 970 that doesn't cost an arm and a leg. The 480 is plain out not worth it.

File: 1434482558702.jpg (446KB, 1000x666px) Image search: [Google]

446KB, 1000x666px

>>58422985
I think AMD has a problem.

The die size of the big vega is almost twice that of the 1080, plus it has HBM2, that means it's much more expensive to produce than a 1080, since less gpu's will fit on a wafer.

Now some might argue that they can still undercut Nvidia because the profit margin on the 1080 is huge. While that is true, Nvidia will just drop prices on the 1080 if AMD does that, and they have alot of room to do that, they can cut prices much further than AMD can because the card is much cheaper to manufacture.

I'm having a hard time imagining this not turning into another Fury x

Well, lets hope Ryzen will deliver

>>58425234
I also have an freesync 144hz monitor.

But I am gonna grab a GTX1070 for 360 bucks on sale in the near future.

I don't need a chip for computing or mining.
AMD is an all-in-one chip.
The GP104 is really a small chip, deactivated, thrown all stuff away that only professional user would be interested in.

>>58425256
Nvidia will release their GTX1080Ti, just like they did with the GTX980Ti.

Yup, it looks like the same story all over again.

File: 1468065101876.jpg (89KB, 960x640px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 960x640px

Does anyone else find it hilarious that amd is the one cult where you'll easily find people like >>58423962 who behave like jehowah witnesses going in every possible thread to spread their wishful thinking, creating hype for months, and then when the thing comes out and it's innevitably a piece of shit like everything amd has released since the bulldozer, they start appearing again to tell everyone how it was always supposed to be a piece of shit and that nobody ever attested to the contrary?

I find this thing fascinating. The only other fanbase that behaves like a genuine cult that I've seen is the nintendo fanbase. Both reek of autism.

I still remember at the time when they were hyping up async compute there was this guy here that made a fucking 17 minutes long vocaroo recording of him saying how AMD was your friend and blablalbala, that usual crap we're all well familiar with, alongside that one guy that had this gianormous 4 or so posts long copypasta just like this one that he reposted on every thread.

The only thing I wanted to know is why does this happen to this one "fanbase" in specific? Is this what they call post-purchase rationalization, in that you have to constantly go and tell the others that the thing you bought was good so you can feel better about it yourself? How does someone even become a fanboy to a fucking producers of some random PC hardware in the first place? This is so pathetic.

>>58425256
>>58425300

For vega to not best a 1080 it would have to be significantly worse than polaris (in both per core performance and clocks) which is an extremnely unlikely scenario. If you flatout double a 480 you get just over 1080 performance.

>>58425174
It's not just the temperature, although that is a major factor in increasing the probablity of electron tunneling. It's the power draw that increases it as well. Nvidia could release a 1080ti fully unlocked and 1080 boost clocks at 300w but it would never work because 16nm wide wires can't take that kind of wattage. The name calling was unnecessary but fully expected from Team Green.

File: xBgSksM.jpg (18KB, 340x260px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 340x260px

>>58425326

>>58425330
It will best the 1080, by 10-20%

But that won't be enough since it will be more expensive (much more expensive to manufacture) and it will most likely use more power

>>58425326
>
Because retards keep buying overpriced nvidia garbage when AMD has been the better deal for quite some time. And it makes me upset,but I didn't post that though.

>>58425326
That's a falseflagging copypasta you're quoting there my man. Probably best to not read too much into it.

>>58425412
>it makes me upset that people buy a better and more expensive product because I'm a poorfag

Figured as much. Post purchase rationalization it is indeed. Let's all go in everyone's doors and tell them to settle for less performance and return their 1070s and 1080s because MUH AMD CULT.

>>58425443
ONE OF US
>logging into facebook so you can download your new drivers

>>58425174
I think that's pretty damning if you think nvidia could increase performance at will based on percieved competition rather than just making the best gpu they can make every time. really makes me think.

>>58425495

lol 780ti.

>>58425256
They're on different processes, per wafer cost could be lower on GloFlo, no shipping costs needed as it's fabbed in America, and Vega may have more redundant structures than Pascal, thus increasing yield further.

Remember, Polaris also acted as a pipe cleaner product, which can be very useful in the semiconductor world. RV740 was crucial for developing RV870, as it let them learn 40nm's ins and outs. Nvidia didn't do that and GF100 resulted. We all know how that went.

Fiji was arguably a pipecleaner for HBM as well, a chip named Tiran, launched in late 2013, was the original plan for HBM. Hawaii was the replacement when it turns out interposers a hard. GP100 is having massive issues with their interposers while Vega has no such problems reported.

>>58425531

20nm being a bust was a bit of a blow as hawaii (and fiji) make much more sense design wise when looking at them targetting 20nm than 28nm.

>>58425364
Yes they can take that kind of wattage. Can you stop talking about things you don't understand?
You're calling power draw and temperatures that are well below 24/7 watercooling temps and power draw impossible. Enabling extra shaders doesn't increase the voltage or amperage that goes through individual transistors either, I have no idea why you're hammering that retarded point. All additional power draw incurred goes into the previously unused areas of the chip and the power delivery mechanisms and in addition the surface area that makes contact with the heatspreader increases which gives better heat conduction that helps offset the higher TDP a little.

I'm name calling you because you won't stop talking out of your ass. I'm not "team green" either you mentally challenged fanboy. Just because I'm telling you that you're wrong doesn't mean I care whether nvidia stomps AMD or vice versa. For all I care AMD could release a chip that shits on a fully enabled 1080Ti running at 2000MHz stock and I'd just buy that if I needed a new card and they didn't predictably price at around 1500-2000 dollars.

>>58425495
Pretty damning to who? Nvidia and AMD are businesses. Neither of them is a charity. They will release the cheapest to make piece of shit low-binned reject you'll buy and fanwank over at the highest price possible and then they'll sell all the good shit to enterprise people with deep pockets because those guys will pay like 5k for the same chip you use to play flappy bird.

>>58422985
>that Scottish accent

I sorry but did AMD already lose? Oh, that's right, Vega isn't even out yet. In fact it's not even out of development. Does not having the lead when it's not even out of development count as a loss? Is that what you're saying? Because if you're saying that I can assure you that you're wrong. Why would you make this topic when Vega isn't even out yet? AMD are still developing right now and they have the best team in tech for how many years now? They're competing against one of the worst GPU company in the industry who just happen to have the lead right now because they're feeding off efficiencys of a smaller die. But you know what? They still fucking suck.

>>58425622
So you are saying that increasing the total length of a circuit doesn't require a corresponding voltage increase. You are the retard my friend.

>Mods literally delete posts pointing out obvious AMD shilling.

Jesus christ this board went full freetard.

>>58425779
The fuck are you talking about? Do you even know how the GPU is laid out at all and what is actually disabled? These are parallel processing units, like CPU cores. You might as well be saying that it's impossible for Intel to have a 24 core CPU based on the same cores as i7 6800K because it increases the length of the circuit and that makes all the quantum bits tunnel through the salt layer so you need massively higher voltage which makes adding more than 6 cores impossible.

Your argument is brain-dead.

>135 posts
>41 posters

The Nvidia Shill Army is going strong on this thread.

>ever believing adoredtv FUD

They guy is a leddit manchild with no EE experience whatsoever, just another /g/-tier armchair analyst who appeals to other chimp tier fanboy retards who think that AMD and nVidia is a black and white issue. Fuck off.

>>58425443
>hurr le poor fag poo poo xDD
literally anybody with a decent job can afford a dual titan x setup, don't be retarded

>>58425878

The anti-AMD brigade has been on edge after the new horizen event.

>>58425878
>several discussions (shitflinging exchanges) going on in the thread
>poster count roughly 1/3 of the post count, so pretty normal all things considered
>HURRR ITS THE NVIDIA DEFENSE FORCE SAMEFAGGING DURRR

The AYYMD think tank in action.

>>58425531
You're describing a best case scenario in which literally every thing that could go right in the manufacturing process for AMD go's right, how likely do you actualy think it is that will happen?

Am I the only one that finds pretty impressive that Vega is getting at the 1080 performance? The 1080 is fucking fast already, AMD will sell a product with that performance at a much lower price. Nvidia will always be faster, and AMD will always have a better price/performance.

>>58425778
>Vega isn't even out yet
No, it will be a year later than the 1080, on a die size which is almost twice as big as the 1080's, and most likely draw a heck of a lot of power and beat it by 10-20%

How impressive

>>58425531
>GP100 is having massive issues with their interposers


Source?
The P100 Nvidia Link and P100 PCIE version are already in the market, you can buy one right now.

>>58425911
It is a black and white issue.

Facts:

Nvidia high end consumer cards way way more efficient than AMD's cards.

AMD is not really cheaper than Nvidia, atleast not for Europe.

That's all I need to know.

I don't give a fuck about muh monopoly.

I support a good engineered chip.

Any good engineer knows that it is not only about power but efficiency.

File: basketballpepe.png (398KB, 499x499px) Image search: [Google]

398KB, 499x499px

>>58425326

STICC

>>58426209
>AMD will sell a product with that performance at a much lower price.
No they won't , are you forgetting what they sold the fury x for?

>>58426209
>AMD will sell a product with that performance at a much lower price
Nigga what are you smoking? Vega 10 is a significantly larger die and has HBM2 memory, which is quadruple the price per GB as GDDR5X.

>>58426256
He's high as fuck on fanboyism

Why the fuck doesn't AMD show some compute benchmarks?

>>58426270
Get out buttcoin miner.

>>58426234
Fury X was a water-cooled abortion on old architecture, but they still managed to get at the 980TI performance level.

I bet my ass that Vega won't need watercooling and therefore it will be cheaper.

Also, if Vega proves to be overclockable, Nvidia is finished.

>>58426285
I want it for rendering.

>>58426295
>I bet my ass that Vega won't need watercooling and therefore it will be cheaper.
>larger die size than the already hot GP104
>allegedly higher clock than Polaris could achieve
>won't need watercooling
kek

>>58426300
Pretty sure it's gonna have shit FP32

>>58425933

The 480 was the beginning of the false flagging from WCCFTech.

They've been in full on baitmode since.

>>58426357
But muh 4096 ALUs

has anyone stopped to consider that when that dude said "flagship vega" he could have meant Vega 10, and not necessarily the full GPU? It could be the Fury, not the Fury X.

>>58426295
Fury X didn't *need* water cooling. Its a 250w~ card. After market cooling solutions are usually rated to 300w or higher. The AIO unit is seen a a premium feature, its a value adder.
The difference in sustained clocks between the Fury Nano and the Fury X is 200mhz~ peak. They're the exact same die, the only thing thats changed is power target.

>>58426374
Vega 10 is the big Vega. That is the flagship.
I have no idea what you're getting your information.

Vega 10 = big die
Vega 11 = smaller die.

>>58426391
Fury X actually takes near 300W under heavy load, so that AIO is very apt for it.

>>58426419
The only workload that stresses the GPU to that extent is Furmark. No game pushes it that hard.

>>58422985

lmao AMDrones on suicidal care 24/7

>>58426450
Furmark doesn't stress the GPU as hard as games, modern GPUs are specifically gimped in furmark. It's really graphically intensive games like Metro LL that cause the power consumption to reach near the 300W mark. It doesn't go quite that high, but it does go over 280. And at that point you really want a good cooler.

They didn't undercut Nvidia with the 480 and they won't with Vega. We will yet again get jewed over.

I'm starting to lose faith in AMD.

We went from "Zen and Vega will fix it" to "Zen+ and Navi will fix it".

>>58426209
>Am I the only one that finds pretty impressive that Vega is getting at the 1080 performance?

Yes, you are the only one that finds it impressive that AMD has yet to reveal all the details about their architecture that was supposed to destroy Volta, but will most likely end up competing with NVIDIA's 2016 lineup instead.

>>58426515
Zen will fix it.

>>58426494
>I have literally no idea what I'm saying: The post
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x,4196-7.html
Gaming loop power consumption: 220w average
Don't talk out of your ass.

>>58426515
Zen looks very promising if the leaked prices are true.

AyyMD stages of grief
Denial
>There's no way Bulldozer/Hawaii/Fiji/Poolaris/Vega is shit! thats just a Nvidia shill site!

Anger
>I fucking hate the world! fuck the evil corporations for not letting good boi AMD succeed!

Bargaining
>At least with AMD I get muh Async performance which like 2 games use

Depression
>Maybe AMD really is just a cancer holding back technology by providing no competition...

Continued Shilling
>Navi/Zen+ will wreck Intel and Nvidia!

All those posts saying Vega is going to be 10% faster than 1080 because of that single 4k Doom benchmark - literally a live or die game for AMD fans that uses a DoA Vulkan and makes every AMD card look better than Nvidia counterparts, even if they're 5 fps behind in overall scores. It's like you want your dreams to be crushed. That very same GPU is probably behind 1080 in OpenGL and every dx11 game. It's just sad.

>>58426553

Zen won't fix shit. i7 7700K overclocks to 5ghz on air, i7 6700K rapes everything as of now. What do you want to fix with your 8 cores and lower per core performance than a fucking i5 6600. And i7 6900K cames out still superior than this garbage Zen CPU.

You AMDfags are truly retarded in the head.

>>58426221
Sure, 28nm of course is less efficient than 16nm, and I rest that the Fiji architecture is less efficient than even Maxwell let alone Pascal.

You've mentioned a lot of things but only a one of them refer to the engineering of the cip, and it's subjective. OpenCL thoroughput is far higher per watt on AMD cards (e.g. mining, ViennaCL, etc.). So is texture mapping and bandwidth bottlenecked operations. If you cared about the "engineering" of a chip you'd find Vega particularly interesting because it handles variable width SIMD (probably for packed math), HBM2, and greatly improved ROP thoroughput; Vega does 11 polygons per clock on the same number of geometry engines, if slides hold correctly. If you want to know what a good chip looks like then wait until it comes out rather than watching videos an old ES.

RX480 8GB starts at $230 here.

>>58426357
>12.5TFLOPS
Yeah that's really shit FP32.

>>58426587
You're projecting, because if you knew what you were saying you would notice the word "average".

It's consistently hovering around 280W even peaking as high as 400W. When your device converts that much power to heat, you need a good cooler. Also, if you look at your own review of the card it shows you that the AIO is pretty noisy, easily no better than high end air cooled 1080s or RX 480s and such so putting a weaker cooler on that card would only result in misery.

>>58424812
Is he shitting out bitcoins?

>>58422985
Lol if Adored is shitting on AMD, you know they are completely fucked.

Yet another AMD fail launch, what a fucking surprise.

File: amd-gpu-roadmap-navi-deni.jpg.png.gif.wmv.flac.tits.this.is.da.police.jpg (303KB, 1200x788px) Image search: [Google]

303KB, 1200x788px

>>58426515
>NAVI

>>58426703
Looking at it from a gaymen point of view which is probably a selling point and do or die for every GPU/CPU manufacturer AMD really stinks when it comes to marketing. I can't understand why they keep shilling their high end 8c/16t CPU that probably is going to cost around $500 against 6900k while using gaymer benchmarks when much cheaper Intel alternatives like 6700 or 6600 can do literally the same when it comes to gaming. Their $200 line up is either really bad or not ready.

>>58426730
>I'm a tech illiterate retard grasping at straws

Average power consumption is the only metric that matters, kid. Peaks and valleys in line load have no effect on anything. Every single thing that pulls electricity has similar behavior.
Go back to /v/, you low IQ little retard.

>>58426703
Dude, I use a 1400 dollar Intel CPU that gets shat on by an i7 6700 in those very same per core benchmarks you're talking about.

>>58426682
Lmao this is so fucking true.

After this launch fails, they will just move on to the next one and start shilling, "Just wait for AMD's next launch! This one's really going to be good I promise!"

Repeat ad nauseum.

>>58426766
And just for reference, since you're such a laughable tech illiterate retard, heres the 980ti's power consumption measured the same way:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti,4164-7.html

Peaks up to 428w~ and it still doesn't matter because the average load is 233w.

>>58424029
>Gameworks wasn't shilling
>Vulkan is
???

>>58426805
Sadly for you Gameworks exists in hundreds of titles. Not in a single QTE dumbed down shooter. You see my point?

>>58426682
Bargaining
>At least with AMD I get muh Async performance which like 2 games use
Don't forget to add worthless Vulkan which only 3 games use. And majority of Dx12 titles works worse than Dx11.

>>58422985
NVIDIA are evils but AMD are incompetent

>>58426819
7000 and some 200 series doesn't work with async anymore either

>>58426766
They increase the average, and when you are in a demanding scene the temperatures will rise, noise will rise and the AIO will prove to be nothing more than adequate.

I bet you're one of those morons who'll argue that the GTX 980 doesn't need a 300W cooler either because it has a sub 200W power consumption on average. Hell, even sub 180W.
Better cooler means more manageable noise and higher clocks in prolonged heavy load scenes. And the card can better cope with high ambient temperatures which severely restrict the efficiency of the cooler. There is nothing overkill or premium about a 300W cooler on that card.

>>58426847
Cooler hardware also operate with less leakage

>mid 2017 release

Vega is DOA

>>58426883
Yup. I kept telling people that AMD has a max of 5 years left before they go bankrupt. This is the nail in the coffin.

File: 2 (1).png (105KB, 320x320px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 320x320px

AMD is going to win anyway guys. Not because of performance, not because of shitty retarded benchmarks. It's going to win because of the openess and thus their contribution to the free software world. Their Linux driver is free, while Nvidia's isn't. That AND NOTHING ELSE is the future, nvidia already lost. Mark my words nvretards.

>>58426883
Volta is probably already ready

Big Pascal was PRESENTED nearly a year ago, so it's over a year old now.

>>58426846
kek, and amd fags dare to trashtalk about gimping nvidia cards. Also vulkan/mantle was running like shit on my old 7850, stutters all the time, frequently drops fps to below 30.

File: 1483629357673.png (181KB, 293x397px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 293x397px

>>58426908

>>58426908
AMD Linux drivers literally doesn't work. Only a guy who doesn't use Linux would say the shit you just did.

>>58426847
>look at me continue to grasp at straws, shift goal posts, and pull things out of my ass because I know literally nothing about power consumption

This just in: GTX 980ti requires 400w+ cooler

>>58424360
>Navi will hone Vega into a 10nm monster like the 1080 did to the 980.
no
navi will be based around two gpus working on the same transistor

which will need HUEG heatsinks but will utterly btfo of anything nvidia

>>58423253
>Engineering sample 3+ months from release
>Somehow a disaster that an engineering sample of the least impressive version now performs as a $500 card with very mature drivers
n/v/idiots gonna be n/v/idiots I guess...

Seriously thou, I haven't owned a dedicated card from AMD since the days the GPU division was it's own business, but I'm not stupid enough to think that the performance of an engineering sample 3+ months from release is going to conform 1:1 with the released product. Seems like /v/ is once again spilling over.

>>58426752
>the literal who of dota nowadays

>>58426936
That's because you are too mentally retarded to get them working

>>58426759
>Their $200 line up is either really bad or not ready.
Intel holds even their i3 7350k models back probably because they know they got the upper hand. I want Ryzen to be good but simply good is not enough. You have to be competitive to the extreme or outperform.

>>58426908
>AMD is worse in every way than Nvidia, but they're gonna win because of LINUX!!!111

>>58424360
AMD is not producing any 10nm parts.

After 14nm LPP, unless they also adopt IBM's 14nm HP, they will be using IBM's 7nm.
GloFo is not offering a 10nm node.

>>58426966
Someone post the amd Linux benchmarks

Also it's literally one guy working on amd drivers iirc. Nvidia releases their Linux drivers alongside Windows because they actually have hpc customers.

>>58426846
I thought it was only the 7K line.. This another low for AMD. So shit.

>>58426941
400W cooler would actually be a premium for 980Ti because it has roughly the same kind of power consumption as a Fury X. A small AIO like the fury uses would be adequate.
It's interesting that you're implying I'm grasping at straws when you have to strawman my argument to have anything to reply with. It's not like the AIO on the Fury X is even better than a decent air cooler, it just makes the card more compact.
I don't get why you're trying to say it's somehow unnecessary, overkill or premium. Yes they could use a large air cooler like the regular fury by AIBs, but that'd not be any less or more "premium". It'd be more premium if anything.

I mean maybe you consider the shitty blower that AMD uses on the likes of R9 390X to be the "non premium" solution and you could get the Fury X to work with it, but you have to be mentally ill to even consider that adequate.

>>58427018
only the 290x and 285 are "new" everything else in the 200 series is rebranded from the 7000

>>58426908

>nvidia's linux drivers aren't open source
>they performs better than amd's open source drivers

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=red-green-eoy2016&num=1

nvidia's linux drivers shit on amd's

>>58426883
You'd think they'd sell Vega cheaper atleast considering everything but nope, another shitshow.

>>58427042
It'll perform 10% worse and cost the same. Then amd scratches their heads why it isn't selling.

>>58426815
>QTE dumbed down shooter

What the fuck are you talking about? nu-Doom has one of the best fps campaigns in years. The killmove shit is also completely optional. You don't move like a snail and the weapon and enemy variety is actually good. Much better than the 5 million other FPS games with generic assault rifles and regenerating health.

File: radeon_400.png (29KB, 470x460px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 470x460px

>>58426846
Their 400-series OEM and laptop lineup is still mostly GCN 1.0-based

>>58426986
>>58427035
BUT THEY ARENT FREE
Are you actually mentally retarded??

>>58427075
It's a game revolving around gunplay but the gunplay is completely ass with the guns sounding like muffled farts.

I drive a Honda Civic, my wife's son drives a Toyota Camry, I don't hate toyota owners, why should I hate AMDfags?

>>58427060
Problem is they seem fine being in their shit position so they don't care. They literally said that they are OK with and continue be 2nd best in the CPU world and only first in inovating when it comes to GPUs, nothing more, back at their hotchips presentation IIRC.

>>58426997
>GloFo is not offering a 10nm node.
They're not offering one because they're skipping right ahead to a 7 nm node. Apparently AMD is going to move on to it once it's ready for mass scale production.

GloFo is also supposedly working on a 12nm node, but that's apparently for memory and embedded stuff made for companies other than AMD.

>>58427108
It's fun but overhyped and disappointing for doom fans. Sad.

>>58427106
Freedom ain't free OK. The gpu marketshare must be cleansed with corpse of amd. Raja koduri is a hack and he doesn't use toilets. High power consumption is no no. OK.

>>58427150
It was actually a pleasant surprise for most people, but thanks for the revisionism. Most people were expecting it to suck ass, but it ended up being pretty great. Much better than the terrible Doom 3.

t. long time Doom fan

>>58427140
As I said, unless they use IBM's 14nm HP after their current 14nm LPP node, they'll use IBM's 7nm.
12 FDX is a shrink of their currently offered 22 FDX. Theres no point in even mentioning these. The clients for these would be ARM parts, and specialized RF chips.

>>58427178
Yeah, kinda. It wasn't nearly as bad as I thought it'd be.

So long as i can get a Vega in the same ballpark as a 1070 i'd probably get one, 1080 money is a bit much for me to justify however.

>>58426515
But Zen looks really good this time. It has btfo attempts at giving it a bad image a few times already. I was expecting lower than Haswell performance and here it is competing with Broadwell and Skylake. I'd like to finally upgrade from a 3570k.

>>58426951
Fuck off, falseflagger. Stop parroting a $500 price point, there is no way in hell that such a big die with HBM2 will be cheaper than a 1080. This has nothing to do with sides you filthy subhuman. Jesus fucking Christ I'm mad.

File: sadguts1.jpg (425KB, 915x985px) Image search: [Google]

425KB, 915x985px

>>58427289
What is left for AMD to do, after they're done debugging/optimizing, is pricing the cheaps low enough that Intel will be put in a ditch. I am wishing for a 200€-ish 6 core Zen atleast, but we all know AMD will fuck even the most important part up in the end. As a waitfag I'd end myself then.

>>58427361
>200€-ish 6 core Zen
I don't think so. Expect at least $500 for an 8 core skew and I'm being nice here. They won't undercut so hard if they have a good product.

>>58427361
Final stepping is done, the chips have been in production for months. AMD said they'll be available Q1, before the end of March, so hard release isn't far off.

6c/12t SKUs are coming, as well as 8c/8t, and top end 8c/16t SKUs.
They'll have competitively priced chips to go head to head with mainstream i5s and i7s.

>>58422985
>15 minutes of speculation

oh ok

>>58427416
Did you watch the video?

>>58425746
almost pooinloo accent

>>58427394
With not even 10% marketshare, bad reputation, no OEM/retail control and no optimization(yet alone marketing) no matter how close they'll come to Intel's offerings they must undercut. They literally can't afford not to.

>>58427466
then they'll be known as the budget option and people will meme about that. they need a superior product, end of the line.

File: scam.png (1MB, 2515x1422px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2515x1422px

>>58426270
XDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

>>58427500
What a fucking liar. I can't believe they were allowed to get away with that blatant fucking bullshit. Nobody Crossfires AMD cards anymore.

>>58427500
>XDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
Can I report you?

Why are AyyMD fuckbois expecting anything anything AMD does to be current since fucking 2011 they have been a year behind

>>58427484
That won't happen this generation, Intel won't let them have one, but they do not even need to.

File: 1484074689981.jpg (187KB, 1920x1135px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 1920x1135px

>>58427518
>>58427500
don't forget the ''51% of gpu utilization''

>>58427500
Worst part is the 1060 costs just as much and performs almost identically.

File: crossfire.png (90KB, 1166x696px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 1166x696px

>>58427610
Honestly I don't care, the RX 480 is a decent card the real meme is the Crossfire 1/2

File: crossf.png (320KB, 2416x656px) Image search: [Google]

320KB, 2416x656px

>>58427669
2/2

>>58427669
I think thqt they'll revive the crossfire meme back with Navi(scalability), but it will still end up being trash in the long-term.

>>58427685
>>58427669
Multi-gpu sucks ass and is a meme, news at 11

>>58426874
Its marginal at best. The cards that we saw this happening the most was the gforce 400 series and those were leaky as fuck. Still was only about 20w less power draw.

>>58427707

Support for multi-gpu setups is absolutely abysmal and getting worse, and AMD doesn't have the sway to reverse that trend.
If they revive the crossfire meme, it will be a suicide - paying >2x for a crossfire setup that will work properly in <10% of games.

Do you faggots think it's just xfire? AMD would have to be literally retarded. Mount stupid at it again.

Daily reminder xdma scales better than sli

>>58428197

Daily reminder. XDMA and SLI are dead with Direct3D 12 offering explicit multiadaptor capability.

>>58423073
>poojeet
I don't think that word means what you think it means.

>>58426408
Vega 11 is a different design based on the same arch, just like Polaris 11 is different from Polaris 10. I was saying that all the demonstrations we have right now could be a cut down Vega 10 and not the whole chip.

>>58422985
>Fanboy

Employee*

>>58423253
>he's objective and gives credit where it's due.

No he doesn't, any time he has to credit something to nvidia or intel, he does so in a really snarky manner and immediately adds a jab into the mix so it's not too positive.

>Yes, Intel created x86 and licensed it to AMD and that lead to AMD using it and growing as a company but like Intel over charges for for low IPC gains, so that leads me to my next point, x64, the amazing thing AMD created.

File: 1483358376688.jpg (68KB, 633x758px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 633x758px

>>58423711
>dude might be canadian, be more understanding.

Is screaming ENGINEERING SAMPLE the new go to panic reaction for AMD shills?

He's been wrong about so much else up until now, why would this be any different?

Whole bunch of assumptions and guesses in this video and thread, odds are it won't pass Titian XP and we know vega is ether using old drivers or very immature alpha drivers and is still 10% faster then a 1080.... so it's going to come Dow to price and how much better vega can get with legit drivers

If you believe it's true and ends up costing $800 for a %10 bump over a 1080 you are a fucking moron, why the fuck would they even bother launching that

File: perfrel_1920_1080.png (35KB, 500x890px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 500x890px

>>58430311
People don't understand that architectures are simulated before they're ever taped out. Barring the foundry failing to deliver target clocks, a company knows how their product will perform before it ever physically exists.
If simulations of Vega were bad, AMD could have created a larger Polaris design, something with more CU than Fiji. They'd have a competitive design right there.

The Polaris 10 die in the RX 480 only pulls 110w at 1266mhz, the rest of the board power is from the high clocked GDDR5. They could have created a 72CU, HBM equipped design and it'd have no problem hitting 200w for 1080 performance, or better. The Polaris 10 die is 232mm2, complete with its 256bit GDDR5 PHY. Doubling up this die as a monolithic design would yield something smaller than the Vega 10 die AMD recently revealed as well.

A reference RX 480 offers 54% of the performance of the factory OC GTX 1080 AMP! at 1920x1080. At 4K the ratio is still 50%, and as the computerbase.de review of Polaris shows, the arch is memory bottlenecked, so providing ample bandwidth with HBM would net more performance per clock.

If Vega was bad it wouldn't exist.

The one saving grace vega has is the metric fuckton of freesync 4k & freesync 2560x1440 144hz monitors floating around.

They could get sales without having to beat Novideo on value.

AMD not even seeming to beat Nvidias GPU a year late to the party is outstandingly grim though.

>>58430477
>People don't understand that architectures are simulated before they're ever taped out.

When was the last time AMD put all their faith in simulations? Oh right, Bulldozer.

>>58430090
is making concussions based on a overclocked card vs one not even out yet using last gen drivers the new standard of of proof?

ok then vega 10% faster then a 1080 case closed DOA

File: ererre.png (25KB, 760x353px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 760x353px

>>58426936
Are you from 2007?

So were looking at around 20% better than 1080 after driver maturity. How is this bad again? Did this guy expect a 50% jump or something

>>58430801
Bulldozer was rushed to market by crumbling management who previously cut funding and cancelled another in development architecture.
Still, the prospective performance of the Zambezi chips was known before they ever hit market. Global Foundries did not hit the desired target clocks inside of their power envelope. They wanted clocks in the range of 4.5ghz, about the top end that IBM hit for their own POWER7+ chips. Instead the FX 8150 launched with a 3.6ghz base clock and wildly out of spec leakage which brought horrid power consumption figures along with it.

>>58430801
Why did you even bother posting this trite nonsense? Annoying child

>>58427685

I mean crossfire/sli is a pretty big meme but there is a bit of hope in DX12 for multigpu

File: DXMD-DX12-mGPU.png (21KB, 1020x511px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 1020x511px

>>58431003

>>58430900
I sure hope AMD can finally merge their huge stack on the kernel one day. I would happily ditch my 970 and sidegrade to a 480.

>>58430972
because it's a 300w chip barely scraping a win over 180w

>>58431061
225w, early engineering sample. Shitposter.

>>58431069
>225w

[citation needed]

>early engineering sample

vega is due in h1, so amd has at best one more respin left before vega's final silicon is in production (if it isn't already).

>>58430477
>People don't understand that architectures are simulated before they're ever taped out.

simulating with FPGAs doesn't tell you anything about performance, it's purely for validating as much as you can before the expensive and lengthy process of getting chips fabbed.

>>58423511
because we thought that the large vega would 16gb and the 8gb would be the small one.

>>58431112
>[citation needed]
http://videocardz.com/65521/amd-vega-10-and-vega-20-slides-revealed
Faggot.

> so amd has at best one more respin left
Yeah, you remind me of that tech illiterate retard who was constantly spewing
>Zen will never clock high!
>They don't have time for a respin!
>it'll never go higher than 3ghz!
>they're doomed, its a flop, hurr durr its Zendozer

Tech. Illiterate. Retard.

>>58431209
>citing videocardz and strawmanning this hard

back to r/amd

>>58431209
Even posting some no name ad infested polish troll site like videocardz.com makes me think your opinion doesn't matter.

File: yu.jpg (117KB, 900x1300px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 900x1300px

VEGA CONFIRMED FERMI

>>58431254
ok but you're literally the worst poster on the board except for the retards who post the all cap meme posts

>>58431227
>>58431254
^
This is a typical /g/ useless response.

requesting the fermi song so it can be updated with new vega lyrics

>>58431017
>wait the driver lads!

File: hestia.png (250KB, 274x403px) Image search: [Google]

250KB, 274x403px

>>58427581
I remember ayymdpoojeet shilling how 480 will btfo 1080 at 100% utilization and crossfire was used just for show.

>>58431351

>100% utilization and crossfire

100% utilization *with crossfire

get your shit right cause AMD never painted a picture of 1 480 competing with a 1080

>>58426209
This thread has some massive nvidia shilling going on.

Vega's a few months from release. It's not in production yet, it's running on unoptimized drivers from another GPU, and they're still finalizing the clock rate. It's a late stage engineering sample with the final kinks getting worked out and optimizations to be done over the next few months.

The fact that it's outperforming a 1080 right now is extremely encouraging for its finale performance, yet somehow nvidia shills turn this around as a BAD thing??

The shilling on this board is unreal.

>>58431452
sup poojeet

>>58426944
1-4gpus like the cpu line.

imagine polaris but 2 of them, that was by my estimate if you had to double literally everything but ram comes out to 400$ for 1080 performance, and adding another that would shit on the titan xp would be 560, and a 4th gpu would be 720$ and good bye gp100, and this is assuming that every single instance of a new die requires doubling everything on the board but ram. it also assumes everything on board works at least as good as crossfire without developers needing to support two gpus. its entirely possible that amd makes a very VERY bare minimum gpu, smaller then polaris that they could build up and insert 8+ gpus onto it. this way you take the absolute minimum risk possible with wafer yields, and reap the most rewards.

again, assuming they get at least crossfire level performance which they should easily surpass.

>>58423962
I honestly wouldn't doubt that drivers bring out more of the gpu, but its on amd to put up or shut up in the coming months.

I may get one because regardless, massive cost savings in my new computer build + possibly sub 600$ version of vega still being almost 4 times more powerful than what I have, but once i get my new rig and see what my gpu does when its not held back, may just wait for navi or sales.

File: 1483528356963.jpg (47KB, 818x475px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 818x475px

>>58422985
>15 minute commentary video

>225w part
>performing ~10% better than a 1080 on very early drivers and with who knows what features enabled/disabled and with probably much lower clocks than the final release

worst case scenario it'll be around titan x in performance/efficiency. yeah it's a big die size but that doesn't necessarily mean it's going to cost the moon just because equivalent nvidia chips do, so i don't know why jim is so worried about it. volta will be better which will make the marketing look silly but only fanboys give a fuck about that.

>>58427328
fury was 550 at launch, fury x was 650, fury now sells for under 300$ at proffit, and fury x at under 350 for profit.

amd has room to play with price even if this is garbage performance, just by virtue of no bad product, only bad prices.

>>58430013
don't see any point in that green that was wrong though?

>>58423399
vega doesn't need to be a runaway success, polaris sure as fuck wasn't but it pulled in money, vega at the very least gives amd new ip/patents, possibly new future roads to go down in terms of performance and power, all it needs to do is not flop and the stock should not be affected.

besides, whatever the gpu division does, will be vastly overshadowed by the cpu, even if amd got twice gp100 performance and could sell it at 99% proffit at 1$ people still would buy nvidia instead.

>>58427178
we expected it to suck due to the multiplayer beta

>>58423896
really, where did amd ever say that?

>>58431597
Yet amdfags usually link to 1+ hours vids of his shit

>>58424142
I really want nvidia to release a 1080ti and amd come out the day after with finished vega faster and cheaper just because it would make me laugh.

I don't expect this, what I expect is about equal performance unless nvidia pull a 780ti which they won't, and everyone gets the nvidia card instead because that's all they know.

>>58424473
Why would you compete with nvidia when every single time you outperformed them in both speed and at a lower cost, the market refused to reward you?

>>58431452
So instead of 10% better than the 1080, it will MAYBE be 15% (across all games, not just AMD optimized titles) better once it gets better drivers? By then the 1080 Ti will have come out, which will be even more powerful. The flagship Vega card will be expensive, at least as expensive as the 1080 is now. You can take this to the bank.

I wanted AMD to succeed, as someone who's owned cards from both companies and doesn't want a monopoly. Unless AMD has some more tricks up its sleeve regarding Vega, they will suffer immensely and the Nvidia will get away with even more bullshit. Expect mid tier GPUs going forward to go for $700 and XX80 to go for an even $1000, it will happen. It's sad.

>>58426234
the fury x came out right where everyone who wasn't retarded thought it would be, remember, they has between 550 and 1000$ to play with as there was no 980ti, it was between a 980 and titan in performance. erey retard on /g/ was claiming 800-900$ I stood firm on 650-700 if they aren't being jews, as it was the first card sense the 'we don't want to be the budget brand' and it was a they are either going full jew or they don't want to be know as the 'i cant afford the better option so fuck it ill go amd'

in response to nvidia learning the price and fearing the on paper stats, they put out the 980ti and price matched fury x.

>>58426295
the cut fury x was 550$
the nano was was 650$

likely we will see 550-650 for the perfect card
a cut version for cheaper or possibly there will be 3 skus,

high ass binned version for 650
low binned for 550-600
and cur version for 400-450

>>58426261
>>58426256
smaller die size then fury x,
not water cooled
unless you got a price on what 8gb of hbm2 costs, i'm going to assume ballpark hbm1 because only 2 dies then 4.

my bet is between 450 and 650
2 uncut skus at different binning (fury x and nano) with a cut one at a lower cost.

>>58427707
no, crossfire will be dead by then, navi would not use crossfire as the bridge otherwise it would be no different or better than dual gpu chips, that's not what an mcm is.

>>58427804
the difference would be the gpus are on the same socket/whatever its called, and are treated as though they are on the same die not different ones, and are only reported as one gpu to the system.

>>58427394
>>58427466
Consumers are a write off for amd, expecting no growth at all.
If you look at it this way, what amd needs is market share, and people on their platform that will last 1-2 more cpu cycles till they need to upgrade.

This gives amd a chance for people to be in for zen, upgrade at zen+ or potentially upgrade passed that.

How do you get people onto an amd platform?
It sure as fuck inst slightly undercutting intel
Base 8c16t is the lowest binned chip they will make, if they sell it for 500$, then they are fucked because you have a 6 core intel that is a known quantity, that once overclocked will out preform amd's lowest binned cpu. and if they sell a higher binned one for 8-900 like everyone thinks, again, you go intel for the known quantity and quad channel memory, more pcie lanes, ect ect.

but if amd puts that 8 core out at 350$, that changes everything because its no longer ill go safe with intel, it becomes why bother with intel?

8 cores will play all current games to 140hz, and many current and future games are highly threaded so another performance uptick again.

Intel will have their 'it hits 5ghz' and gets 50 more fps that I cant even see, but amds 8 core will run circles around it.

amds 6 core will be a no brainer from an i5 perspective of 250, and from an i3, amd is offering 4 cores 8 threads at 150, now who's to say this wont clock close to 5ghz? you willing to bay double the price for almost the same peak performance from intel?

if amd price compete with intel, they lose the consumer market, and only have the enterprise space left which they will gain some seeing as octa channel memory, and from the ryzen and 6900, seemingly faster and more powerefficant too.

>>58429670
He's a poojeet born in Scotland.

>>58426682
polaris fell where we thought it would, hawaii was fantastic if a bit hot, however by the time you could get one for non inflated prices, nvidia had the 900's out, fiji got fucked by the process but was above a 980 below a 980ti for a price that wasn't bad for what you got.

vega isnt out and bulldozer, wasn't in the market for a cpu when that came out so not paying attention to what was hype, apparently amd was clear it was a loss in single core for strides in multicore, which it was.

for anger, nvidia and intel have a long history of fucking amd in compilers, locking code, and now black boxing core forcing amd to make in driver workarounds, see tessellation limiters, the 900 series have these as hardware level features, everyone else needed driver level ones, amd got the fix, sadly none of nvidias non 900 cards did.

not sure how much async really adds, it seems to potentially be 12% in free performance gains which is nice.

yea, amd is competition in the gpu space, not so much cpu. see the 980ti, only reason you got that for that price was nvidia being scared of amd, and if amd is close to their performance with vega, you will see nvidia do something with volta.

only retards think zen will be bad right now, and navi... if i can hold out and vega isn't that big of a jump likely wait for navi as the potential mcm will drastically reduce the cost of performance.

>>58432387
nope

https://youtu.be/4oxNq5JiCPQ?t=42s

>1080 released in may 2016
>titan pascal released two months after

>8 months later amd has a preproduction product that's allegedly 10% faster than 1080, still slower than the titan

You guys realize Volta is dropping this year right?

>>58424089
>comparing baseclock vega results to overclocked 1080
Even if it overclocks poorly, it will still end up better.

>>58432603
>will still end up better
marginally better and more expensive a year later
so that's what ayyymd calls an accomplishment

>>58431158
this is irrelevant to performance, specially on ES card they can just make 16gb pack

>>58432667
>marginally better and more expensive a year later
none of this is known

File: amdapprovedreviewer.png (783KB, 1083x712px) Image search: [Google]

783KB, 1083x712px

>This thread still exists
>Poojets still cling to the false assumption that Vega will be 10% faster than 1080 because of a single Doom Vulkan benchmark.
>They will continue their tradition of ignoring those 100+ annual Nvidia optimized games while crying about goyworks etc. and posting that single AMD favoring game benchmark in that single DOA API.

Then you will probably start spamming a shill review made by some actual Poojet like the one at HardwareKuks where he benchmarks more DX12/Vulkan titles than DX11 titles to make AMD look better thanks to async (at least till Volta comes out) as if that ratio of dx11/dx12 titles was a real reflection of current library of games. Like some anon wrote before, AMD is truly like a cult that has ability to deny any sort of logic or fact. Scary stuff.

>>58432819
DELIT TIS

File: 658.png (928KB, 600x887px) Image search: [Google]

928KB, 600x887px

>>58425779
It's okay,don't call the guy a retard,
he doesn't understand the basic of electronic and think cpu are immune to the law governing all are power distribution lines and the rest of the god dam electronic world.

It's perfectly Fine he's not the one hired or leading the field in cpu layout or transistor.

>320 replies, 86 poosters

Nice "poomunity" you got here

KEK

>>58426219
Yeah low volume sales with golden chips. Lot of people on backlist.

They were having issues with thermal expansion for awhile, it'd damage the TSV's.

>>58432819
>Vulcan/DX12 is amd favoring!!!
Hi there, tech illiterate.

ITT: /v/tards (((raiding))) /g/.

>>58432717
it is relevant as prior to amd calling it a flagship, we assumed the performance could have been a smaller version of vega like the 460 is to the 480