AMD Unveils New 7000 Series APUs and New Radeon Graphics Products for OEM PCs

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
AMD today at their 2015 Financial Analyst Day is unveiling new AMD 7000 Series Accelerated Processing Units (APUs), AMD Radeon™ 300 and M300 Series Graphics, and AMD A-Series desktop APU updates, delivering a robust lineup of products in 2015 that reinforce AMD's surround computing leadership.

"We're excited about the experiences our latest APU and GPU technologies will bring this year for tech enthusiasts, gamers and mainstream consumers alike," said Matt Skynner, corporate VP and general manager, Computing and Graphics Business Unit at AMD. "AMD's commitment to graphics and compute performance is evident in the newly available 7000 Series APUs and the Radeon™ 300 Series graphics that deliver superior gaming experiences, premium entertainment streaming and innovative computing features."
 
From what I read the new 300 is suppose to be 3x more power efficient? If so then they may have finally solved the heat/noise issue and will be back up to par with Nvidia. Sounds great!
 
Looks like re-brands of the GCN 1.1 and 1.2 chips. Bad AMD, really bad!
 
This is common for OEM-only product lineups. Very common.

Hmmm, still with AMD in the state it's in, they really needed to do something to stand out, and prove they are here for the long-haul.

Rebranding ancient 4 year old chips is not really good at instilling confidence in your customers, OEM or not.
 
Looks like re-brands of the GCN 1.1 and 1.2 chips. Bad AMD, really bad!
Nvidia does the same thing, taking their old-gen high end equipment and rebranding it as new gen mid and eventually low end.

Personally, the most important aspect for me is bang/buck factor. On a desktop gaming rig, I don't really get the infatuation with power efficiency. How many hours could you possibly game per day? 4 hours on average if you have a job?

That's 28 hours or so a week if you don't skip a day, which is pretty hardcore, and even then if you're paying 8.5 cents per KWH as I am at least, that comes out to maybe a buck difference or so a month on your electrical bill.

More power efficient is ALWAYS better all else equal, but if you're sacrificing performance per buck quite a bit, as NVidia of cards of late absolutely are, then I don't get it. But that's probably why I own a ATI 295x2, one of the most power hungry cards on the market lol!
 
Nvidia does the same thing, taking their old-gen high end equipment and rebranding it as new gen mid and eventually low end.

Personally, the most important aspect for me is bang/buck factor. On a desktop gaming rig, I don't really get the infatuation with power efficiency. How many hours could you possibly game per day? 4 hours on average if you have a job?

That's 28 hours or so a week if you don't skip a day, which is pretty hardcore, and even then if you're paying 8.5 cents per KWH as I am at least, that comes out to maybe a buck difference or so a month on your electrical bill.

More power efficient is ALWAYS better all else equal, but if you're sacrificing performance per buck quite a bit, as NVidia of cards of late absolutely are, then I don't get it. But that's probably why I own a ATI 295x2, one of the most power hungry cards on the market lol!

Don't worry, I'm not forgetting about the shit that nVidia pulls, but AMD is in a very different position to nVidia, and they have nothing but old, hot, and not particularly fast cards, which will made up by far the most options available from OEMs. Also another thing is that with hot running chips, comes more expensive cooling.

If AMD was going to pull this maneuver, then they should have exclusively used GCN 1.3 chips, and scaled from there...
 
Oh and for the record, that doesn't apply to HTPCs though, where I understand that tiny form factor is paramount which pretty much means you want the most power efficient GPU possible to keep the size down. And for laptops, absolutely, number one priority for me is bang/watt more than bang/buck.

In any case, I am excited about the new APUs though, as supposedly with DX12 you'd be able to combine the performance of the APU with a dedicated part time GPU right? If they integrate some Nvidia Optimus technology to use just the APU for most tasks, but then bust out crossfire with a midrange dedicated GPU, that would be pretty awesome.
 
Nvidia does the same thing, taking their old-gen high end equipment and rebranding it as new gen mid and eventually low end.

Personally, the most important aspect for me is bang/buck factor. On a desktop gaming rig, I don't really get the infatuation with power efficiency. How many hours could you possibly game per day? 4 hours on average if you have a job?

That's 28 hours or so a week if you don't skip a day, which is pretty hardcore, and even then if you're paying 8.5 cents per KWH as I am at least, that comes out to maybe a buck difference or so a month on your electrical bill.

More power efficient is ALWAYS better all else equal, but if you're sacrificing performance per buck quite a bit, as NVidia of cards of late absolutely are, then I don't get it. But that's probably why I own a ATI 295x2, one of the most power hungry cards on the market lol!
Well that heat means more work on the ac... And these things can heat a room on their own. That's on top of noise, longevity concerns, overclock and throttling potential..
 
they have nothing but old, hot, and not particularly fast cards, which will made up by far the most options available from OEMs.
Huh? AMD has a GPU offering to rival all of NVidia's niches as far as I know. Even the TitanX is blown away in performance by the 295x2, and at $400 lower price.

And for integrated graphics, clearly there is a reason that both Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo went the AMD route.
 
What AMD needed to do, was to make a GCN 1.4 part, which pulls off the same kind of trick that nVidia did with the Maxwell II architecture. They could have scaled that chip both up and down, and would have seen much interest from OEMs and the rest of us.

Unless these are sold dirt cheap, then I think AMD will have less of it's GPUs in systems over the next 12 months, so even lower market share compared to nVidia and Intel.

As always, AMD are just not aggressive enough, and their products overstay their welcome, to the point of being bottom end stuff, with low margins.
 
Huh? AMD has a GPU offering to rival all of NVidia's niches as far as I know. Even the TitanX is blown away in performance by the 295x2, and at $400 lower price.

And for integrated graphics, clearly there is a reason that both Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo went the AMD route.

But you are forgetting the GTX980Ti cards that are due soon. That $400 difference is going to look closer to $100, and who can say about performance...

And the reason Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo are using AMD's chips is money, AMD offered more for less.
 
Well that heat means more work on the ac... And these things can heat a room on their own. That's on top of noise, longevity concerns, overclock and throttling potential..
Longevity concerns are moot on GPUs in my experience, as all my cards to date have been 3-year minimum warranties, and my current is a lifetime warranty. Noise thanks to watercooling on my AMD GPU is also very low, and it runs cooler than NVidia's competitor because of it.... not that it emits less heat, but the card itself runs way cooler.

Now, yes, in theory it means the heatsink has to be of better quality and thus more expensive, but since NVidia is keeping their profit margins so very high, in reality the AMD offerings are still better value for the customers which is why cards like the 290x sell like hotcakes, and I recently recommended a Vapor-X one to a buddy of mine which is a great cooler on it and was on sale at an awesome price.

AMD:
index.php


NVidia:
index.php


No backplate and a POS cooler on a $1000 video card from NVidia... yeah, not impressed, sorry. Results and street price are what matter most to me, and I'm no fanboi and have jumped Nvidia to AMD back and forth depending on who IMO makes the best product based on my priorities. *shrugs*
 
But you are forgetting the GTX980Ti cards that are due soon. That $400 difference is going to look closer to $100, and who can say about performance...

And the reason Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo are using AMD's chips is money, AMD offered more for less.
Exactly, with the same priorities as consumers. If AMD is offering you more frames per second at a lower cost... why would you buy NVidia? Because its newer tech on paper? Who cares...

And yes, when the GTX 980Ti comes out, that'll be cool, until AMD unveils a 395x2 next generation GPU at hundreds less that blows it away.
 
Who has the fastest top end card overall is meaningless to the main consumer market. How many Titans does Nvidia sell compared to it's $100 or thereabouts cards? I bet its 100 to 1 to the budget cards.

How many S class do Mercedes sell compared to C or A class? It's just tech showcase product. It all filters down.
 
Who has the fastest top end card overall is meaningless to the main consumer market. How many Titans does Nvidia sell compared to it's $100 or thereabouts cards? I bet its 100 to 1 to the budget cards.

How many S class do Mercedes sell compared to C or A class? It's just tech showcase product. It all filters down.

Yes, but it does make people think that if brand X makes the fastest top-end card, then they also think that the same brand would be a good bet if you're looking for a cheap card.
 
Who has the fastest top end card overall is meaningless to the main consumer market. How many Titans does Nvidia sell compared to it's $100 or thereabouts cards? I bet its 100 to 1 to the budget cards.

How many S class do Mercedes sell compared to C or A class? It's just tech showcase product. It all filters down.
Very true, but the same story applies to many price-points.

All the slickdeals I see lately are for AMD 270s and 280s which give you more frames per second than their same dollar NVidia counterparts at this time. I still recommend say 750Tis if someone needs a really small power efficient card for say a gaming HTPC, but otherwise same thing you can get a AMD card that's less power efficient but offers better performance for the money.

Nvidia makes AWESOME cards and reliable drivers and so on, but IMO they just price them too damn high.

And if AMD can offer these new APUs at low enough price-points with a little performance improvement on current offerings, they could kill the Intel+integrated graphics options available. What will really decide this is street pricing, to see if AMD can beat Intel's G3258 with a cheap GPU combo for example.
 
Yes, but it does make people think that if brand X makes the fastest top-end card, then they also think that the same brand would be a good bet if you're looking for a cheap card.
Yeah, its the "halo" effect is what I think they call it. Apple banked super hard on that effect with their iPods back in the day, bringing them from obscurity to massive financial success. Most consumers aren't that well educated in the finer details of the products and just ask, "Is XYZ a good brand?".

So you get prestige and mindshare for your brand by showing you kick ass up on top. Even if you just end up buying the V6 Camaro, many consumers feel more pride in the brand if their halo car Camaro SS sets world records around the Nuerburgring.
 
The best news is this should drive down 290x prices :)
 
Yeah, its the "halo" effect is what I think they call it. Apple banked super hard on that effect with their iPods back in the day, bringing them from obscurity to massive financial success. Most consumers aren't that well educated in the finer details of the products and just ask, "Is XYZ a good brand?".

So you get prestige and mindshare for your brand by showing you kick ass up on top. Even if you just end up buying the V6 Camaro, many consumers feel more pride in the brand if their halo car Camaro SS sets world records around the Nuerburgring.

Yeah I see it so often here. One person wont by A because B has the fastest of the fastest (by 3fps) product that retails for $1000 but their actual budget is $250 so doesn't even apply to them.

You just buy the best value you can afford with your budget, regardless of brand. Well that's my mindset anyway.;)
 
The 200 series OEM cards are just like the retail cards. I'm not sure why anyone thinks the 300 series will be any different.

250 = Oland core = 8000 series
250X = derived from Cape Verde = Radeon 7700
260X = Bonaire XTX = derived from Bonaire XT = Radeon 7790
265 = derived from Radeon 7850
270X = Curacao XT = Pitcairn = 7800 series
280X = derived from 7970GE
285 = Tonga
290 = Hawaii Pro
290X = Hawaii XT

Look at all those rebrands. :eek:
 
Huh? AMD has a GPU offering to rival all of NVidia's niches as far as I know. Even the TitanX is blown away in performance by the 295x2, and at $400 lower price.

And for integrated graphics, clearly there is a reason that both Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo went the AMD route.

Though the 295x2 requires proper Crossfire support from both the drivers and the game in question, and we all know getting that support has not always been consistent.
 
From what I read the new 300 is suppose to be 3x more power efficient? If so then they may have finally solved the heat/noise issue and will be back up to par with Nvidia. Sounds great!

Um i think that was only the Vram efficiency not gpu as a whole.
 
250 = Oland core = 8000 series
250X = derived from Cape Verde = Radeon 7700
260X = Bonaire XTX = derived from Bonaire XT = Radeon 7790
265 = derived from Radeon 7850
270X = Curacao XT = Pitcairn = 7800 series
280X = derived from 7970GE
285 = Tonga
290 = Hawaii Pro
290X = Hawaii XT

Look at all those rebrands. :eek:

Unless the chip featuresets (eg, OpenGL and DX versions) are identical, they're not rebrands. To derive something is to base it on something that works, update it and improve it. No problem with that as long as they keep the performance and price competitive with what nVidia is releasing.
 
Unless the chip featuresets (eg, OpenGL and DX versions) are identical, they're not rebrands.
Yeah, that part I guess is true, because on some "rebrands", technically while its the same chip as before its a new board with different features and support.

Ultimately I think what most of us care about though is how many FPS/$ do I get, without the card sounding like a snowblower and staying reasonably quiet.
 
Do we know for sure if only the 390/390X have HBM or do the "rebrands" have that? if so, then there could be a fairly nice improvement over the "old" chips.
 
Unless the chip featuresets (eg, OpenGL and DX versions) are identical, they're not rebrands. To derive something is to base it on something that works, update it and improve it. No problem with that as long as they keep the performance and price competitive with what nVidia is releasing.

My point is that Tonga, Hawaii Pro, and Hawaii XT are all new architectures and not direct carry-overs from, or massaged variant of, older gen GPUs (rebrands).
 
My point is that Tonga, Hawaii Pro, and Hawaii XT are all new architectures and not direct carry-overs from, or massaged variant of, older gen GPUs (rebrands).

By your definition of older Gen GPUs variants being rebrands...

Current Intel Core generation chips are rebrands of Pentium Pros.

PPro > P2 > P3 > P-M > Core > Core2 > etc...

P-M is a direct descendant of the P3, optimized for Mobile, which ended up making for a better desktop CPU than the P4 in light of what AMD released (AMD64), beyond process node and architectural tweaks, they're still effectively "rebrands."

So no, I do not think it's fair to call derives rebrands if updates have been made to the chip to keep it in line with current standards.
 
By your definition of older Gen GPUs variants being rebrands...

Current Intel Core generation chips are rebrands of Pentium Pros.

PPro > P2 > P3 > P-M > Core > Core2 > etc...

P-M is a direct descendant of the P3, optimized for Mobile, which ended up making for a better desktop CPU than the P4 in light of what AMD released (AMD64), beyond process node and architectural tweaks, they're still effectively "rebrands."

So no, I do not think it's fair to call derives rebrands if updates have been made to the chip to keep it in line with current standards.

That's exactly right. Even CPU's are carry-overs, derivatives, or rebrands of previous models unless an entirely new uArch is developed and utilized. Just like auto manufacturers change some sheet metal curves, use different looking headlights, move some shit around the dashboard, and tweak the engine a bit for more HP/MPG/whatever and then call it a "new model".

285, 290, and 290X are true 200 series GPUs while everything else is simply a "tweaked" (or direct) rebrand.
 
More power efficient is ALWAYS better all else equal, but if you're sacrificing performance per buck quite a bit, as NVidia of cards of late absolutely are, then I don't get it. But that's probably why I own a ATI 295x2, one of the most power hungry cards on the market lol!

The power efficiency affects heat, heat affects overclocking.

Nvidias gpu's overclock really well. AMD gpu's less so.
 
i dont care i want a date when we will see these in stores and at oems...
 
So basically, the 390/390x are the only ones that will potentially have significant performance/heat/noise differences from the 200 series? If that is the case, is the 390 going to be some ridiculous expensive card (like the 980 is right now), or is it supposed to give a true cool/quiet/reasonably-priced 4gb option? Some of us are not interested in the underpowered AND overpriced 970, the overpriced 980, or having a rocket-engine in our home in the form of a 290/290X.
 
Guys, based on the fact that they pretty much filled out the 300 series, and didnt even leave a spot for Hawaii AND Fiji -- it's almost guaranteed that the next gen cards (ie Fiji) will launch as the 400 series. Think about it.
 
Guys, based on the fact that they pretty much filled out the 300 series, and didnt even leave a spot for Hawaii AND Fiji -- it's almost guaranteed that the next gen cards (ie Fiji) will launch as the 400 series. Think about it.

Looks like it. From the press release:

AMD Radeon™ 300 Series Graphics for OEM desktops: Additionally, AMD announced the availability of AMD Radeon™ 300 Series desktop graphics, available only through OEMs. The AMD Radeon™ 300 Series GPUs feature AMD’s revolutionary GCN Architecture with full support for DirectX® 12. The product stack will offer a great experience on new Windows® 10 platforms and represents AMD’s commitment to provide the smoothest, high-quality graphics solutions for everyday desktop users. Designs are currently shipping from HP plus additional OEMs shipping soon.
 
The power efficiency affects heat, heat affects overclocking.

Nvidias gpu's overclock really well. AMD gpu's less so.
Again, what do you care about though? How much higher you can clock your card than factory, or what gets you the highest frame rate for XYZ dollar budget? And in my experience, memory overclocking shows me the biggest gains, and tends to do with what type of memory was used.
Gearchoices said:
So basically, the 390/390x are the only ones that will potentially have significant performance/heat/noise differences from the 200 series? If that is the case, is the 390 going to be some ridiculous expensive card (like the 980 is right now), or is it supposed to give a true cool/quiet/reasonably-priced 4gb option? Some of us are not interested in the underpowered AND overpriced 970, the overpriced 980, or having a rocket-engine in our home in the form of a 290/290X.
Most likely, but we haven't seen teased pricing yet. Chances are high that AMD will simply use NVidia as their baseline, and price their product competitively.

What do you mean by rocket engine though? Look at the MSI Lightning 290x or Saphire Vapor-X with IFC. The excellent tri-fan cooling options available mean that they are inaudible at idle and don't exceed 41db at full blast load testing. The downside of course is that they are long cards, but I rather have a long card with a giant quiet heatsink than those silly single fan reference coolers that sound like jets taking off.

Tek is even blown away and calls it the "Rustling Leaves Model" because its so retarded quiet under load: https://youtu.be/tvBSKEpro5k?t=6m52s

11226-09_R9_290X_VAPOR-X_TRI-X_OC_4GBGDDR5_DP_HDMI_2DVI_PCIE_C03_635343766944608156_600_600.jpg
 
The power efficiency affects heat, heat affects overclocking.

Nvidias gpu's overclock really well. AMD gpu's less so.

Sir please refrain from posting stuff you know nothing about. ian 8pack parry decimated titan blacks, 780tis that were on ln2 with quad r9 290x's on distilled water, not forgetting the records the has broken together with hivizman ln the 290x lightnings. overclocking is about skill.
 
Skilled at what exactly? Being lucky at the silicon lottery and being loaded with money?

Overclocking for performance gain is one thing, but I feel there are a number of overclockers out there who just overclock for the sake of overclocking and not actually using the said overclocks for anything except for proving they can do it.
 
Back
Top