gigaxtreme1
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2002
- Messages
- 3,577
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Doesn't even look like a CU increase.
As long as they stay price competitive it won't be bad.There was never expected to be one. Its a 580 with a slight boost in clockspeed..I am surprised they stuck with the slow GDDR5, but maybe AMD plans on pushing these out the door for $220 with the free games and flood the midrange market? I expected a boost to 9Gbps ram at least...
There was never expected to be one. Its a 580 with a slight boost in clockspeed..I am surprised they stuck with the slow GDDR5, but maybe AMD plans on pushing these out the door for $220 with the free games and flood the midrange market? I expected a boost to 9Gbps ram at least...
More then likely they would not sell any. I have yet to see a dual gpu card that works well and sells well.This is silly, but I wish they'd just go the dual GPU route. They already have a dual "rx 580" Radeon Pro Duo with a massive 32gb of DDR5 currently shipping for $610.
If they can make the price work, release a "gaming" Dual 580 card and try and price it at $400 ($350 would be unreal)
About all they can do until they stop refreshing!
Depends on what cards are coming. Maybe OEM can get some 9Gbps action going but it would be depending on availability and price.There was never expected to be one. Its a 580 with a slight boost in clockspeed..I am surprised they stuck with the slow GDDR5, but maybe AMD plans on pushing these out the door for $220 with the free games and flood the midrange market? I expected a boost to 9Gbps ram at least...
Why not? The Xbox One X is a Polaris with 40 CU's. So it's definitely not like its some new fangled thing, it is an existing IP block. Pretty low hanging fruit to convert the Xbox One X IP block to a discrete card.
around 10% of a 580x I think. In any case unless it's priced ridiculously low it's too little too late.
Do you mean about 10% more performance than a 580x? Just asking as I didn't keep up on the 580x when it was released...
I never said they could not do it, just that it was never expected with the move to the 12nm process..a 40CU Polaris would require all new masks etc and it would not be profitable for AMD unless they could sell them for $300+ and with the flood of cheap 1070/tis out there AMD would have a lot of trouble selling a $300+ RX590.
So you're saying that AMD would rather spend the money on a new mask (12nm) for Polaris 36 CU because getting a new mask for 12nm Polaris 44CU (on an existing IP block) would somehow be immensely more expensive comparatively?
I think AMD is missing out on sales because they've literally had the same part (RX 480) for what appears to be 3 years running. If AMD went with a 44 CU/up-clocked design, at the very least it would get people contemplating an upgrade.
Zen+ uses GlobalFoundries' 12nm fabrication process,[5], a die shrink relative to the 14nm process used for Zen.[6] However, the die size and transistor count are the same for Zen and Zen+, with AMD using the smaller feature size to increase the space between features. The die shrink allowed for Zen+ to achieve higher clock speeds and lower power consumption than Zen products
So you're saying that AMD would rather spend the money on a new mask (12nm) for Polaris 36 CU because getting a new mask for 12nm Polaris 44CU (on an existing IP block) would somehow be immensely more expensive comparatively?
I think AMD is missing out on sales because they've literally had the same part (RX 480) for what appears to be 3 years running. If AMD went with a 44 CU/up-clocked design, at the very least it would get people contemplating an upgrade.
You seem to think that the 44CU Xbox design is an off the shelf part, and it is far from it. The only thing that sKU has in common with a discrete GPU is that it has a GPU included in it's SoC. The 44CU Polaris part you talk about would be very nice, but what does it do? Will it beat VEGA 56? No, it would probably slot in 15% slower. The 56 is already competing with the 1070/TI sdo why waste the tens of millions it costs for a completely new mask for a part that cannot own the segment it would be launched into.
The move to 12nm would most likely save them money now that has ramped to volume production with very good yields. AMD basically is just using the slight density increase to squeeze some more clock speed out the the already excellent Polaris 20. It will cheaper to produce (most likely) and it gives them a "fresh" product SKU to keep some buzz in the important mid range market.
I think not moving to a higher base memory tier is a mistake, but there is a good chance we will see that on partner cards, or even the reference design, as the only thing we have to go on now is the ES leaks. Polaris responds well to memory speed increases, so going with at least 9Gbps GDDR5/5X would have given them another 5%+..There is a very good chance they stuck with 8Gbps '5 since it is dirt cheap, and it allows the partners to ship their SKUs with a higher memory speed if they choose.
A lot of us here forget how large the midrange market is..It's easy for me to look at my rig with 3 VEGAs and forget that most people are using 1080P screens on the desktop side which is already covered very nicely by the 580. Giving it a nice little ~10% improvement means better frame rates for high refresh 1080P panels, or a better experience on 1440P.
You seem to think that the 44CU Xbox design is an off the shelf part, and it is far from it. The only thing that sKU has in common with a discrete GPU is that it has a GPU included in it's SoC. The 44CU Polaris part you talk about would be very nice, but what does it do? Will it beat VEGA 56? No, it would probably slot in 15% slower. The 56 is already competing with the 1070/TI sdo why waste the tens of millions it costs for a completely new mask for a part that cannot own the segment it would be launched into.
AMD is working on the 7nm push, and I think they are going to come out swinging this Spring...
They have the PS5 design they are working on/finalizing, and there is most likely an XBox design in the process as well. On the desktop side Zen2 is going to smash the CPU market (and possibly take the crown again depending on final clock speeds) and then as 7nm volume is freed up then we will see a high end GPU launch.
I'm a SW Engineer, so I don't know the specifics of productizing the hardware. But I do know that for SoC's, they are typically built using IP blocks. For instance, our product has a networking block and a crypto block. To make a discrete solution (add-in cardf) from the networking or crypto block, it took take less than 6 months to market. I am under the assumption that the Polaris in the Xbox One X is an entire IP block, and moving it to a discrete solution would take about a year without 'rushing'.
As for why this over Vega 56? Vega die is twice the size of the Polaris 10 die. Assuming linear scaling, a Polaris 44 CU die would still be significantly smaller than a Vega die. Furthermore, a Polaris 44 CU (assuming linear scaling) with a 12nm shrink would offer similar performance to a stock Vega 56 (44/36 CU = 22% gain, with another 10% clock speed gain from 12nm shrink will put it on par with stock Vega 56, per TechPowerUp summary). So basically you can sell them at $250-300 GTX 1070 competitor at a significant BOM savings over a $350 Vega 56 (especially with HBM2 vs GDDR5 prices).
This method is not accurate to determine performance of a theoretical MPU as there are multiple bottlenecks within any given architecture, from workload to workload and moment to moment. Case-in-point, 64 CU Vega should be significantly faster than 44 CU Polaris by way of its larger shader array, but in your hypothetical you compare the best-case "on-paper" performance of the theoretical part to the real-world performance of the existing part to arrive at a conclusion which states the smaller part would essentially equal the larger part in performance. Similarly, when people compare AMD GPUs to Nvidia GPUs they often cite the "on-paper" performance of the shader array of each part and say "wow, AMD's new GPU is going to KILL Nvidia's xx part" and yet it never happens, thanks to the fact that very few real-world workloads are constrained only by pure math rate.
This is AMD's graphics department. We should have expected a disappointment...
So basically you can sell them at $250-300 GTX 1070 competitor at a significant BOM savings over a $350 Vega 56 (especially with HBM2 vs GDDR5 prices).
It's been discussed ad infinitum of why Vega is a poor gaming chip
It has nothing to do with gambling Vega (higher clock speed)would need stupid amounts of power with anything but HBM.'Poor' is being a bit disingenuous- Vega games great, it just didn't look that great when it compared better to the competition's previous generation upon release than the current generation that had already been on the market for some time. It's still a great generalist arch, and it's mostly hampered by yields relating to AMD's gamble on HBM.
This is bullshit where is my 7nm. I was going to build a raw ass PC with zen 2 and a 7nm GPU. Fuck.
It has nothing to do with gambling Vega (higher clock speed)would need stupid amounts of power with anything but HBM.
'Poor' is being a bit disingenuous- Vega games great, it just didn't look that great when it compared better to the competition's previous generation upon release than the current generation that had already been on the market for some time. It's still a great generalist arch, and it's mostly hampered by yields relating to AMD's gamble on HBM.
were you expecting to build zen 2 this year? If so you already had a problem right there. Nothing 7nm is coming this year for consumers. So why so mmmaadd? lol
were you expecting to build zen 2 this year? If so you already had a problem right there. Nothing 7nm is coming this year for consumers. So why so mmmaadd? lol
I was gonna start working on heavily modding my lian li yacht case for open loop (first time doing this), and have the design and parts ready for Q1. Now what, I'm not going to dump all that time and money for it to sit there and then find out AMD is not in the time frame I though it would be.
'Poor' is being a bit disingenuous- Vega games great, it just didn't look that great when it compared better to the competition's previous generation upon release than the current generation that had already been on the market for some time. It's still a great generalist arch, and it's mostly hampered by yields relating to AMD's gamble on HBM.
I am still confused though. Did you expect 7nm parts this year? This has nothing to do with 7nm, this is just its on side upgrade for current gen cards. Not sure how this derails your project. What I am saying is where did you hear AMD had 7nm parts out in your timeframe. Ws your timeframe this year? AMD has said 2019 all along for 7nm parts. So not sure why you though it would align with your timeframe to begin with.
Your right, I browsed over the 7nm and thought it was Q4 2018 gpus for consumers and Q1 2019 cpus, it's not. Still if they are getting this 12nm ramped up that means the 7nm is a ways away, fucking AMD. The goal was to have every thing ready for Q1 2019 and then have the build good to go for launch, but who knows when that is going to be now.
10% faster than the RX580...
So still 10-15% slower than the nearly four year old AMD Fury.
Sigh...
Your right, I browsed over the 7nm and thought it was Q4 2018 gpus for consumers and Q1 2019 cpus, it's not. Still if they are getting this 12nm ramped up that means the 7nm is a ways away, fucking AMD. The goal was to have every thing ready for Q1 2019 and then have the build good to go for launch, but who knows when that is going to be now.
Your right, I browsed over the 7nm and thought it was Q4 2018 gpus for consumers and Q1 2019 cpus, it's not. Still if they are getting this 12nm ramped up that means the 7nm is a ways away, fucking AMD. The goal was to have every thing ready for Q1 2019 and then have the build good to go for launch, but who knows when that is going to be now.
This is silly, but I wish they'd just go the dual GPU route. They already have a dual "rx 580" Radeon Pro Duo with a massive 32gb of DDR5 currently shipping for $610.
If they can make the price work, release a "gaming" Dual 580 card and try and price it at $400 ($350 would be unreal)
About all they can do until they stop refreshing!