390X coming soon few weeks

SnowBeast said:
Wow. Am I the only one who see's how like the R300X series is to 3DFX Rampage?

Roy@AMD acted like info was coming soon on 300 series since October with his stupid little Churchill quotes. Stocks sunk at under $3 a share, CEO gets replaced 2 weeks before financials for the quarter ending last year, no one wants to really acquire them, Crossfire drivers aren't up to par on game launch day like Nvidia, and mean while back at the ranch; Nvidia keeps releasing cards! Actual fucking cards.

Look I am not saying the ship is sinking, but for fucks sake, look at all of what I posted. This is factual. This is supposed to be the company handling GPU development for a 3 gaming systems and they can't get a stock above $3 a share???? Their next big CPU is what? 3 years away IF they have the funding?

A good editorial piece would be "The State Of AMD". Because right now, they look exactly like 3DFX.
Click to expand...

I like how you back everything you said with facts. /sarc
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
You're looking at this backwards. Nvidia wouldn't be releasing an overclocked Titan X for $800 unless they were provoked by AMD.

The 390X will pass the Titan X just like the original 290X vs Titan, only a few percent but everyone will call the 390X "The Titan X killer". Then a month later Nvidia will release the Titan X GHz Edition which passes the 390X by 5-10% and takes back the performance crown.

If that's not the case, then the 980 Ti has no reason to exist... Certainly not an overclocked Titan X for $300 less.

The 390X will be faster than the Titan X. Assuming the 980 Ti rumor is true, Nvidia just confirmed it for us. Or more specifically, Nvidia is genuinely worried the 390X will be faster than the Titan X.
Click to expand...

You are trying to draw conclusions from the last gen when R9 290X launched and beat Titan by 2-4% and then 780 Ti launched 2 weeks later and was faster than R9 290X by 8 - 10%. You have to remember that the original Titan was not a fully enabled die like the Titan-X. The Titan clocks were 837 Mhz base and 876 Mhz boost. But most reviewers saw clocks in the 940 - 992 Mhz range.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/02/21/nvidia_geforce_gtx_titan_video_card_review/9#.VRaS1fmUfSg

"In our game testing we noticed three different primary levels of clock speed our video card liked to hover between. We tested this in a demanding game, Far Cry 3. At first, our video card started out at 1019MHz actual clock speed in-game at 1.162v. As the game went on, and the GPU heated up, the clock speed dropped to 967MHz and 1.125v. After 20 minutes of gaming, the GPU clock speed settled at 941MHz and 1.087v. Therefore, our real-world starting point for clock speed was actually 941MHz at 81c max"

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6774/nvidias-geforce-gtx-titan-part-2-titans-performance-unveiled/
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6774/nvidias-geforce-gtx-titan-part-2-titans-performance-unveiled/15

The 780 Ti with 2880 cc came with 875 Mhz base and 928 Mhz boost, but ran in games in the same 950- 1000 Mhz range.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7492/the-geforce-gtx-780-ti-review
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7492/the-geforce-gtx-780-ti-review/15

The Titan-X came with a fully enabled GM200 die ( 6 x 512 = 3072cc) with 1 Ghz base and 1.075 Ghz boost clocks. Actual in game clocks were 1.088 - 1.15 Ghz

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9059/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review/
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9059/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review/16

Power consumption on Titan-X is already higher than 780 Ti and much higher than Titan. Noise and temps are comparable to 780 Ti. Overclocking the Titan-X causes noise and temps to hit levels which are considered loud and hot.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9059/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review/17

btw there is a good chance that R9 390X beats the Titan-X by 8 - 10%. The Titan-X on avg is 45% faster than R9 290X according to most reviews. the R9 390X is likely to end up 55 - 60% faster than R9 290X putting it 7 - 10% faster than Titan-X. A overclocked GM200 with 6GB could match up but at the cost of higher power, temps and noise. So I don't think its guaranteed that Nvidia will get back the crown at all. We might see this generation be the closest since the pre 8800GTX days. :)
 
Last edited:
People have to be in denial to not say that as of RIGHT NOW, amd is a sinking ship. Maybe this new ceo will do good, along with the other changes that have occurred. Maybe in the near future dx12 and better written programs for multi core use will put amd ahead of nvidia and Intel. This is what I hope for, and I do hope someone with intelligence is now running amd. This latest driver fiasco should deter any true enthusiast. Even after all this time, farcry 4 cross fire support is still utter garbage. No one wants to deal with amd's apparent lack of resources.
 
A true enthusiast doesn't complain about drivers, they find a way around it.

And in the CPU GPU industry time is marked in years not Months. Even a single year does not allude to promise or failure.
 
For $16 million I'd get an Nvidia tattoo.

To answer your question: God willing, I want both of them making my GPU's in the future. Well, the companies they work for... Not those 2 people in particular.
 
SnowBeast said:
Wow. Am I the only one who see's how like the R300X series is to 3DFX Rampage?

Roy@AMD acted like info was coming soon on 300 series since October with his stupid little Churchill quotes. Stocks sunk at under $3 a share, CEO gets replaced 2 weeks before financials for the quarter ending last year, no one wants to really acquire them, Crossfire drivers aren't up to par on game launch day like Nvidia, and mean while back at the ranch; Nvidia keeps releasing cards! Actual fucking cards.

Look I am not saying the ship is sinking, but for fucks sake, look at all of what I posted. This is factual. This is supposed to be the company handling GPU development for a 3 gaming systems and they can't get a stock above $3 a share???? Their next big CPU is what? 3 years away IF they have the funding?

A good editorial piece would be "The State Of AMD". Because right now, they look exactly like 3DFX.
Click to expand...

There is no doubt about the fact that AMD is in trouble. They have been in a slow motion death spiral for 10 years.

They don't have the capital to stay competitive in all the markets they are in (consumer x86 CPU's, enterprise server x86 CPU's, ARM SoC's and GPU's), and these issues compound generation after generation like compound interest.

5-10 years from now they will either be gone, having gone chapter 11 and sold for parts, or will have been acquired by a larger company, in which case it is probably the end of AMD x86 CPU's due to the non-transferable nature of Intels x86 license.

They simply do not have the financial backing to support cutting edge R&D in all these very R&D intensive fields, and they are hemorrhaging talent left and right as a result.

The contracts for all major consoles this generation are not really helping. They look like a big win, but in reality they had to do some crazy "lowest bidder" type shit to get those contracts, so the margins there are likely razor thin.

The best case situation, a buyout of AMD and successful renegotiation of the x86 license with Intel seems - to me - rather unlikely, but one can hope! The best possible thing would be if someone swings in and acquires them sooner rather than later while their products are still slightly relevant, as that value will just drop over time as the slow motion death spiral of compound generation over generation performance deficits continue.
 
If samsung buys em they will ditch that x86 license, with all that entails.
Bigger silicone fish to fry these days than cpu's hardly anyone buys, relatively speaking.
 
They simply do not have the financial backing to support cutting edge R&D in all these very R&D intensive fields, and they are hemorrhaging talent left and right as a result.

So what about the 512 bit bus that caught everyone off guard in the R9-2xx? HBM memory? A lot of what is in Carrizo?

Business doesn't work the same in every field nor does time pass the same. Ignorance of the masses is what adds to the negativity, a great deal of it purported here and other tech forums.
 
Given the number of rumors surrounding the 300 series I think that
a) There is a good deal of interest in these cards
and
b) we know jack shit about them

In the last month I've read that the entire line will be new chips, the entire line will be rebrands aside from fiji, that fiji will have 4GB max, 8GB max, will be a dual gpu card, will have water cooling, won't have water cooling and last the cards are already made and AMD is just waiting until june to sell them.

All of this came from wccftech which means that from a common source there is conflicting information. Add to that the fact that wccf is already a rumor mill and I think it's fair to say that we can't infer anything about these cards.
 
shadow85 said:
I don't know man. Who do you want making your graphics cards in the future.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Su

Or

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jen-Hsun_Huang

I think Mr. Huang has the GPU market locked down. I mean the guy gets a freaking nvidia logo tattooed on his arm ffs. That's dedication.
Click to expand...

Just looking at the two Wikipedia from the start. Lisa Su is an MIT. "Su has bachelor’s, master’s and doctorate degrees in electrical engineering." I'll say electrical engineering is not the easiest degree to complete especially at the master's level. PHd can depend on the professor in question. Though, I feel she could have an inherently good understanding of energy-constraints, power draw issues, memory clockspeeds, etc.

Huang is a Oregon State University undergraduate and Stanfor for his graduate which makes me go 'huh'. I've heard of MIT and Stanford. I have not heard anything for or against Oregon State University. Is it a world renown school? Do they have a particularly famous electronic engineering program? "Huang received his undergraduate degree in electrical engineering from Oregon State University in 1984, and his master's degree in electrical engineering from Stanford University in 1992."

So Su has a PHd, Huang has a master's degree. Both are in the same subject. Su's school is better known for electrical engineering.

Previous work experience? "Before joining AMD, Su worked at Texas Instruments, IBM and ... in engineering and management positions." These two companies are pretty good corporations and relevant. She's worked as an engineer and management. Presumably by working up with good performance, business skills or a combination of both from the former to the later.

Huang's previous work experience? Worked for AMD and then co-founded nVidia and has only ever had those two employers.

One could argue, Su's work experience is more varied having worked at 3 companies plus AMD vs Huang's 1 company other than AMD and AMD.

Irregardless, I don't think one CEO stands out heads and shoulders above the other. I'd have to interview both and judge more of their personality types in my opinion if I were in an HR department and responsible for hiring one. If I had to hire one without meeting them, I'd almost aim slightly for Su due to higher education from a university better known for electronic engineering and a slightly more varied work background. I can say Tattoos would not be a determining factor in whom I hired.
 
WBurchnall said:
If I had to hire one without meeting them, I'd almost aim slightly for Su due to higher education from a university better known for electronic engineering and a slightly more varied work background. I can say Tattoos would not be a determining factor in whom I hired.
Click to expand...

Su may have the higher education, Huang I would say has the higher rep atm. Personally announcing their flagship cards time after time, and releasing them frequently.
 
AMD STOCK

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=amd stock

Considered a "junk" stock at this point.
Has all 3 major consoles under its GPU wing.

AMD SWITCHES CEO 1 WEEK BEFORE FINANCIAL REPORTING:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...evices-appoints-lisa-su-as-ceo-replacing-read
Nobody in business replaces a CEO 1week before earnings.

ROY@AMD TALKING COMPETITION THAT HASN'T HAPPENED AND TAGGING NVIDIA GEFORCE IN TWEET:
https://twitter.com/amd_roy/status/513467158316077057
Also see Churchill+Fiji This is direct statement towards the new 980/970 last SEPTEMBER. You know almost 7 months ago. Hints from ROY@AMD were something in January, then March, now June?? 9 months of sales that went to Nvidia before R300 series debuts.

Has AMD ever gone 9 months behind the competition? Generally 3-4. Maybe 6.

Sorry I wanted AMD to keep on Nvidia's heals, but that's not happening and is not good for us as consumers. R300 isn't going to magically take 40% of the market on release.
They either get acquired or slowly dissolve at this point. They can not sustain this business practice. And yes Nvidia can have a monopoly if a company dissolves and is bankrupt regardless. (it won't be technically a monopoly as long as Intel puts GPU on their CPU's.)

Thank you and have a nice day. Try to stay informed next time. :)
 
On the plus side, if AMD dies, the fanboy debates die with them.
Can't argue with team green when they're the only team.

Sorry I wanted AMD to keep on Nvidia's heals
Click to expand...
This is like when someone says something racist, and they defend themselves with "I'm not racist, I have black friends."
You can't make a huge post shitting all over AMD and then pretend like you want AMD to be competitive.

I know what 'competitive market' posts look like, that's not one of them. It's still so hard for me to believe there are PC gamers out there who actively want AMD to fail. Boggles my mind.

Has AMD ever gone 9 months behind the competition? Generally 3-4. Maybe 6.
Click to expand...
GTX 480 to HD6970 was 9ish months.
 
Last edited:
TaintedSquirrel said:
On the plus side, if AMD dies, the fanboy debates die with them.
Can't argue with team green when they're the only team.


This is like when someone says something racist, and they defend themselves with "I'm not racist, I have black friends."
You can't make a huge post shitting all over AMD and then pretend like you want AMD to be competitive.

I know what 'competitive market' posts look like, that's not one of them. It's still so hard for me to believe there are PC gamers out there who actively want AMD to fail. Boggles my mind.


GTX 480 to HD6970 was 9ish months.
Click to expand...

Maybe he still wants AMD around on Nvidia's heals to keep Nvidia from charging whatever they want for their GPU's. If Nvidia had the whole market, they could potentially sell anything at much higher prices than if the competition (AMD) is around.

TaintedSquirrel said:
GTX 480 to HD6970 was 9ish months.
Click to expand...

Well don't forget this time around, AMD are doing major arcitechture changes from GDDR5 to HBM for the first time, and what ever else they are improving, hence can explain for the extended delays.
 
durquavian said:
A true enthusiast doesn't complain about drivers, they find a way around it.
Click to expand...

Eh, I disagree. Some people like rat rods, some people like luxurious Italian sports cars. I'd argue that you can be an enthusiast either way. Sometimes people enjoy getting raw performance without having to worry about the "little things."
 
AMD is almost as dead as their CPU sub forum here :) It's sad to say but things don't look rosy for AMD, been a life time supporter of AMD and Ati but nothing lasts forever. Most sensible users have switched to Intel CPU's even the CPU market is dying as innovation is stagnant and performance is incremental over the last few generations. GPU's on the other hand have been more exciting offering far more performance than any CPU upgrade ever could, the day we no longer have team Red will be a sad day but life will go on.
 
Last edited:
The CPU Market really is in full stagnation - my i5 750 is now over 5 years old and it may be overclocked, but it's still every bit relevant compared to brand new CPUs, especially from AMD's side. A decade ago, CPUs that were 5 years old were relics, unfit for much at all.
GPUs haven't really stagnated yet but progress has slowed, which I primarily attribute to silicon yield issues more than anything else.
 
KaptainKhaos said:
AMD is almost as dead as their CPU sub forum here :) It's sad to say but things don't look rosy for AMD, been a life time supporter of AMD and Ati but nothing lasts forever. Most sensible users have switched to Intel CPU's even the CPU market is dying as innovation is stagnant and performance is incremental over the last few generations. GPU's on the other hand have been more exciting offering far more performance than any CPU upgrade ever could, the day we no longer have team Red will be a sad day but life will go on.
Click to expand...

Don't worry some giant will buy them out. So just because there may not be a Team Red in the future there will be something like Team Samsung or Team whoever buys them out.

Can you imagine Samsung and Nvidia battling in the discrete GPU market? Samsung are pretty innovative and have their own memory modules, would be interesting.
 
samuelmorris said:
The CPU Market really is in full stagnation - my i5 750 is now over 5 years old and it may be overclocked, but it's still every bit relevant compared to brand new CPUs, especially from AMD's side. A decade ago, CPUs that were 5 years old were relics, unfit for much at all.
GPUs haven't really stagnated yet but progress has slowed, which I primarily attribute to silicon yield issues more than anything else.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Even an older I7 920 overclocked is still very reliable. Even against AMD.

My friend is still rocking his 4.2ghz I5 760. Using a 290x on it and having no issues with BF4 (his main game).

Only problem is those chipsets (P55 X58) didn't have native USB 3.0 or SATA 6.0.

Other then that, those CPU's are still going strong today. Lets not even mention the fact that alot of people are using their old X58 chipsets with Xeons X5650+ 6core CPU's that are built on the 32nm process.

Anyway way off topic now.
 
No native USB3 but my board, of the same age, has it - I think it's NEC?

Anyway, this is off topic, but such is the thread destined to remain until the next bit of news about the 300 series.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
GTX 480 to HD6970 was 9ish months.
Click to expand...

What a pathetic sense of GPU history. HD 5870 beat the GTX 480 to market by 6 months and was much more power efficient. HD 6970 launched a month after GTX 580 and was more power efficient. But Fermi especially as GTX 580 was the better DX11 GPU by a good margin.
 
I still running a Q6600 lol...I'll probably just wait for skylake before I build a new PC now.

Aren't most games more GPU dependent now? Even the AAA games like Stat Citizen. Is there any real benefit in buying a high end CPU like a 6-core or 8-core?
 
HardLiner said:
I still running a Q6600 lol...I'll probably just wait for skylake before I build a new PC now.

Aren't most games more GPU dependent now? Even the AAA games like Stat Citizen. Is there any real benefit in buying a high end CPU like a 6-core or 8-core?
Click to expand...

I did notice a pretty massive jump from Q6700 > 4690k It was worth upgrading .. But if you can hold out til skylake then no prob.
 
plexx said:
dx12... 6 cores have a huge benefit now
Click to expand...

We have to be careful with that until we see actual games. I think we've only seen synthetics so far. Unless someone else here knows how these synthetics translate to games.

If you look at CPU performance with current games it's a pretty flat line for all intel processors. Personally I'd go on that data right now, if it changes with DX12 in (??) years then assess the gains again.

I thought DX12 was supposed to make games less CPU dependent like Mantle? Am I wrong there?
 
Last edited:
Dayaks said:
We have to be careful with that until we see actual games. I think we've only seen synthetics so far. Unless someone else here knows how these synthetics translate to games.

If you look at CPU performance with current games it's a pretty flat line for all intel processors. Personally I'd go on that data right now, if it changes with DX12 in (??) years then assess the gains again.

I thought DX12 was supposed to make games less CPU dependent like Mantle? Am I wrong there?
Click to expand...

I thought so too..........
 
Dayaks said:
I thought DX12 was supposed to make games less CPU dependent like Mantle? Am I wrong there?
Click to expand...

No, it free's up the CPU from overhead which leads to developers being able to put in more robust worlds. In other words, its making the CPU a factor again, if the developer wants to create a unique and very detailed world that is.

Almost no game currently is CPU dependent.
 
Can't wait to buy the 400 series in Q1 2018.
I suppose AMD is aiming for a Fiji refresh on 16nm sometime in 2016, then...?

290X -> 390X, two years.
390X -> 490X, two years.
And we thought the waiting was unbearable this time...

8vBbCGu.jpg
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
Can't wait to buy the 400 series in Q1 2018.
I suppose AMD is aiming for a Fiji refresh on 16nm sometime in 2016, then...?

290X -> 390X, two years.
390X -> 490X, two years.
And we thought the waiting was unbearable this time...

http://i.imgur.com/8vBbCGu.jpg[/MG][/QUOTE]

You and your doom and gloom. [URL="http://wccftech.com/amd-gpu-apu-roadmaps-2015-2020-emerge/"]From WCCFTech:[/URL]

[QUOTE]AMD will introduce Accelerated Processing Units with updated GPU architectures once every two years. It should be noted that this does not mean that AMD will only be introducing new graphics products every couple of years because that’s not the case. Discrete graphics cards will follow a faster cadence, this roadmap only serves to illustrate GPU architectures in relation to APUs.[/QUOTE]
Click to expand...
 
Dayaks said:
We have to be careful with that until we see actual games. I think we've only seen synthetics so far. Unless someone else here knows how these synthetics translate to games.

If you look at CPU performance with current games it's a pretty flat line for all intel processors. Personally I'd go on that data right now, if it changes with DX12 in (??) years then assess the gains again.

I thought DX12 was supposed to make games less CPU dependent like Mantle? Am I wrong there?
Click to expand...

It made a pretty good improvement with Mantle. Minimums went up pretty dramatically in CPU intensive situations like BF4 in multiplayer. That should be the same with DX12.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top