[BitsAndChips]390X ready for launch - AMD ironing out drivers - Computex launch

[5150Joker]

Yes, Nvidia fans (in this very thread) will latch onto yet another rumor from some random website, and will preach it as fact. It's happening already!

ExtremeTech is owned by Ziff Davis. Calling it a "random website" shows how clueless you are.

Next time I see you behave like this you are gone for a week.

-Rvenger

 

[2is]

AMD releasing a card that is competing with it's own card is kind of lame. AMD can't command the same pricing structure that nVIdia can, their position in the market can't support it. If it's going to cost the same or more than a 980, it needs to demolish it in everything. 100fps vs 150fps @ 1080p isn't going to cut it if that 50% performance advantage drops to 10% at 4k because both cards run into vram limitations.

 

[chimaxi83]

ExtremeTech is owned by Ziff Davis. Calling it a "random website" shows how clueless you are.

Oh crap, Ziff Davis. Why didn't you mention that before? Suddenly, ExtremeTech speculation on an unreleased product is now fact. What was I thinking?!

 

[twjr]

ExtremeTech is owned by Ziff Davis. Calling it a "random website" shows how clueless you are.

Irrespective from the owner of the website the "Its only 4GB" statement came from the comments section. Furthermore it was an "I know a guy who knows a guy who owns a dog" type of statement. It really does nothing to clarify anything anymore than Cloudfire's earlier comments.

 

[5150Joker]

Irrespective from the owner of the website the "Its only 4GB" statement came from the comments section. Furthermore it was an "I know a guy who knows a guy who owns a dog" type of statement. It really does nothing to clarify anything anymore than Cloudfire's earlier comments.

Read who in the comments stated it. It wasn't any ordinary person commenting but rather the admin of the site and author at ExtremeTech. Being a large media company, Ziff Davis likely has several insider contacts in the tech industry.

 

[Silverforce11]

4gb only would be a failure.

Let's wait and see, all these silly back & forth rumor clickbaits are getting tiresome to follow tbh.

 

[piesquared]

4gb only would be a failure.

Let's wait and see, all these silly back & forth rumor clickbaits are getting tiresome to follow tbh.

Which of course would also make the 980 4GB and 970 3.5 + .5GB a failure. And from the time a rumored 390 4GB is launched, not a single NV card other than a card with 12 Gigs of marketing Bytes would be worth buying.

 

[twjr]

Read who in the comments stated it. It wasn't any ordinary person commenting but rather the admin of the site and author at ExtremeTech. Being a large media company, Ziff Davis likely has several insider contacts in the tech industry.

I don't think that "knowing someone in the know" is really anymore concrete than a rumour if they are not going to name a source.

4gb only would be a failure.

Let's wait and see, all these silly back & forth rumor clickbaits are getting tiresome to follow tbh.

Until AMD actually says something pretty much everything is rumours. But a lot of people seem to be getting pretty invested in these rumours.

 

[pj-]

Read who in the comments stated it. It wasn't any ordinary person commenting but rather the admin of the site and author at ExtremeTech. Being a large media company, Ziff Davis likely has several insider contacts in the tech industry.

Yeah, regarding this particular rumor I think it's safe to assume the guy who posted it is not lying. Whether his source is accurate is another matter. Maybe AMD is giving the 8gb version exclusively to Sapphire and the contact works for XFX. Or he's just plain wrong, or he's absolutely correct, or...

 

[Silverforce11]

Which of course would also make the 980 4GB and 970 3.5 + .5GB a failure. And from the time a rumored 390 4GB is launched, not a single NV card other than a card with 12 Gigs of marketing Bytes would be worth buying.

The DIFFERENCE if it did not occur to you, 970/980 was launched nearly 9 months ago.

The other difference is the performance bracket. A 970/980 cannot push settings in single GPU config to be limited by the 3.5/4 gb vram limit. Something like a Titan X or potentially faster, can indeed be limited by vram. This isn't something you ever want in a GPU, you want it to always be performance limited not vram limited with performance left on the table.

 

[Silverforce11]

Yeah, regarding this particular rumor I think it's safe to assume the guy who posted it is not lying. Whether his source is accurate is another matter. Maybe AMD is giving the 8gb version exclusively to Sapphire and the contact works for XFX. Or he's just plain wrong, or he's absolutely correct, or...

AMD would not talk about their unique development of HBM & their interposer supporting two HBM on one die for them to only release 4GB models. Lots of people "in the know" are fed contradicting info. It should have been clear already.

 

[twjr]

Which of course would also make the 980 4GB and 970 3.5 + .5GB a failure. And from the time a rumored 390 4GB is launched, not a single NV card other than a card with 12 Gigs of marketing Bytes would be worth buying.

Going by rumoured specs the competition for the 390X is going to be the Titan X and an 980ti, assuming one gets released. Both those cards have (or likely will have) more than 4GB. You know that is going to be a marketing check box nvidia will use.

Furthermore AMD will be relying on these cards as their highend for upwards of 12 months. They will be marketed as 4k cards. Within the next 12 months there will surely be games released that exceed 4gb at 4k.

Not saying that it is a failure if they only come in 4gb models but I don't think it would be a prudent move on AMD's part.

 

[5150Joker]

Yeah, regarding this particular rumor I think it's safe to assume the guy who posted it is not lying. Whether his source is accurate is another matter. Maybe AMD is giving the 8gb version exclusively to Sapphire and the contact works for XFX. Or he's just plain wrong, or he's absolutely correct, or...

IF and that's a big IF AMD is really sending false signals to "insiders" then that would be a surprise, especially this close to launch. I'd guess almost every vendor by now knows what the 390X is about since they have to prepare marketing material, make custom boards etc. It's hard to keep a tight lid on info. this close to launch.

 

[Silverforce11]

IF and that's a big IF AMD is really sending false signals to "insiders" then that would be a surprise, especially this close to launch. I'd guess almost every vendor by now knows what the 390X is about since they have to prepare marketing material, make custom boards etc. It's hard to keep a tight lid on info. this close to launch.

The only reliable leak we still have is from months ago, the one that included Titan X performance & metrics that was spot on. That's why I'm confident its going to be faster than Titan X. Only thing is this 4/8GB issue, no other leak is concrete enough to believe.

 

[RussianSensation]

AMD releasing a card that is competing with it's own card is kind of lame. AMD can't command the same pricing structure that nVIdia can, their position in the market can't support it. If it's going to cost the same or more than a 980, it needs to demolish it in everything. 100fps vs 150fps @ 1080p isn't going to cut it if that 50% performance advantage drops to 10% at 4k because both cards run into vram limitations.

If you don't want 50% more performance at 1080P and 10% more performance at 4K for the same price, you are free to buy NV. This idea that AMD has to beat NV in every metric to sell at the same price is absurd but if you believe it, you already know what you need to buy. If a card 90% as fast as the Titan X for $550-600 doesn't interest you and you are willing to pay the NV premiums, the Titan X is already for sale today and it overclocks well too. No need to wait for R9 390X if you think 30-40% more performance at 1080p-1440P vs. a 980 is not good enough for you.

I've said it before, the 3-4% of the local minority that buys $700-1000 GPUs (double that for SLI) and has a 4K monitor never needed to wait for a 390X because Titan X OC is already an amazing card if price isn't a factor. As it stands, neither a single Titan X nor the 390X will be good enough for 4K anyway without going SLI. There are plenty of gamers who don't care for SLI/CF and even more gamers who don't own 4K monitors. A card priced at $550 with 20-30% more performance over a 980 for 1080P-1440P is a huge win considering 980's advantage over 780Ti/290X at launch was FAR worse.

980 barely beat a 290X by 15% despite launching 10 months later and the PC gaming community went nuts for it! But apparently now a card 20-30% faster would be a total fail due to 4GB of VRAM? LOL!

Which of course would also make the 980 4GB and 970 3.5 + .5GB a failure. And from the time a rumored 390 4GB is launched, not a single NV card other than a card with 12 Gigs of marketing Bytes would be worth buying.

Exactly, and also 970 SLI, 980 SLI, 780TI SLI, all failures but hundreds of thousands of gamers bought those. Not to mention the constant defending of 960 2GB and review sites purposely ignoring the 2GB VRAM bottleneck that can actually be measured. Conversely, there is no game out today that shows a 4GB VRAM bottleneck at 1440P or below where a card like a 980 is actually playable.

 

[Silverforce11]

This idea that AMD has to beat NV in every metric to sell at the same price is absurd but if you believe it, you already know what you need to buy.

How is it absurd if its the truth?

I guarantee you, two GPU that are the same in all aspects, just AMD & NV branded. Most consumers will buy the NV one if the price is same. Most would even pay extra for the NV one.

Retailers with experience will tell you this.

AMD has a very BAD rep with "lol drivers" and as more GW titles ship with broken AMD performance or no CF, this spreads. It becomes accepted as a fact.

 

[5150Joker]

4K isn't a prerequisite for high VRAM usage, there's also VSR/DSR which people are using more and more everyday over regular MSAA. I know that if I didn't have a G-Sync display, I'd be pushing DSR in every single game I have. With games like BF4 and ARMA 3, I use 150% display scaling which is equivalent to 4K and sometimes I go even higher with ARMA.

 

[RussianSensation]

The DIFFERENCE if it did not occur to you, 970/980 was launched nearly 9 months ago.

The other difference is the performance bracket. A 970/980 cannot push settings in single GPU config to be limited by the 3.5/4 gb vram limit. Something like a Titan X or potentially faster, can indeed be limited by vram. This isn't something you ever want in a GPU, you want it to always be performance limited not vram limited with performance left on the table.

970 SLI costs $600-660 today, 980 cost $500-550 and 980 SLI costs $1000-1100 today. Lots of PC gamers bought those setups in the last 9 months but suddenly things change? So what you are saying is if R9 390X 4GB costs $599 and is at 93% on this chart, it's a failure? And if R9 390 at $429 is 85% on this chart too, it's a failure also? You killed it man.

4K isn't a prerequisite for high VRAM usage, there's also VSR/DSR which people are using more and more everyday over regular MSAA. I know that if I didn't have a G-Sync display, I'd be pushing DSR in every single game I have. With games like BF4 and ARMA 3, I use 150% display scaling which is equivalent to 4K and sometimes I go even higher with ARMA.

That's why there are $400-550 cards and $1000 cards. Maybe in your world a $550 card should have 100% of the performance of the Titan X and 8GB of VRAM or it's not worth buying because it's from AMD. For a lot of PC gamers 8GB or esp. 12GB of VRAM is a waste of money for 1080P/1440P gaming. I'd rather get a $400 4GB card with 87% of the performance of Titan X, sell it in 24 months and get a new gen card than pay $1K for 8-12GB of VRAM to 'future-proof'.

If R9 390X even approaches anywhere close to 90% of the performance of the Titan X for close to 1/2 the price, even if it has 4GB of VRAM, it will sell like hot hates. The 3% of PC gamers who need 8-12GB of VRAM can always pay double.

 

[Silverforce11]

@RS A GPU with more grunt than 980, potentially 40% more grunt, cannot have 4gb vram. It would be vram limited. That would be a failure, like the 512mb 4870.

@5150Joker
I use VSR, its great. Its now my preferred AA in fact, so potentially everyone can push 4K demands even if they have a 1080p monitor.

 

[5150Joker]

That's why there are $400-550 cards and $1000 cards. Maybe in your world a $550 card should have 100% of the performance of the Titan X and 8GB of VRAM or it's not worth buying because it's from AMD. For a lot of PC gamers 8GB or esp. 12GB of VRAM is a waste of money for 1080P/1440P gaming. I'd rather get a $400 4GB card with 87% of the performance of Titan X, sell it in 24 months and get a new gen card than pay $1K for 8-12GB of VRAM to 'future-proof'.

If R9 390X even approaches anywhere close to 90% of the performance of the Titan X for close to 1/2 the price, even if it has 4GB of VRAM, it will sell like hot hates. The 3% of PC gamers who need 8-12GB of VRAM can always pay double.

So now anyone that uses 4K, surround, VSR/DSR is irrelevant and a 3% PC gamer? That's hilarious man, what else are you going to discount as time goes on? Yes I expect a $500+ card released Q2 2015 to have >4 GB VRAM as it's immediate competition won't be a $1000 Titan X but a $700 6 GB VRAM sporting 980 Ti which will likely best it in benchmarks and have more VRAM to spare. IF this source is accurate, a 4 GB limitation will be a blunder for a high end card.

 

[RussianSensation]

How is it absurd if its the truth?

For starters, no AMD/NV/ATI GPU beat the competitor's GPU in every metric. Therefore, even making that statement is ludicrous because it's an impossibility.

Secondly, R9 200's image is tarnished and destroyed not because of performance but because of "image that all R9 200 cards are hot, loud and power hungry". Therefore, even if R9 290X was 20% faster than the 980, it would still not sell. The image is shot. AMD has already shown with HD4000-7000 series they do not need to outright beat NV in every metric possible to sell well and be popular. You are buying into too much FUD that's being spread online about AMD and the entire doom and gloom agenda.

Are you seriously suggesting that a card 20-30% faster than a 980 for $550 is a failure just because it has 4GB of VRAM? OK, then go right ahead and pay $1K for the Titan X if you think 10-15% more performance and 12GB of VRAM is worth it. That's how the market works.

 

[RussianSensation]

So now anyone that uses 4K, surround, VSR/DSR is irrelevant and a 3% PC gamer?

Any situation where 4GB of VRAM is exceeded requires the most powerful GPUs today, expensive 4K monitors. Do you seriously expect $400-550 GPU to play games with VSR/DSR at 1440P/4K? That's not happening. Even dual Titan Xs struggle to 4K without SSAA. It's absurd to think a $500 card should break the laws of physics. Today 12GB on the Titan X absolutely doesn't help it in games if you only have just 1 of those cards. You need 2-3 of them to take advantage of that much VRAM because the card runs out of gas well before it runs out of VRAM.

Yes I expect a $500+ card released Q2 2015 to have >4 GB VRAM as it's immediate competition won't be a $1000 Titan X but a $700 6 GB VRAM sporting 980 Ti which will likely best it in benchmarks and have more VRAM to spare. IF this source is accurate, a 4 GB limitation will be a blunder for a high end card.

Maybe in your world a $500 card competes with a $700 one. Ever since you started spending thousands of dollars on flagship cards and monitors, you completely lost track of what the 97% of the PC gaming market wants. Maybe if you hang out around Titan X and ROG monitors on OCN all day, you might think the average gamer actually cares about 8-12GB cards priced at $700+, but they don't.

Somehow in your mind 2 distinct GPU markets cannot co-exist, you know a market for fast $400-550 cards and a market of $700-1000 cards, just like there is a Porsche GT3 RS, Porsche Turbo, Porsche 911 S and a Porsche Cayman GT4 and Porsche Cayman, all serving different markets. In your world, it seems price is 100% irrelevant. That's fine, we get it, but for 97% of the GPU market they would rather have 90% of Titan X's performance at $400-550. In case you need a refresher, R9 290 for $400 completely revolutionized the GPU landscape exactly because of this even though the $1K Titan had 6GB of VRAM.

 

[5150Joker]

RS, anything that starts at $500+ is high end. You thinking it's somehow mainstream and not in the same realm of a $700 competitor is funny. Also note that AMD has told the world recently that it is tired of being the "value" brand and now wants to compete in the high margin world of NVIDIA/Intel. This means that they cannot afford to launch R390X at $400 and expect to make investors happy. This thing won't be anything less than $500 and your car analogy is flawed so I won't even go there.

 

[Silverforce11]

Are you seriously suggesting that a card 20-30% faster than a 980 for $550 is a failure just because it has 4GB of VRAM? OK, then go right ahead and pay $1K for the Titan X if you think 10-15% more performance and 12GB of VRAM is worth it. That's how the market works.

Yes. I am expecting it to rival Titan X, that means ~35% above 980 already. With some OC headroom, its potentially a 4K capable single GPU. But with 4GB vram it's not. Never will be. This is worse if it ends up faster than Titan X.

All that grunt is wasted if its vram limited, so it may as well not have the extra grunt.

Also, its direct competitor is going to be the 6gb GM200 SKU, not Titan X, not 980.

 

[RussianSensation]

@RS A GPU with more grunt than 980, potentially 40% more grunt, cannot have 4gb vram. It would be vram limited. That would be a failure, like the 512mb 4870.

Proof, or this is just your opinion.

Name 2 games on the planet, with hard review data testing, where GTX980 SLI is 4GB VRAM limited at playable settings (50-60 FPS averages) at 1080P, 1200P or 1440P. 980 SLI is > 80% faster than a single 290X. Using your logic, Titan 6GB SLI would be winning in most titles against R9 295X2, 970 SLI and 980 SLI at 1080P-1440P if 4GB limitation was real today at those resolutions. I bet you can't find a single game in the world where OG Titan SLI is beating 980 SLI at 1440P or below.