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

[Serandur]

So what are the cut off points? How old/new does a card have to be before 4GB is either fine or not enough.

Well, it's pretty simple to me.

7970 -> 290X = 37.5% more shader cores and 33.3% more VRAM; good balanced ratio

680 -> 780 = 50% more shader cores and 50% more VRAM; good balanced ratio (though both amounts are actually insufficient for their respective cards' power at the time of their driver-optimized peak, imo and experience)

980 -> GM200/"980Ti" = 50% more shader cores and 50% more VRAM; good balanced ratio

290X -> 390X = 45.5 % more shader cores and double the bandwidth and ROPs with massively improved tesselation and color compression, but 0% more VRAM; WTH?


It's like if Nvidia decided to keep the 980Ti at 3 GBs like the 780Ti or had somehow, without destroying the memory bus, kept the 780 at 2 GBs like the 680. Or if AMD kept the 290X at 3 GBs like the 7970, which undoubtedly at this point in time would already be limiting for its capabilities (would have been last year even).

Why more than 4 GBs for the 390X is simply because the card is powerful enough to easily make use of more, especially in any crossfire configuration. AMD are going to push it as a high resolution card, or multi-monitor, or it's going to excel at processing AA, or some other nice and demanding settings that demand both VRAM and power. If you just want one to drive a higher FPS display (like 120 FPS) at similar settings to like a 980/290X, then the extra VRAM isn't really necessary per se, but it's simply not a good match for this, what, 8.5 TFLOPs monster we're talking about? The PS4 has more potential VRAM for Pete's sake and a GPU barely 1/5th as powerful.

 

[raghu78]

Thats what the picture above I posted shows I think.
390 is Hawaii while 390X is Grenada.
Then what the heck will Fiji be called?
These rumors lol

btw cloudfire you mentioned R9 370X with HBM which looks quite unlikely now as Mark Papermaster said HBM will first be introduced at the high end of their GPU product stack. I take that as a statement that HBM will be used as a best case in the USD 300+ GPUs or worst case in the USD 500+ GPUs. So you basically have either the R9 390 series alone or the R9 390 and R9 380 series with HBM. I frankly do not see a HBM product selling below USD 300.

If AMD have done what I believe they desperately needed to do they have 2 separate chips or ASICs with HBM -
1.) A 550 sq mm flagship chip with 4096 sp, full fp64 performance at 1/2 peak fp32 rate for Firepro and 1/8 peak fp32 rate for Radeon. That chip will double up as the flagship Firepros when it launches later in Q4 2015. It will come with 8 GB HBM for R9 390 and R9 390X and maybe a R9 385 with 6 GB HBM

2.) A 400 sq mm cost optimized gaming chip with 3072 sp, 1/16 rate fp64 and which will drive the R9 380 and R9 380X. It will come only with 4 GB HBM with lower price of USD 400. This chip will also be the flagship notebook GPU.

Anyway all of this will be sorted out in 4-6 weeks. Frankly if AMD do not have a very strong GPU stack after being so late then they deserve to lose even more market share. If AMD cannot compete with Nvidia products in terms of perf/sq mm and perf/watt I will basically say that AMD is just not serious about its long term success and profitability in the GPU market.

 

[raghu78]

Well, it's pretty simple to me.

7970 -> 290X = 37.5% more shader cores and 33.3% more VRAM; good balanced ratio

680 -> 780 = 50% more shader cores and 50% more VRAM; good balanced ratio (though both amounts are actually insufficient for their respective cards' power at the time of their driver-optimized peak, imo and experience)

980 -> GM200/"980Ti" = 50% more shader cores and 50% more VRAM; good balanced ratio

290X -> 390X = 45.5 % more shader cores and double the bandwidth and ROPs with massively improved tesselation and color compression, but 0% more VRAM; WTH?


It's like if Nvidia decided to keep the 980Ti at 3 GBs like the 780Ti or had somehow, without destroying the memory bus, kept the 780 at 2 GBs like the 680. Or if AMD kept the 290X at 3 GBs like the 7970, which undoubtedly at this point in time would already be limiting for its capabilities (would have been last year even).

Why more than 4 GBs for the 390X is simply because the card is powerful enough to easily make use of more, especially in any crossfire configuration. AMD are going to push it as a high resolution card, or it's going to excel at processing AA, or some other nice and demanding settings that demand both VRAM and power.

Exactly. I expect AMD has some significant architectural improvements over Tonga for better perf/sp and perf/watt in the upcoming R9 3xx without counting the improvements due to HBM. imo the R9 390 is going to be competing with Titan-X and it better sport 8 GB to do justice to its raw GPU power. With overclocking the R9 390 and R9 390X are going to be as fast as R9 295X2 with all the benefits of single GPU. So crippling such powerful GPUs with 4GB is ridiculous.

 

[Glo.]

As of right now - nobody has ANY clue what will AMD do with next gen graphics.

That silence is amazing!

Even Apple does not do that.

 

[Head1985]

Yeah amazing but bad for marketing.
Most people just buing NV and not waiting for AMD to finaly release new cards..
Last year they have 24% before christmass.Now they must be bellow 20% already(market share)

 

[exar333]

As of right now - nobody has ANY clue what will AMD do with next gen graphics.

That silence is amazing!

Even Apple does not do that.

Well, besides a relatively well-trusted industry reporter that has gone on the record stating Fiji tops-out at 4GB. Keep in mind this is what he is saying, but I do think that does carry some weight until we get an official word. I am not ruling out an 8GB SKU, but I am leaning toward 4GB right now.

Who knows though? I am still optimistic we get an 8GB 390/x option...

 

[Elfear]

Yeah what the hell.

Fiji*2 is said to reach 980Ti/TitanX performance based on that chart.
Maybe thats why it have 8GB HBM. Dual Fiji with 4GB each?

This rumor doesn't make any sense at all as that would imply Fiji is slower than Hawaii...

 

[maniacalpha1-1]

Newegg, at least, has begun giving GTA V with R9 200 series cards. Any chance R9 300 release will drive remaining 290X stock any lower in price? If so, most cost effective upgrade path for me might be to pounce on one then, and then considering upgrading again when/if Nvidia's next shot reduces R9 390s.

Edit: GTA V was showing on Newegg a couple of hours ago, and now it doesn't. Not sure now... Re-edit- it still shows on specific product pages but at least for me they poofed from the search screen.

 

[Cloudfire777]

I know R9 380X is coming, not just the R7 360/370/380 cards.
Ive been keeping this for a while but one of AMD`s engineer says:

• Backend engineer and team leader at Intel and AMD, responsible for taping out state of the art products like Intel Pentium Processor with MMX technology and AMD R9 290X and 380X GPUs.

Further down she only says she been working on 290X, which may be because 380X = 290X like I suspected earlier.


https://www.linkedin.com/in/ilanashternshain

 

[Glo.]

AMD R9 290X, modern GPUs

Thats what it says. Modern, which possibly means GPUs that are further in future from 290X.

However, I would not mind core count from R9 290X coupled with implemetnation of Tonga technology, and HBM memory with more mature process at 200 TDP.

 

[Cloudfire777]

Thats what it says. Modern, which possibly means GPUs that are further in future from 290X.

However, I would not mind core count from R9 290X coupled with implemetnation of Tonga technology, and HBM memory with more mature process at 200 TDP.

Oh yeah, thats a possibility she meant two things I guess.
We will see. HBM, 28nm SHP with better efficiency, GCN 1.3, higher clocks, 290X or not, it will be a decent card I think

 

[DiogoDX]

I know R9 380X is coming, not just the R7 360/370/380 cards.
Ive been keeping this for a while but one of AMD`s engineer says:

Further down she only says she been working on 290X, which may be because 380X = 290X like I suspected earlier.


https://www.linkedin.com/in/ilanashternshain

This is very old. It was 2 profiles: one mentions the 380X ("king of the hill") and the other a 300W 2.5D gpu.

 

[3DVagabond]

What I'm hearing now is that a 4GB 390(X) will be for those who run 1080p and will sell their card when the new node ships.

Not looking good...

If that's all you're hearing then you have selective hearing.

I think unless you want to game @ 40fps or less, 4GB is enough. Now, I'm not saying there won't be a case that's not an outlier. So, if someone thinks pulling a game or two with 8xMSAA, or downsampling from 4K and adding MSAA proves this wrong, one game or special instance doesn't make a rule.

I'm not saying 4GB is the ultimate option for everyone. There will likely be some people who could legitimately use more. It's not total fail for the card though. Not everyone, or even a relevant minority of people, buying top of the line cards need more than 4GB. Let's not ignore and dismiss the advantages of HBM either.

We know the tech is there to have 8GB HBM with the dual link interposer technology. Just trying to think logically, if we don't get it with the 1st release it'll be either because 8GB of HBM would hurt the perf/$ too much, or it's just not ready for mass production yet.

Unless you count Titan @ $1000, AMD has had more VRAM available with higher bandwidth at a lower price point in the top 2 performance levels than nVidia for years. Assuming HBM ends up limited to 4GB on early release I don't see where a card that's only memory advantage is gross amt., 6GB vs. 4GB. A card who's memory system is actually slower and outdated by comparison. A card which will likely be more expensive, not the same price or less, is going to make the 390 "Fail" in reality.

Will nVidia try and convince us it is? Sure they will. They have to sell their product. Will people who buy nVidia try and convince us? Many will. They either need to justify their purchase or just have an emotional attachment. Have those same sorts been trying to convince us for years that less VRAM with less overall bandwidth doesn't matter and it's been worth paying more for less? Sure they have.

We'll probably see more testing @ 4K now that nVidia seems to have a product that is competitive at that resolution without paying Titan pricing. And I'm talking nVidia not the AIB's. They've had 6GB 780's for a while, but without nVidia behind it, likely because they didn't want to damage the perception of it's other products, 6GB was never a pressing need. I'm sure though that if they have a 6GB product and that's it's only bullet point over the competition, it will all of a sudden be very very important.

 

[3DVagabond]

4GB is plenty... unless 390 launches with 8GB. Then suddenly 6GB won't be enough. Watch it happen.

I wish there was some way to take up that challenge.

The reason I say that is there would likely also be 4GB 390 versions who's perf/$ will be far better than the almighty "390X-8GB-WCE" that's been rumored. People who buy AMD, as a group do so because they don't like to needlessly overspend. You will see lots and lots of people recommending the 4GB versions. Unless of course the 8GB version is the same price or cheaper. Then you'll be right. But what are the odds of that?

 

[96Firebird]

If that's all you're hearing then you have selective hearing.

Look at the posts just above mine that you quoted and tell me if you see something different? I never said that was all I was hearing, not sure where you pulled that from...

 

[3DVagabond]

Look at the posts just above mine that you quoted and tell me if you see something different? I never said that was all I was hearing, not sure where you pulled that from...

Well then, why is it "not looking good" then? I assumed you were addressing the larger picture with that comment.

 

[96Firebird]

I'm sure AMD doesn't want their flagship card to be hyped as the card to sell when the next set of cards come out due to not enough VRAM, nor do they want it being hyped as the perfect 1080p card when they have been hellbent on pushing for 4K in the past.

 

[3DVagabond]

I'm sure AMD doesn't want their flagship card to be hyped as the card to sell when the next set of cards come out due to not enough VRAM, nor do they want it being hyped as the perfect 1080p card when they have been hellbent on pushing for 4K in the past.

I think the "only" 4GB is being blown out of perspective. If they do release 8GB models as well as 4GB, I bet the 4GB, if priced right, will drastically outsell the 8GB.

If 4GB is all the tech will currently support, which is the only reason not to have 8GB, I'd rather have the tech available than not have it because there will be a niche performance level it doesn't support well.

 

[boozzer]

kinda weird how 8gb vram and 4k gaming just became the must haves. some of you guys make it sound like unless it is 6gb or more = automatic failure for a gpu.

newest steam HW survey
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/
every resolution above 1080p combined doesn't even make up 3% total of gamers. why the hell are some of you guys using it as a metric to measure how good a gpu is? if it will be a success?

 

[JDG1980]

If 4GB is all the tech will currently support, which is the only reason not to have 8GB, I'd rather have the tech available than not have it because there will be a niche performance level it doesn't support well.

Ultra-high resolutions may be "niche" in terms of AAA gaming as a whole, but you know what else is "niche"? $500+ graphics cards. How many people buy flagship cards just to play at 1080p? Seriously? Even on modern AAA titles, and at fairly high settings, a R9 290 or GTX 970 will get the job done for 1080p. People usually buy flagship cards to game at very high resolutions (1440p, 4K) or with triple monitors (5760x1080).

 

[2is]

kinda weird how 8gb vram and 4k gaming just became the must haves. some of you guys make it sound like unless it is 6gb or more = automatic failure for a gpu.

newest steam HW survey
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/
every resolution above 1080p combined doesn't even make up 3% total of gamers. why the hell are some of you guys using it as a metric to measure how good a gpu is? if it will be a success?

For a top of the line GPU, it is.

 

[boozzer]

For a top of the line GPU, it is.

so 97% to 99% of the gamers don't matter, as long as the 1%, 4k gamers approve, the gpu is automatically a success?

please explain in a logical manner so I can understand.

 

[LTC8K6]

kinda weird how 8gb vram and 4k gaming just became the must haves. some of you guys make it sound like unless it is 6gb or more = automatic failure for a gpu.

newest steam HW survey
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/
every resolution above 1080p combined doesn't even make up 3% total of gamers. why the hell are some of you guys using it as a metric to measure how good a gpu is? if it will be a success?

My argument is that a "flagship" gpu released in 2015 should have at least 8gb of vram.

It's supposed to be the top of the line representing AMD graphics cards.

It needs to have 8gb of vram for that reason alone, imo.

Is it a failure if it doesn't? Probably not, but it lacks that flagship status, imo.

 

[3DVagabond]

Ultra-high resolutions may be "niche" in terms of AAA gaming as a whole, but you know what else is "niche"? $500+ graphics cards. How many people buy flagship cards just to play at 1080p? Seriously? Even on modern AAA titles, and at fairly high settings, a R9 290 or GTX 970 will get the job done for 1080p. People usually buy flagship cards to game at very high resolutions (1440p, 4K) or with triple monitors (5760x1080).

We're going around in circles. You are saying 1080, not me.

 

[boozzer]

My argument is that a "flagship" gpu released in 2015 should have at least 8gb of vram.

It's supposed to be the top of the line representing AMD graphics cards.

It needs to have 8gb of vram for that reason alone, imo.

Is it a failure if it doesn't? Probably not, but it lacks that flagship status, imo.

so, your argument is solely based on your feeling that it should have 8gb regardless of need or performance?