• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Hawaii = 3072SP??

DGLee

Member
Well... I'm trying to build a block for a simple numeric. (Calculating die area and reverse-engineering the Hawaii GPU)
Many clues drive me to one thesis that a full Hawaii GPU employs 48CU which is equivalent to 3072SP / 192TMU while ROP/memory part remains unchanged. Steps are following:

- Start with a Tahiti and Pitcairn die image. Normalize the size of their CU (shader cluster)
- Now we earn 6 GDDR5 controllers in Tahiti as well as 4 in Pitcairn, Tahiti's IMC is about 3 times larger than that of Pitcairn. At this point we should remind that Hawaii's 512bit GDDR5 controller is actually 30% smaller than Tahiti's 384bit controller thank to design-wise simplification of 2^n width bus. So it seems very rational that Tahiti has 3 times bigger IMC than that of Pitcairn.
- ROP partitions are (literally) covering around the shader clusters. Calculated areas (thank to MS PPT: I drawed infinitely many rectangles, get their vertical/horizontal lengths and manually multiply them) are surprisingly similar among Tahiti and Pitcairn, which suggests that they actually have the same amount of ROPs(both employ 32).
- Reverse-engineering is done. We've done almost everything. Etc & Overheads are less than 5% of total area.
- Now the "block-building" time. Start with shaders: Simply multiply 44 or 48 to 'normalized' shader cluster size.
- Estimate the IMC size of Hawaii. In this case we have two ways to approach: Multiply 0.7 to Tahiti's IMC or 2 to Pitcairn's - Fortunately, both earn the same value.
- Estimate the size of ROP partition: I simply multiply 2 to Tahiti's ROP size(which is same as Pitcairn's) because Hawaii have ROPs as twice much as them.
- Apply similar ratio for etc & overhead area (= dead space). In this case I apply 5%.
- Sum them all!

When I apply 44 CUs for Hawaii GPU, I earn 410~415mm2 die size which is quite smaller than its revealed size (438mm2). Interestingly, I could get this number only when I apply the amont of CUs equal to 48, which means AMD's highest SKU as of today (=290X) is being shipped as 'not-fully-capable' status. In other words, a full Hawaii GPU has 3072 SP and 192 TMU at the highest probability.

pIj6BVF.jpg


Well, my thread is over. How do you guys think about that?
 
Well... I'm trying to build a block for a simple numeric. (Calculating die area and reverse-engineering the Hawaii GPU)
Many clues drive me to one thesis that a full Hawaii GPU employs 48CU which is equivalent to 3072SP / 192TMU while ROP/memory part remains unchanged. Steps are following:

- Start with a Tahiti and Pitcairn die image. Normalize the size of their CU (shader cluster)
- Now we earn 6 GDDR5 controllers in Tahiti as well as 4 in Pitcairn, Tahiti's IMC is about 3 times larger than that of Pitcairn. At this point we should remind that Hawaii's 512bit GDDR5 controller is actually 30% smaller than Tahiti's 384bit controller thank to design-wise simplification of 2^n width bus. So it seems very rational that Tahiti has 3 times bigger IMC than that of Pitcairn.
- ROP partitions are (literally) covering around the shader clusters. Calculated areas (thank to MS PPT: I drawed infinitely many rectangles, get their vertical/horizontal lengths and manually multiply them) are surprisingly similar among Tahiti and Pitcairn, which suggests that they actually have the same amount of ROPs(both employ 32).
- Reverse-engineering is done. We've done almost everything. Etc & Overheads are less than 5% of total area.
- Now the "block-building" time. Start with shaders: Simply multiply 44 or 48 to 'normalized' shader cluster size.
- Estimate the IMC size of Hawaii. In this case we have two ways to approach: Multiply 0.7 to Tahiti's IMC or 2 to Pitcairn's - Fortunately, both earn the same value.
- Estimate the size of ROP partition: I simply multiply 2 to Tahiti's ROP size(which is same as Pitcairn's) because Hawaii have ROPs as twice much as them.
- Apply similar ratio for etc & overhead area (= dead space). In this case I apply 5%.
- Sum them all!

When I apply 44 CUs for Hawaii GPU, I earn 410~415mm2 die size which is quite smaller than its revealed size (438mm2). Interestingly, I could get this number only when I apply the amont of CUs equal to 48, which means AMD's highest SKU as of today (=290X) is being shipped as 'not-fully-capable' status. In other words, a full Hawaii GPU has 3072 SP and 192 TMU at the highest probability.

pIj6BVF.jpg


Well, my thread is over. How do you guys think about that?

may have been cut down to reduce power and thermals
 
438/415 is only 5% difference.
There is much more uncertainty in your calculus then measly 5%.

Basically you want to know the length of your porch, OK
But you don't trust your neighbor and the result he got with his measuring tape,
so you're using his thumb to re-measure it.
 
Is not the first one that doubt if Hawai have 256 deactivated Sps... (some sites already tried to investigate it). Could AMD is waiting better Yelds to unleash the "full Hawaii"?
 
44 does seem an "odd" number, I suspect there is some redundancy in there
@ el etro: Waiting more on a respin maybe than better yields
 
R9-290x is already having thermal problems as is.

With the reference cooler even the 290 has problems,but look at the custom cards.A Hawaii chip with 3072 shaders seems entirely possible,but wouldn't make sense.They did let the 780ti take the performance crown and the performance difference between the 290 and 290x isn't that big anyway.
 
R9-290x is already having thermal problems as is.

Looking at the 3rd party coolers; I would say it doesn't. AMD made a huge mistake with their shitty stock cooler.

Open air coolers on the 290/290X make an incredibly competitive product compared to the 780/780 ti.
 
Someone over at TPU said that they had a source that said amd said the current shader config would always be enough and that wanted the extra as backup for defects.
ALL YMMV!!
 
Someone over at TPU said that they had a source that said amd said the current shader config would always be enough and that wanted the extra as backup for defects.
ALL YMMV!!

Then you see january news: "Hacker develops a custom bios to unlock the extra 256 shaders that 290-x have!" or "290-x is unlockable like her little sister!"
Will be good to see things like these(i know the possibility of a from-fab shader cut is greater).
 
Last edited:
Then you see january news: "Hacker develops a custom bios to unlock the extra 256 shaders that 290-x have!" or "290-x is unlockable like your little sister!"
Will be good to see things like these(i know the possibility of a from-fab shader cut is greater).
Wut. 😵
 
Back
Top