AnandThenMan
Diamond Member
- Nov 11, 2004
- 3,949
- 504
- 126
7970 and R9 290X is the exact same architecture
The exact same. Really?
7970 and R9 290X is the exact same architecture
Were did you get that the 7970 and 290X use the exact same architecture. The R9 290X uses the new Hawaii Chip and uses GCN 2.0.
First, congratulations on coming out of retirement at this very odd timing to tell us all of this. I remember your posts on OCN.
Christ dude, go look up what TDP means. TDP is not power consumption. Furthermore, the leaks have shown that the 290X uses less power at load than the Titan, so that would indicate that the 290X did improve efficiency over Tahiti; besides which - every site that has mentioned a "300W TDP" only did so after making mention of the fact that it has a 8 pin + 6 pin connector which can draw 300W. So basically what they're doing is assuming that it is a 300W TDP, when all prior leaks indicated a 250W TDP.
The TDP merely indicates how versatile the cooling solution must be running "average" applications. There is no industry standard of what TDP means. It can mean anything. Nvidia's TDP measurement is different than Intel's. Intel's is different than AMD's. AMD's is different than both nvidia and Intel. The point here is that given the definition of TDP (which you're apparently NOT aware of) - the size and characteristics of the shroud on the 290X, it is not a 300W TDP unless you blindly and ignorantly just look at the power connectors (which provides up to 300W) and assume that TDP is the same. The shroud used on the 290X is roughly the same as the one on the 7970 with slightly different aesthetics - thus it can't be a 300W TDP as it is not a massive shroud re-design. This is aside from the fact that the 290X uses less power at load than the Titan, and the Titan has a 250W TDP. But the bottom line is that TDP is not the same as maximum power consumption.
If it's an improved GCN transistor re-layout at its core it can still be a new architecture. It has a new, supposedly more efficient memory controller. And more render engines. Does that define "new architecture" in your terms, if you have any definition of it at all?Its an improved GCN, yes. But its still GCN. Its not a new architecture.
Seriously this thread derailed fast. When are official reviews coming?
The link I posted stated TDP = 300W for 290X. Don`t blame me if that is incorrect.
Seriously this thread derailed fast. When are official reviews coming?
AMD is doing rebadge on all other GPUs, except 290 and 290X. Why?
You might be wrong
http://beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1789377&postcount=850
"None of these products announced are rebrands. "
So according to Dave Baumann of AMD the existing chips seems to have undergone slight tweaks at an ASIC level. something akin to GTX 680 to GTX 770. I am thinking its a newer stepping to lower load power and improve perf/watt.
The memory speeds alone don't seem to do much for performance on this generation, nor on the last. The 79xx's can easily oc to the 300GB/s++ speeds that AMD bragged about in the presentation, and they've been out for almost two years.
Ah hello? It's got an additional memory channel! That's +33% more bandwidth at equal speeds, comparing apples to apples. What's hindering you to OC Hawaii in the same way as Tahiti?
think he said it best:
There will be games takeing advantage of this mantle stuff.
Activision and EA arnt small potatoes in the gameing industry, and these are just the ones we know of so far.
There could be intire swarms of other developers out there too, planning on doing it/actively doing it atm.
This
I might just CF my i7 rig after all and call it a day
20nm needs happen before i spend $600 on Nv or AMD
Looked like it suffered from hitching? now and again but overall looked pretty smooth. They seemed pretty excited about it tho.
I predict there will be more games using Mantle than Physx. And Mantle improves performance across the board on all graphics features.
I predict there will be more games using Mantle than Physx. And Mantle improves performance across the board on all graphics features.
Problem is a lot of us already have enough performance, what we want are cool features and more immersion.
AMDs answer to slower performance is Mantle, their answer to PhysX is sound.
Lets so some thinking here
R9 290X: 2816 cores, TDP = ?
7970: 2048 cores, TDP = 250W
2816/2048 = 1.375 = 37.5%
--------------------
Lets say TDP of the new 290X is 250W. That would mean that AMD have improved GCN with 37.5%. Same architecture as 7970, improved, but still on 28nm.
Does this sound plausible?
Lets say R9 290X is 300W.
7970 is still 250W.
300W/250W = 1.20 = 20%
Looking purely at TDP, its still missing 17.5% to reach the core count of 290X. Now what if AMD got that from the inproved GCN?
Does that make any sense? That they improved GCN by roughly 17% on the same 28nm.
Looking at this, what would be the most plausible option here? Id say the last one.
a mere 35% performance increase over a nearly 2-year-old 7970. That's beyond a joke considering how quickly GPUs become obsolete & drop in resale value.
This too. If you can't beat their hardware one on one you develop software that can "force it to win benchmarks wee!" That's all it is cause if it is close to 780 performance then it will be plenty of performance for games. They just want the graphs to look longer under their brand which means about zero when you are playing the game. "Ohh look at that guys, it says 80fps. *bang* oh sorry I was checking out the fps ticker when I got blown up and we lost. my bad" I still think this is simply a way for the DICE guys to easily port their engine around to different platforms so they can push out yearly releases of all these games they have to work on.
Anyone else notice the contradiction?
You're all over the place with this post
If the "graphs look longer under their brand" means more than zero, it is about selling gpus, thats were it matters to them