- Mar 10, 2006
- 11,715
- 2,012
- 126

What do you think AMD means by "mainstream" GPUs in this case? And didn't AMD say previously Polaris was 2.5x perf/watt?
And didn't AMD say previously Polaris was 2.5x perf/watt?
Are you sure? 3584 GCN chip with 1266 MHz of core clock and 180W TDP has 9 TFLOPs of compute power.I'm afraid 2x Tonga might not be enough.![]()
![]()
What do you think AMD means by "mainstream" GPUs in this case? And didn't AMD say previously Polaris was 2.5x perf/watt?
Or 2x versus Fiji or 2.5x versus Tonga, otherwise it will not be able to conpete with Pascal on perf/w.
Or 2x versus Fiji or 2.5x versus Tonga, otherwise it will not be able to conpete with Pascal on perf/w.
Good enough for me.I'm afraid 2x Tonga might not be enough.![]()
I wonder what made them lower that number from 2.5x to 2x in such a short time.
But if 2x perf/watt compared to a 380x results in 2x performance vs a 380x, that would be pretty competitive in terms of overall performance. A 200W Polaris card would give you Titan X performance if it was twice as fast as a 380x.
http://tpucdn.com/reviews/ASUS/R9_380X_Strix/images/perfrel_2560_1440.png
At 200W you would get 10 TFLOPs of compute power from Polaris GPU. It would be faster than GTX 1080...I wonder what made them lower that number from 2.5x to 2x in such a short time.
But if 2x perf/watt compared to a 380x results in 2x performance vs a 380x, that would be pretty competitive in terms of overall performance. A 200W Polaris card would give you Titan X performance if it was twice as fast as a 380x. Although it would be less efficient than the 1080.
![]()
At 200W you would get 10 TFLOPs of compute power from Polaris GPU. It would be faster than GTX 1080...
Old benchmarks for performance/watt are meaningless, because you do not know how new architecture affects performance. Only way to count overall performance is from GLOPs/watt.
Unlikely that we will see Polaris at 200W. Rumors point to substantially lower TDPs.
2) AMD is increasing clocks of Polaris GPUs in response to GTX 1080/1070 reported clocks, reducing perf/Watt
3) Actual silicon results from 14nm FinFET are worse than expected
Can you link the posted slide?![]()
What do you think AMD means by "mainstream" GPUs in this case? And didn't AMD say previously Polaris was 2.5x perf/watt?
Can you link the posted slide?
When was it published?
I hope it doesn't become 1.5x performance/watt by the time Polaris actually launches. Knowing AMD's history, it is actually quite possible.
It would be hilarious if they would be able to compete with it, however, don't you think?
heeh if polaris can compete with 1080 u mean? that would be hilarious.If Polaris is GP104 competitor, then which GPU competitor is Vega 10? GP102?
So now we get into situation, where Mainstream has to compete with High end.
High-end with enthusiast.
Pretty bonkers if you would ask me. Hilarious if AMD would be able to do this, however...