videocardzAMD’s Greenland/Vega 10 GPU to feature 4096 Stream Processors

[Sweepr]

I expect Nvidia to go the exact same route as well. Only with the GP100 as the joker due to Knights Landing. If GP100 cant compete with this, Nvidia loses the HPC. But any GP100 chips will cost more than your first born assuming they can. Another thing people have to remember, there are no cost savings transistor wise. All the current leaked chips seems to be more or less shrinked 28nm in terms of size with little to no increase.

Agreed. Other than GP100 we're probably talking about small chips for NVIDIA as well.

BTW you're 2 days late OP. D:

 

[Krteq]

But again, performance/price and low power is what the 99% crowd wants.

fixed

 

[ShintaiDK]

fixed

If that was the case, AMD should sell much better already and cards like the GTX970 and down a lot less. This also shows the complete lack of understanding on this forum about the reality.

So no, you didn't fix anything. Just showing the lack of understanding there is.

 

[itsmydamnation]

If that was the case, AMD should sell much better already and cards like the GTX970 and down a lot less. This also shows the complete lack of understanding on this forum about the reality.

So no, you didn't fix anything. Just showing the lack of understanding there is.

so we can take that from you that 390 is low power. thax for confirming.

 

[Head1985]

Another hint why this 4096SP SKU is vega11:
Because if its vega10 and have 4096SP then cutdown version will have 3584SP just like fury non x.
Then vega 11 must have 3072SP and cutdown version 2560SP.
So vega 11 will be at polaris 10 performance.This is just not gonna happend.

This 4096SP SKU is vega 11 and AMD have even bigger 400+mm2 SKU at sleeve.

 

[KaRLiToS]

Hopefully this will be my next upgrade or Vega 10. Looks promising.

[Nope]

Let's not start any fights, OK?

-Rvenger

 

[raghu78]

Another hint why this 4096SP SKU is vega11:
Because if its vega10 and have 4096SP then cutdown version will have 3584SP just like fury non x.
Then vega 11 must have 3072SP and cutdown version 2560SP.
So vega 11 will be at polaris 10 performance.This is just not gonna happend.

This 4096SP SKU is vega 11 and AMD have even bigger 400+mm2 SKU at sleeve.

correct. anandtech mentioned that Vega is complimentary to Polaris and would address higher performance and products higher up the price range. If we have Vega 10 as 4096 sp that leaves very little room for Vega 11. My guess is Vega 11 is 4096 sp. Vega 10 is 5120 sp or more.

 

[Timmah!]

Remember size as well.

GTX680=294mm2 ~3.5B (32ROP)
GTX980=398mm2 ~5.2B (64ROP)

I fully agree on the unbalanced chip as I already stated. And for that matter every time its not shader limited Vega 10 can look much better, assuming ROP increase. And hopefully they increase it to 128. But I doubt shader power will change much at all and I will guess they will look around equal gflops wise.

I expect Nvidia to go the exact same route as well. Only with the GP100 as the joker due to Knights Landing. If GP100 cant compete with this, Nvidia loses the HPC. But any GP100 chips will cost more than your first born assuming they can. Another thing people have to remember, there are no cost savings transistor wise. All the current leaked chips seems to be more or less shrinked 28nm in terms of size with little to no increase. But again, performance/watt and low power is what the 99% crowd wants. In that relation this forum lives in its own world. So financially they are doing the right move. If I had to guess, Vega 10would end up in the 175-200W area as top bin.

You keep repeating this, but its not really true. What most people want is maximum possible performance at minimum possible cost. There is no place for watts in that equation, low power consumption is just a nice bonus. Only select few with HPCs and stuff like that care about that primarily, surely not 99 percent crowd.

 

[Gloomy]

So stock clock seems to be 1152mhz for the 2300sp part, according to the linux drivers, so theres at least an improvement from that direction.

Hopefully it means we can expect 1250-1300mhz aftermarket/common oc.

 

[ShintaiDK]

So stock clock seems to be 1152mhz for the 2300sp part, according to the linux drivers, so theres at least an improvement from that direction.

Hopefully it means we can expect 1250-1300mhz aftermarket/common oc.

That would be a very nice improvement with 10-15% over today just in clock. :thumbsup:

 

[ShintaiDK]

You keep repeating this, but its not really true. What most people want is maximum possible performance at minimum possible cost. There is no place for watts in that equation, low power consumption is just a nice bonus. Only select few with HPCs and stuff like that care about that primarily, surely not 99 percent crowd.

Why doesn't sale reflect this then?

AMD does the right thing when they champion performance/watt this time around.

 

[Erenhardt]

Why doesn't sale reflect this then?

AMD does the right thing when they champion performance/watt this time around.

Why didn't sales reflect this in Fermi era? Fermi was 3 times worst in perf/watt vs competition than hawaii is, yet it didn't matter as much, not even in a 1/3rd of what we've seen with hawaii.

I'm sure there is a term for this phenomenon.

Also, I kind of agree that consumers don't care much or at all about perf/$. Else everyone would sport radeons and mine cryptos in the meantime. My 290 just mined half its price worth of ETH coin.
Way to often we see people asking for a GPU recommendation with only as single criteria: it has to be nv gpu. "And nothing else matters". Those people are not even interested what competitor has to offer. They don't care even if they could get the same GPU for helf the price, but with sticker other than nv, it is no go. There is a large market for "nv GPUs". A giant success of nv marketing team, and a giant problem for amd's incompetent bunch behind powerpoint slides. It is hard to win a consumers that are not even slightly offended when their expensive GPUs appeared to not be what nv claimed those to be.

Anyways, seems a wild guess and speculation season is about to begin.

 

[Timmah!]

Why doesn't sale reflect this then?

AMD does the right thing when they champion performance/watt this time around.

When do they not reflect it? You mean when people kept buying gtx970? Perhaps the people who bought it were not aware they could potentially get better bang for their money with comparable AMD card? So because they actually are not HW enthusiasts, not that much because they somehow care about their card to have say 150 instead of 200W consumption?

OFC they do the right thing. But only cause more performance per watt means more absolute performance. At the same wattage levels as before per usual tier of peformance.

 

[railven]

Why doesn't sale reflect this then?

AMD does the right thing when they champion performance/watt this time around.

I wouldn't argue people actively look for performance/watt, it just happens to be Nvidia has that right now.

I would also argue, people aren't looking at performance / price, because AMD currently has that and they are floundering.

People go by marketing/image/brand recognition/etc. Nvidia could turn it around next gen and sit on performance / price while AMD sits on performance / watt, and I'd predict NV would still devour AMD in terms of sale.

Mobile, where the options are limited and often made by the OEMs, performance / watt matters a whole bunch, but at this point consumer input is barely noticed. Look at poor Carizzo. Another wise AMD goldmine and it's bastardize because OEMs don't care what consumers want in the mobile space, they care more about their bottom dollar. (And then brand kicks in when OEM probably assume that consumers won't pay top dollar for an AMD laptop that roasts chest nuts, thus not putting the effort to deliver a device with the proper cooling regardless of what they can sell it for.)

TL;DR:
The 99% barely care about actual metrics, they care more about the shiny and marketing. Just swing by NeoGAF once or twice - I swear I get stupider each time I read a PC-related thread.

EDIT:

When do they not reflect it? You mean when people kept buying gtx970? Perhaps the people who bought it were not aware they could potentially get better bang for their money with comparable AMD card? So because they actually are not HW enthusiasts, not that much because they somehow care about their card to have say 150 instead of 200W consumption?

OFC they do the right thing. But only cause more performance per watt means more absolute performance. At the same wattage levels as before per usual tier of peformance.

Oh, they were aware. They just didn't care. Unfortunately, the stigma of "value brand" sticks to AMD GPUs thanks to their flopping CPU division. At least that's what I see on a few gaming mainstream sites I visit. Nvidia has strong brand presence. And it's thanks to years of promoting itself with TWITMBP and at gaming events. AMD only recently started being a presence at gaming events. NV logos/banners where EVERYWHERE the last few years at esport tournies. AMD, it feels is only now realizing that mmo/moba's are a huge market.

When AMD was promoting good games with their 2013 Gaming Evolved line up, NV was catering to MOBA/F2Ps/MMOs etc. And I think NV came out the winner in hindsight.

 

[Adored]

I don't think it's as simple as saying raw performance or perf/Watt is what counts. You have to look at what is around in the market and figure how to make your card look like a no-brainer upgrade. Nobody with a 970 is gonna upgrade to a Polaris 10 with 980 performance at 100W. Fury X performance at 150W is another matter though.

 

[ShintaiDK]

When do they not reflect it? You mean when people kept buying gtx970? Perhaps the people who bought it were not aware they could potentially get better bang for their money with comparable AMD card? So because they actually are not HW enthusiasts, not that much because they somehow care about their card to have say 150 instead of 200W consumption?

OFC they do the right thing. But only cause more performance per watt means more absolute performance. At the same wattage levels as before per usual tier of peformance.

So now they are uninformed buyers? :thumbsdown:

So when AMD champion performance/watt and low power. They are also ignorant? Or is it because they actually know what the broad user base wants?

Look around, lower power, mobile, smaller form factors. This is what sells. Not some dinosaurs with big cases and 300W card(s).

 

[Erenhardt]

I don't think it's as simple as saying raw performance or perf/Watt is what counts. You have to look at what is around in the market and figure how to make your card look like a no-brainer upgrade. Nobody with a 970 is gonna upgrade to a Polaris 10 with 980 performance at 100W. Fury X performance at 150W is another matter though.

Oh rly? There are people (even on this very forum) that "upgraded" from 780ti to 970.

In optimized games, that is not an upgrade, apart from the additional 0,5GB of VRAM

They justified it with better perf/watt.

 

[ShintaiDK]

I wouldn't argue people actively look for performance/watt, it just happens to be Nvidia has that right now.

I would also argue, people aren't looking at performance / price, because AMD currently has that and they are floundering.

People go by marketing/image/brand recognition/etc. Nvidia could turn it around next gen and sit on performance / price while AMD sits on performance / watt, and I'd predict NV would still devour AMD in terms of sale.

Mobile, where the options are limited and often made by the OEMs, performance / watt matters a whole bunch, but at this point consumer input is barely noticed. Look at poor Carizzo. Another wise AMD goldmine and it's bastardize because OEMs don't care what consumers want in the mobile space, they care more about their bottom dollar. (And then brand kicks in when OEM probably assume that consumers won't pay top dollar for an AMD laptop that roasts chest nuts, thus not putting the effort to deliver a device with the proper cooling regardless of what they can sell it for.)

TL;DR:
The 99% barely care about actual metrics, they care more about the shiny and marketing. Just swing by NeoGAF once or twice - I swear I get stupider each time I read a PC-related thread.

Sorry to break it to you, but Carrizo is a terrible laptop and desktop chip. Not because of some evil conspiracy.

If marketing is the reason, why did it first happen with Maxwell that at the same time offered exactly what the consumer demands?

You make it sound like its someone else fault again.

If AMD can get close to or even reach NVidia this time around in performance/watt. I bet you their share will climb to 30%+ on that alone.

 

[Sequences]

How much do you guys think these chips will go for? In the $700+ range?

 

[Erenhardt]

$500 and less I hope.

 

[railven]

Sorry to break it to you, but Carrizo is a terrible laptop and desktop chip. Not because of some evil conspiracy.

If marketing is the reason, why did it first happen with Maxwell that at the same time offered exactly what the consumer demands?

You make it sound like its someone else fault again.

If AMD can get close to or even reach NVidia this time around in performance/watt. I bet you their share will climb to 30%+ on that alone.

Odd, I didn't even once mention that. I gave examples of how NV promotes their products better, where AMD lost public/manufacturer favor, and thus why NV is destroying AMD and you think I'm making excuses for AMD?

Okay, but if you think it's solely because the majority of buyers are hitting up performance / watt reviews, you go right ahead and think that.

EDIT: I need to address the red.
Yeah, I covered that too. If OEM/Manufacturers regain confidence in AMD, they'll use it more often. IE, they aren't trying to properly cool a chip and thus cut into their own margins.

What you're stating is so blatantly obvious, I don't get why you even had to state it. "IF AMD were a better, they'd sell more."

 

[ShintaiDK]

How much do you guys think these chips will go for? In the $700+ range?

699 perhaps.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Odd, I didn't even once mention that. I gave examples of how NV promotes their products better, where AMD lost public/manufacturer favor, and thus why NV is destroying AMD and you think I'm making excuses for AMD?

Okay, but if you think it's solely because the majority of buyers are hitting up performance / watt reviews, you go right ahead and think that.

EDIT: I need to address the red.
Yeah, I covered that too. If OEM/Manufacturers regain confidence in AMD, they'll use it more often. IE, they aren't trying to properly cool a chip and thus cut into their own margins.

What you're stating is so blatantly obvious, I don't get why you even had to state it.

We can see after Polaris10/Polaris11/GP104/GP106 release. If its due to marketing AMD will be at 20% or below. If its due to low power and performance watt they will be higher. Lets say 30%. Deal?

And Carrizo is unfit for laptops.

 

[railven]

We can see after Polaris10/Polaris11/GP104/GP106 release. If its due to marketing AMD will be at 20% or below. If its due to low power and performance watt they will be higher. Lets say 30%. Deal?

I have no care where AMD sits. If you want to wager with yourself, go for it.

 

[Adored]

Obviously AMD will gain market share due to launching first with small polaris clearly ahead in laptop perf/Watt, the OEMs will be all over it.

That's different from the average desktop buyer who buys off the shelf based on what his mates told him was the best card (970, still).