WCCF: AMD’s Flagship ‘Fiji XT GPU’ Debuts Radeon’s Titan Equivalent Branding

[Erenhardt]

Since you guys both brought up gameworks, the consumer paying $850+ doesn't care the reasoning why AMD games don't work well in Gameworks titles. They just want them to work.

You guys seem to somehow think I'm in love with Nvidia. This is just my opinion that when it comes to users with more and more disposable income, AMD is going to have a hardtime saying those users without doing more to alleviate the percepion that their drivers aren't good. They'll need more partnerships for games, and need to ensure that gameworks titles are up and running ASAP.
Etc.

Otherwise, it won't matter how great of a product AMD has. If it's gimped in a bunch of titles, and crossfire doesn't work in a bunch of those titles, people will purchase the Titan X, even if it's not as good because it has greater compatibility across titles.

Then I hope amd does their own version of GW and makes their branded games a mess on nv hardware. Then you will have to play on console as it will be the only platform without issues. Think about that...

 

[tviceman]

Tential, if you value gameworks so much, did you know that FC4 had broken SLI for months after release? Major game-breaking bugs relating to rendering glitches.

WatchDogs didn't have good SLI scaling at all and stuttered horribly with SLI.

ACU was bug ridden, missing textures, floating objects..

Witcher 3, the GW HairWorks is an utter joke. Crippling performance for some fluff. Funny enough it runs better on AMD with a tessellation override. But at least Proj Red optimized their engine on all hardware (except Kepler), kudos.

I used to be worried about GW as an AMD user, but its quite clear, those games ship broken full of bugs, and its mostly due to Ubisoft. It's best to steer clear of Ubi's games for a few months before the patches fixes issues, regardless of your GPU hardware.

FC4, Watchdogs, AC.... Looks more like a crappy developer than anything to me.

 

[geoxile]

Then I hope amd does their own version of GW and makes their branded games a mess on nv hardware. Then you will have to play on console as it will be the only platform without issues. Think about that...

They should. It would help them sell cards if they had a series of good games in which AMD cards beat the hell out of Nvidia cards.

 

[Zstream]

They should. It would help them sell cards if they had a series of good games in which AMD cards beat the hell out of Nvidia cards.

*facepalm*

 

[chimaxi83]

They should. It would help them sell cards if they had a series of good games in which AMD cards beat the hell out of Nvidia cards.

Sorry, but hell no. Gameworks needs to die, and AMD needs to keep out of that realm of BS.

 

[flopper]

My name is Fury, Radeon fury.
Cant believe this rumor and such stuff will soon be over.
what to do then?
Play games on the Fury

 

[tential]

Tential, if you value gameworks so much, did you know that FC4 had broken SLI for months after release? Major game-breaking bugs relating to rendering glitches.

WatchDogs didn't have good SLI scaling at all and stuttered horribly with SLI.

ACU was bug ridden, missing textures, floating objects..

Witcher 3, the GW HairWorks is an utter joke. Crippling performance for some fluff. Funny enough it runs better on AMD with a tessellation override. But at least Proj Red optimized their engine on all hardware (except Kepler), kudos.

I used to be worried about GW as an AMD user, but its quite clear, those games ship broken full of bugs, and its mostly due to Ubisoft. It's best to steer clear of Ubi's games for a few months before the patches fixes issues, regardless of your GPU hardware.

Well those are just examples in which gameworks worked poorly for both vendors. Usually nvidia has an advantage in its own gameworks suite (seriously how do you have a disadvantage in something you create nvidia?).

Don't act like I haven't bashed these titles continously too.

I still holds though that currently nvidia has had more titles come out in which they've had a hand in development compared to amd which is not good for amd since when nvidia has a hand in the development it usually ends badly for amd if not both vendors.

 

[tential]

Then I hope amd does their own version of GW and makes their branded games a mess on nv hardware. Then you will have to play on console as it will be the only platform without issues. Think about that...

I wish gameworks died but that's the ideal world. Like I've tried to explain, I don't believe that the luxury buyer of gpus really cares about the intricacies of this stuff though.
They'll just pick up nvidia cards because it works better on average on more titles than amd cards since nvidia pushes gameworks and amd doesn't have a competitor.

You guys seem to think I'm pushing nvidia, but I'm stating an issue amd is going to have competing. If you don't think it's an issue that's Ok, but the majority of users I see in far more casual forums don't care and will purchase nvidia until amd catches up and figures out methods of dealing with some of these issues.

 

[Azix]

https://twitter.com/AMDGaming/status/607966701397884928

Our E3 livecast on June 16th at 9 a.m. PT is going to be full of surprises, you won't want to miss it! #AMD300 http://******/O29jd

hopefully good surprises. Hopefully surprises relative to some rumours

 

[Skurge]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kp1GrjcJSxo

 

[piesquared]

AMD's ace in the hole is DX12, Vulcan, Metal and Mantle, which is probably why they are waiting to release close to Win10. - Apple sure seems to be using more and more AMD hardware lately. - Perhaps AMD said, 'OK eNV, you want to play that game? Here's Mantle 2.0'. Of course this wouldn't sabotage the competition (or their own hardware), but it could sure give some nice surprises to Radeon owners.

 

[LTC8K6]

My name is Fury, Radeon fury.
Cant believe this rumor and such stuff will soon be over.
what to do then?
Play games on the Fury

That will depend on how soon we can get our greedy little hands on them after the announcement.

 

[Lepton87]

Thank you. Like right now, I'm looking at buying a Fury X.
If my income doubled?

I'd already have two Titan X in SLI

Thing is, AMD's value proposition fades away as you move towards the high end and the buyers have more and more disposable income. I see it as a huge problem for the Fury X in the premium market where the buyers have more money they may simply purchase Nvidia because Nvidia is more in with the devs, has better/more software features and better/faster driver support.
One can cite gameworks as a reason why AMD struggles but when a person spends (just hypothetical price now), $850 on a graphics card, they don't care that AMD doesn't get access to Gameworks games. If that's such a large issue, they may just spend the extra $150 (Which at that price point isn't much), and get the Titan X. Even if the Titan X is slower, and more expensive, the better support and also lets not even forget resale value too.

I'm not knocking AMD, I'm just saying that I wonder if they've put extra effort into the driver/software side of things to alleviate those concerns for the high end buyer.

There's a lot more I want to get into, but I just see that as a large problem for AMD on the high end. Gameworks especially is a large hurdle for them to jump over.

Yeah great support, I guess that's why my Titans went from about as fast as 290X CF to 30% slower.

 

[Boundless]

I really hope these new graphics cards from AMD are competitive with Nvidia's lineup. No one benefits (we, rather) when options are limited.

 

[RussianSensation]

Yeah great support, I guess that's why my Titans went from about as fast as 290X CF to 30% slower.

It's not that bad. I see 12% slower [(158-180)/180 = -12.2%)

The performance is still decent compared to 290s but what makes it bad is the Titans cost $2000 brand new and R9 290s/290Xs were $800/$1100. But that's more a lesson that $1K flagship cards are not worth buying if anything.

 

[tential]

I really hope these new graphics cards from AMD are competitive with Nvidia's lineup. No one benefits (we, rather) when options are limited.

Well I consider amds current lineup to be very competitive.

The thing is, we need the market as a whole to find amds new lineup to be competitive.

 

[JDG1980]

hopefully good surprises. Hopefully surprises relative to some rumours

Well, I'm surprised they had the balls to rebrand Pitcairn yet again.

(And we know the R7 370 render leaked today is indeed Pitcairn because of the CrossFire fingers on the card, which would be completely unnecessary on a GPU with GCN 1.1 or better.)

 

[Lepton87]

It's not that bad. I see 12% slower [(158-180)/180 = -12.2%)

The performance is still decent compared to 290s but what makes it bad is the Titans cost $2000 brand new and R9 290s/290Xs were $800/$1100. But that's more a lesson that $1K flagship cards are not worth buying if anything.

I had only the newest games in mind The wither 3 runs horribly on Kepler

 

[3DVagabond]

They should. It would help them sell cards if they had a series of good games in which AMD cards beat the hell out of Nvidia cards.

Why do we have to keep having this discussion? Please go find to the Gameworks thread if anyone wants to talk about Gameworks. I'm sure that it has already been discussed long and hard in that thread (As well as many others that get dragged off topic by it).

 

[3DVagabond]

It's not that bad. I see 12% slower [(158-180)/180 = -12.2%)

The performance is still decent compared to 290s but what makes it bad is the Titans cost $2000 brand new and R9 290s/290Xs were $800/$1100. But that's more a lesson that $1K flagship cards are not worth buying if anything.

It's not like the 780 ti fared any better. People paid more (substantially) and are now getting less (sometimes substantially).

Also, games where crossfire scaling is good (most) it is probably ~30%. I'm not sure about the bench you posted on the mix of games.

 

[Azix]

Well, I'm surprised they had the balls to rebrand Pitcairn yet again.

(And we know the R7 370 render leaked today is indeed Pitcairn because of the CrossFire fingers on the card, which would be completely unnecessary on a GPU with GCN 1.1 or better.)

That's what wccf and other sites said. Was blurry as hell tho so I wasn't sure. can't really say its rebrand till we get information but if its $135 and performs well I don't see the problem. Sure we all like shiny new things, but ultimately what matters is performance and price. I'm not fool enough to buy a 750ti if the r7 370 is faster, same price or cheaper and offers dx 12. Not on weekdays anyway.

Even less likely if the 370 is on glofo

 

[Kippa]

Physically how big do you think the gpu chip will be for the 390X? Possibly really huge?

 

[3DVagabond]

Physically how big do you think the gpu chip will be for the 390X? Possibly really huge?

The 390X should be the same as Hawaii, 438²mm.

Or do you mean Fury?

Some people have estimated it at ~600²mm from this pic.

 

[Despoiler]

The 390X should be the same as Hawaii, 438²mm.

Or do you mean Fury?

Some people have estimated it at ~600²mm from this pic.

You know I just noticed how nice the lapping is on Fury. Seriously mirror finish.

 

[soccerballtux]

Some are so eager to play the rebrand card, so dedicated to troll, it's amazing :whiste:

haha