What will be AMD'S next Move?

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

AtenRa

Lifer
Feb 2, 2009
14,003
3,362
136
I don't see a single "R9 285 owner's thread" here. OTOH we seem to have a rather active one on the for the 970/980.

I didnt know GPU owners threads on AT Forum represent Global GPU Volumes :rolleyes:

If the 285 couldn't get buzz at $250 when 780 Ti performance cost $600, what makes you think it's getting it now when you can get 780 Ti performance at $330?

People in the market for $200 to $249 GPUs are going to chose between GTX760 and R9 285. I dont see why GTX970 at $329 is relevant here.
 

3DVagabond

Lifer
Aug 10, 2009
11,951
204
106
This makes sense, thanks. Good post.

So a full distributed-computing load, would basically revert Maxwell to being quite a bit more inefficient, due to all computational units being utilized, and not being allowed to power-gate them.

The way I define efficiency is only using the power needed to accomplish the task. This seems to be exactly how it's working with Maxwell. It seems that people who assumed that Maxwell used very little power while fully stressed were wrong, but it is using power very efficiently by not wasting power when it's not fully stressed.

I didnt know GPU owners threads on AT Forum represent Global GPU Volumes

Agreed. It seems to only reflect forum marketing.
 
Last edited:

DominionSeraph

Diamond Member
Jul 22, 2009
8,386
32
91
People in the market for $200 to $249 GPUs are going to chose between GTX760 and R9 285. I dont see why GTX970 at $329 is relevant here.

The ones who receive good advice will be told to ditch the idea of a crappy 285 and to save up the $329. That's why the GTX 970 is relevant here.
 

3DVagabond

Lifer
Aug 10, 2009
11,951
204
106
The ones who receive good advice will be told to ditch the idea of a crappy 285 and to save up the $329. That's why the GTX 970 is relevant here.

That's a pretty big price jump over 30%. I think people who have $330 to spend on a gpu wouldn't be looking at the 285 in the first place.
 

DominionSeraph

Diamond Member
Jul 22, 2009
8,386
32
91
That's a pretty big price jump over 30%. I think people who have $330 to spend on a gpu wouldn't be looking at the 285 in the first place.

The difference in a build is going to be 10%. The 970 is worth making sacrifices elsewhere to try to fit it in where the same would never be true for 285 --> $600 780 Ti.

780 Ti performance at $329 is a game changer.
 

AtenRa

Lifer
Feb 2, 2009
14,003
3,362
136
The difference in a build is going to be 10%. The 970 is worth making sacrifices elsewhere to try to fit it in where the same would never be true for 285 --> $600 780 Ti.

780 Ti performance at $329 is a game changer.

I assume you are talking about OC performance because at default GTX 970 is not equal to GTX780Ti.

Also, i could argue that an OC R9 285 will have 90% or more the performance of the GTX970 at almost 30% cheaper price. Now the GTX970 becomes irrelevant doesnt it ?? :rolleyes:

Not everyone will spend $329 for a GPU, the faster people realize that the better.
 

DominionSeraph

Diamond Member
Jul 22, 2009
8,386
32
91
You know, i could make the same argument for what ever price segment i would like up and down. But reality doesnt work like that, just ask Intel why it has so many Core i5 from $182 to $243. By your logic they would only need one CPU at $243 :p

Intel has OEM markets. Note how the 4690K gets all the attention from gamers, and how we skip right past all the other i5's. Those i5's are invisible in a world with the 4690k, just as the 285 is invisible in a world with the GTX 970.

You get an i3/FX-6300, or you get an i5 4690k. There is nothing in between.
You get a 270X/760, or you get a GTX 970. There is nothing in between.

Also, i could argue that an OC R9 285 will have 90% or more the performance of the GTX970 at almost 30% cheaper price.

I suppose if AMD pays you that well.
Any chance I can get in on this? I mean, if I could rake in a 290X and a FX-9590 just for advertising, I could sell those for enough for an i5 4690k and a GTX 970. AMD would be a pretty good value at that.
 
Last edited:

Cloudfire777

Golden Member
Mar 24, 2013
1,787
95
91
The ones who receive good advice will be told to ditch the idea of a crappy 285 and to save up the $329. That's why the GTX 970 is relevant here.
No doubt that would clearly be the smartest choice.

You get a 40-50% faster GPU plus it got a TDP of 150W instead of 190W.
 

AtenRa

Lifer
Feb 2, 2009
14,003
3,362
136
Intel has OEM markets. Note how the 4690K gets all the attention from gamers, and how we skip right past all the other i5's. Those i5's are invisible in a world with the 4690k, just as the 285 is invisible in a world with the GTX 970.

You get an i3/FX-6300, or you get an i5 4690k. There is nothing in between.
You get a 270X/760, or you get a GTX 970. There is nothing in between.

So AMD and NVIDIA doesnt sell GPUs to OEMs ??? :rolleyes:

How many times in the AT Forums locked Core i5 have been recommended in order to fit within the OPs budget ?? give me a brake mate, not everyone thinks and buys like you. Get over it.
 

KaRLiToS

Golden Member
Jul 30, 2010
1,918
11
81
Looks like this is truly a new GPU coming from AMD.
https://twitter.com/amd_roy/status/513467158316077057

Since GTX 980 beat R9 290X by 15-20%, I am positive that this is another GCN 1.x GPU with more cores than R9 290X with higher TDP.
Will be very interesting to see what comes from the AMD camp. Only 4 more days :)


15%-20% ???????? :hmm:

You mean more like ±10% and this is with the GTX 980 boost clock while the R9 290x is stock clock.

perfrel_5760.gif


perfrel_3840.gif
 
Feb 19, 2009
10,457
10
76
Looks like this is truly a new GPU coming from AMD.
https://twitter.com/amd_roy/status/513467158316077057

Since GTX 980 beat R9 290X by 15-20%, I am positive that this is another GCN 1.x GPU with more cores than R9 290X with higher TDP.
Will be very interesting to see what comes from the AMD camp. Only 4 more days :)

You know what would be ridiculous...

They release GCN 2.0 without any pre-leaks which nobody saw coming.

But its probably a rushed ~550mm2 GCN 1.2 "Super Tonga" @ 350W with >GTX 980 performance while running cool & quiet due to the LC (lets not forget, R295X2 has 2x R290X with only 1x 120mm AIO).
 

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
11,885
4,873
136
No doubt that would clearly be the smartest choice.
You get a 40-50% faster GPU plus it got a TDP of 150W instead of 190W.

The 9xx TDP is not 150W, that s the value of the average power used in games (177W for the 980) but is in no way its TDP, in this sense Nvidia did somewhat stretch the definition of TDP for marketing purposes, what you dont get is that the card will consume 240W-280W continuously if the GPU loading is held constant and at high values, how would this qualify as 150W TDP.??.

I explain grossly the kind of optimisation in function of the load, let s take 7 values of throughput from 0 to 100%, i put first the comsumption without optimisation as if it was a regular 780 and then the optimised power management.

0% 0W 0W

20% 40W 10W

40% 80W 40W

60% 120W 80W

80% 160W 120W

90% 180W 160W

100% 200W 200W
 

desprado

Golden Member
Jul 16, 2013
1,645
0
0
You know what would be ridiculous...

They release GCN 2.0 without any pre-leaks which nobody saw coming.

But its probably a rushed ~550mm2 GCN 1.2 "Super Tonga" @ 350W with >GTX 980 performance while running cool & quiet due to the LC (lets not forget, R295X2 has 2x R290X with only 1x 120mm AIO).
So right bro.If anything AMD was planning to release it would have been leaked by know like AMD R9 series and Nvidia GTX 7xx and 9xx series.Maybe they will just show there updated road map and an overclocked R9 290X.
 

Paul98

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2010
3,732
199
106
So if AMD adjusts its PowerTune similar to Maxwell we can see much better efficiency on new GCN also?
 

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
11,885
4,873
136
15%-20% ???????? :hmm:

You mean more like ±10% and this is with the GTX 980 boost clock while the R9 290x is stock clock.

The sapphire ocx are used as comparison because they have stable frequency, the 290x OCX is at 1040MHz and the 290 OCX at 1000MHz,
the regular 290/290X are in quiet mode, looking at thoses scores it is obvious that there s lot of noise about a few % advantage thanks to inflated frequencies, on this graph the regular 970 is at 1168Mhz and the equivalent 980 at 1137Mhz.

getgraphimg.php


http://www.hardware.fr/articles/928-20/recapitulatif-performances.html
 

Cloudfire777

Golden Member
Mar 24, 2013
1,787
95
91
15%-20% ???????? :hmm:

You mean more like ±10% and this is with the GTX 980 boost clock while the R9 290x is stock clock.

perfrel_5760.gif


perfrel_3840.gif

Oh here we go again.

Here is R9 290X on Uber mode vs GTX 980. GTX 980 is 15% faster. If you study enough reviews, you will find that in average, the findings point to 15%-20% above R9 290X.
NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-980-vs-Radeon-R9-290X.png



You know what would be ridiculous...

They release GCN 2.0 without any pre-leaks which nobody saw coming.

But its probably a rushed ~550mm2 GCN 1.2 "Super Tonga" @ 350W with >GTX 980 performance while running cool & quiet due to the LC (lets not forget, R295X2 has 2x R290X with only 1x 120mm AIO).

Well without a new architecture (GCN 2.0) they are forced to play the more cores, more TDP game they have been doing against Intel in the CPU space.
We already know a 28nm 500mm2+ GPU is coming from them. Its a sure sign toward a bigger R9 295 or R9 295X whatever they want to call it.
It could be a R9 295 since the 350mm2 listed below is Tonga. The other one is the Tonga version of R9 290X me thinks.
30+ more blocks than R9 285, whatever that is.

Synapse-Design-500mm-AMD-GPU.jpg
 
Last edited:

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
11,885
4,873
136
Oh here we go again.

Here is R9 290X on Uber mode vs GTX 980. GTX 980 is 15% faster. If you study enough reviews, you will find that in average, the findings point to 15%-20% above R9 290X.

The chart i posted above use 10 games at least while yours use 6, so wich one is the most relevant.?.

Edit : I just noticed the games used in your phony slide, well made...
 
Last edited:

RussianSensation

Elite Member
Sep 5, 2003
19,458
765
126
Not going to call out specific members here but for the last 8 months, nearly every single person here who is calling doom and gloom for AMD not once pointed out the following:

1) $350-400 after-market 290 made $450-500 3GB 780 irrelevant and even more so the $550 6GB version. Yet, I saw a total of 0 threads regarding the horrible value of 780 and how NV was doomed.

2) $700-800 after-market R9 290s such as Sapphire Tri-X solved temperature and noise levels of 290, while crushing a similarly priced 780Ti by 50-70% at 4K and multi-monitor. Essentially 970 SLI brings slightly faster performance for a bit less $$, but amazingly enough when AMD did this for nearly 1 year, somehow it went unnoticed.

3) When AMD brought the flexibility of running multiple displays in Eyefinity with different resolutions and unmatched 4K performance, it was also unnoticed but now with 3x DP 1.2 on 970/980, all you hear is how revolutionary NV's features are for 4K as if people have $ for triple 4K monitors.

4) This is arguably the most unusual position to me by NV fans - they rarely see the awesome value in AMD's products:

- Unlocked and stock/overclocked 6950s crushed 580 stock/overclocked especially at 1600p for a similar price
- 7950s overclocked crushed 680 overclocked for a similar price
- 290s absolutely crushed a 780Ti stock or OC vs. OC for a similar price

Vs.

970 SLI makes 290s obsolete but I cannot buy 2 NV cards for the price of AMD's flagship and beat it by 50-70% like 6950s, 7950s, 290s did to NV's flagship.

So while NV's 970s are awesome, this is nowhere near as impressive what AMD did with its 2nd best cards to NV's best I outlined above. From a performance point of view, 970 SLI isn't that much better than nearly 1 year old 290s.

Furthermore, while 970 is a star, 980 is grossly underwhelming. It is easily the worst generational improvement from NV ever for an x80 product. I get that it's not GM200 but at $549 and barely 7-10% faster than 780Ti, it won't be hard for AMD to match or beat that.

In the short term, all AMD needs to do is release a 15-20% faster card than 290X for $449 with LC and it's lights out for 980. These calls of a 350W card are hilarious. Watercooled chip will use 40-50W less power and a more mature 28nm with tweaks will allow AMD to release a card 15-20% faster than 290X at 280W. Add a popular game bundle and they are back long enough for 20nm to mature.

Also, I read comments that 285 needs to come down to $149 and 290 to $249. That's really funny considering the inferior 760 has a $219 MSRP. I see that NV's marketing is working wonders as people are falling on their knees over it and exaggerating how efficient the 980 is when it's really using 180W not 160W. On the other hand, the same people are inflating 290's power usage and extrapolating some outrageous 350W for its successor.

You know how many ppl will take a card with similar performance to a 980 but for $100 less even if it uses 80-100W more power? A lot, because not everyone pays $100s on their electricity bill. Similarly if AMD releases a 550mm2 390X that's priced at $499 with LC and it beats 980 by even 10%, even with 80-100W higher usage, a lot of gamers will want the fastest single GPU. Perf/watt rules 980 right now because it also happens to be the fastest single GPU. But if AMD beats in in performance by 10% or more and slightly undercuts it, people will focus in the value and performance of AMD's card.

I will likely be getting 970s for fun unless AMD has something better in the next 1 month but 970s are nowhere near as impressive vs. 290s compared to what 290s did to a 780Ti for nearly 1 year. But unfortunately NV fans never acknowledge the awesome value of AMD CF or the incredible price/performance value AMD cards had since 4870 days. Yes, for $329 970 is a great card but it isn't anything spectacular for anyone who has been getting 80-90% of NV's flagship performance for nearly half the price with AMD for the last 5 years.

Also, I find it very odd that the doom and gloom comments don't take into account that 290 is a 1 year old product while 980 just came out. No one would call the end of NV when 7970 destroyed the 580 before giving NV a chance to respond.
 
Last edited:

Mand

Senior member
Jan 13, 2014
664
0
0
Yet, I saw a total of 0 threads regarding the horrible value of 780 and how NV was doomed.

There is a difference, though. Nvidia is outselling AMD nearly two to one. A weakness in one particular product is much less threatening to them as a result. Damage to Nvidia would bring parity - the same damage to AMD could bring complete failure.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.