Support NeoGAF

[dr_rus]

They can't afford that. They need to substantially outclass Nvidia's Pascal to regain marketshare and relevance within PC gaming.

On quite the contrary, doing a rebrand of GCN to Polaris while shrinking the architecture from 28 to 14nm and getting the 2.5x perf/watt from this shrink sounds like something which they can afford. What I have my doubts they would be able to afford is to actually build a new architecture with Polaris which would be on the same level of difference to GCN as Pascal will be to Kepler - considering that this is the same timeframe of new architecture launches on NV's side. On the other hand GCN is a really nice architecture which doesn't need much updating even today but I hope that they'll support FL12_1 in Polaris at the very least.

It's obviously not. When's the last time they've actually done a rebrand on a high end gpu? 290x wasn't a rebrand. Fury wasn't a rebrand. Repositioning your former high end chip into the midrange isn't a bad thing for consumers, which is exactly what the 390/390x is.

Too bad that Polaris isn't a GPU.

 

[Hypron]

those rebrands all beat nvidias latest quite handily

They are a couple % more powerful but get completely trounced in other areas (power consumption, heat, noise).

 

[tuxfool]

On quite the contrary, doing a rebrand of GCN to Polaris while shrinking the architecture from 28 to 14nm and getting the 2.5x perf/watt from this shrink sounds like something which they can afford. What I have my doubts they would be able to afford is to actually build a new architecture with Polaris which would be on the same level of difference to GCN as Pascal will be to Kepler - considering that this is the same timeframe of new architecture launches on NV's side. On the other hand GCN is a really nice architecture which doesn't need much updating even today but I hope that they'll support FL12_1 in Polaris at the very least.

What was previously stated, from AMD slides was that Arctic Islands was going to be GCN 2.0. Sounds like what they are doing is rebranding that into Polaris.

 

[finalflame]

Rebrand or not the R9 300 series are very good GPUs that match Nvidia's current offering in performance. The Fury line does not do as well as I thought.

Mostly match, at much worse efficiency and thermals, unfortunately. I suppose for some, power draw is not a concern, but AMD not being able to reach similar performance at similar power levels just screams incompetence. I want to see them actually match nVidia, or surpass them, before saying they're doing a good job at all.

those rebrands all beat nvidias latest quite handily

No, they hardly "beat them quite handily". They trade punches throughout, depending on which price range you're looking at, but nVidia still comes out mostly ahead with better thermals, noise, and efficiency. AMD is not matched, or their marketshare wouldn't be at 18% vs nVidia's 82% in desktop GPUs.

 

[Oxn]

They are a couple % more powerful but get completely trounced in other areas (power consumption, heat, noise).

And looks.

 

[tuxfool]

They are a couple % more powerful but get completely trounced in other areas (power consumption, heat, noise).

Sure. Not so much noise any more though.

 

[Burgess_101]

I'm locked in now with my freesync monitor, give me something good AMD.

I love my 390 though, I trust AMD to do something great with these next series of cards.

 

[jaypah]

I've been flip-flopping between the 2 since I started PC gaming. I was ready to swing back to team green for the next upgrade (VR is hungry) but I may wait and see what AMD is doing. My 290x is still pulling its weight so I guess I'm not in a rush.

 

[Oxn]

Im making my upgrade end of 2016, with a super high end single card. Lets see who will wow me.

fury X2 or 1080 Ti

 

[tuxfool]

I've been flip-flopping between the 2 since I started PC gaming. I was ready to swing back to team green for the next upgrade (VR is hungry) but I may wait and see what AMD is doing. My 290x is still pulling its weight so I guess I'm not in a rush.

Seemingly, AMD is what Oculus favours. This possibly suggests their preference to LiquidVR.

 

[Kezen]

Dont think all but majority yes. Nvidia's mindshare is simply too much for AMD.

Are you shifting the blame here ? AMD are everything but strangers to their current situation, let's not try to claim that things would not change whatever AMD's moves are.
Loser's mindset. I hope you don't work for AMD.

AMD have been late to react to Nvidia's graphic cards, they should have immediately countered the 900 series with their R300 series. Their failure to do that shaped the current landscape.

The truth is that it is up to them to shake things up.

Even if Polaris is better than Pascal, I dont think there will be any significant change in tides.

I disagree with that outlook. Essentially this is saying that it's not AMD's fault and I think this is way too naive of an opinion to hold.
Nvidia worked hard to get where they are in terms of GPUs, nothing prevents AMD from fighting back.

I know you are an AMD fan and that's why you should not try to be an apologist, you should kick them in the nuts. Blaming the circumstances just does not work and it goes without saying the same applies to Nvidia. They have noone but themselves to blame for their underwhelming performance in some price brackets, they should have done better.
If async compute is such a jewel then Nvidia will take a beating or two, that's it. They probably opened their shutters once in a while and they knew consoles are powered by the GCN therefore advanced features of said arch would be used in PC multiplats.
They should have seen that coming, assuming gains will be as significant as claimed. But even disregarding async compute for a moment it's up to them to man up and adapt to this new environment, they need to be as good as AMD where it matters due to consoles dictating the technological roadmap.

 

[Oxn]

Are you shifting the blame here ? AMD are everything but strangers to their current situation, let's not try to claim that things would not change whatever AMD's moves are.
Loser's mindset. I hope you don't work for AMD.

AMD have been late to react to Nvidia's graphic cards, they should have immediately countered the 900 series with their R300 series. Their failure to do that shaped the current landscape.

The truth is that it is up to them to shake things up.


I disagree with that outlook. Essentially this is saying that it's not AMD's fault and I think this is way too naive of an opinion to hold.
Nvidia worked hard to get where they are in terms of GPUs, nothing prevents AMD from fighting back.

Nvidia is the Apple of the GPU world.

 

[icecold1983]

They are a couple % more powerful but get completely trounced in other areas (power consumption, heat, noise).

if by a couple you mean 10 to 30 in recent games then yeah. amds cards power ahead in virtually all titles not hamstrung by last gen development. nvidias architecture is not suited nearly as well to modern compute based engines, which will be almost all games soon enough.

 

[AmyS]

I'm confused, is Polaris a new name for Arctic Islands, or are both names are correct, like one being a GPU name, one being an architecture name, or what?

Arctic Islands / Polaris.

The biggest GPU in this family is meant to be Greenland.

 

[ZOONAMI]

I really hope that this won't be another rebrand on AMD's part.

On quite the contrary, doing a rebrand of GCN to Polaris while shrinking the architecture from 28 to 14nm and getting the 2.5x perf/watt from this shrink sounds like something which they can afford. What I have my doubts they would be able to afford is to actually build a new architecture with Polaris which would be on the same level of difference to GCN as Pascal will be to Kepler - considering that this is the same timeframe of new architecture launches on NV's side. On the other hand GCN is a really nice architecture which doesn't need much updating even today but I hope that they'll support FL12_1 in Polaris at the very least.



Too bad that Polaris isn't a GPU.

What? We were responding to your original post saying hopefully this isn't another rebrand. Obviously Polaris is an architecture. Any GPU using Polaris architecture will not be a rebrand. Your response post doesn't even make sense.

Edit: I see, if they are rebranding GCN into Polaris, I guess there is a possibility of rebrand using "Polaris" architecture. That seems unlikely. If Polaris is GCN 2.0, any GPU with that architecture would not be a rebrand though. And as myself and others have stated, if you're rebranding high end gpus into the midrange and lowering prices, that isn't a bad thing at least from a performance perspective.

 

[jmga]

I think AMD can have a future in Steam Machines thanks to Vulkan and their Linux open source strategy for GCN 1.2 and above. I can see them joining forces with Valve/LunarG to maintain high performance and open source Vulkan and OpenGL implementations.

 

[tuxfool]

I'm confused, is Polaris a new name for Arctic Islands, or are both names are correct, like one being a GPU name, one being an architecture name, or what?

Arctic Islands / Polaris.

The biggest GPU in this family is meant to be Greenland.

It is unclear. My interpretation is that it is a rebrand of GCN 2.0 to Polaris.

 

[jaypah]

Seemingly, AMD is what Oculus favours. This possibly suggests their preference to LiquidVR.

Thanks tux. Yeah I noticed that after a while but I'm still not sure if I'm going Rift or Vive! Mmm, hardware decisions. Best problem to have.

 

[pestul]

I know Nvidia has a huge lead.. but the PC videocard market is fickle. If AMD actually produces a great series that holds on to the performance / feature lead for a reasonable length of time, many will switch back to team red.

 

[Kezen]

On quite the contrary, doing a rebrand of GCN to Polaris while shrinking the architecture from 28 to 14nm and getting the 2.5x perf/watt from this shrink sounds like something which they can afford. What I have my doubts they would be able to afford is to actually build a new architecture with Polaris which would be on the same level of difference to GCN as Pascal will be to Kepler - considering that this is the same timeframe of new architecture launches on NV's side. On the other hand GCN is a really nice architecture which doesn't need much updating even today but I hope that they'll support FL12_1 in Polaris at the very least.

Rebrand or not it does not matter. Performance and to a lesser extent perf/watt efficiency is the only relevant metric. Considering most AAA stuff need to run on consoles for budgetary reasons AMD don't have to panic, those games will have to heavily consider the GCN's strengths and weaknesses. Do you believe those games would be build around the latter ?

Mostly match, at much worse efficiency and thermals, unfortunately. I suppose for some, power draw is not a concern, but AMD not being able to reach similar performance at similar power levels just screams incompetence. I want to see them actually match nVidia, or surpass them, before saying they're doing a good job at all.

Yeah, perf/watt is on Nvidia's side. However, thermals can be perfectly fine on non-reference designs. Under 70°C load with little noise (MSI).

Nvidia is the Apple of the GPU world.

No. The FX series is there to attest to that, when they screw up people look at what the other guy has to offer.
There is not fatality here. If this is AMD's mentality they might as well quit right now.

 

[icecold1983]

Rebrand or not it does not matter. Performance and to a lesser extent perf/watt efficiency is the only relevant metric. Considering most AAA stuff need to run on consoles for budgetary reasons AMD don't have to panic, those games will have to heavily consider the GCN's strengths and weaknesses. Do you believe those games would be build around the latter ?


Yeah, perf/watt is on Nvidia's side. However, thermals can be perfectly fine on non-reference designs. Under 70°C load with little noise (MSI).


No. The FX series is there to attest to that, when they screw up people look at what the other guy has to offer.
There is not fatality here.

power draw only matters if your product is as fast or faster. why anyone would buy a slower product because it uses less power is beyond me. its completely transparent to the consumer.

 

[Kezen]

power draw only matters if your product is as fast or faster. why anyone would buy a slower product because it uses less power is beyond me. its completely transparent to the consumer.

We can't apply our own preferences onto others. Some PC gamers are seemingly very concerned about power consumption. I would not put myself in that category.

Regardless, the perf/watt of most AMD cards is not bad. The R9 380/380X score well there.

 

[icecold1983]

We can't apply our own preferences onto others. Some PC gamers are seemingly very concerned about power consumption. I would not put myself in that category.

Regardless, the perf/watt of most AMD cards is not bad. The R9 380/380X score well there.

IMO this accounts for maybe 5% of the people who claim they are. i think the other 95% just use it when its in their favor to suit their own illogical gpu biases.

 

[wachie]

Are you shifting the blame here ? AMD are everything but strangers to their current situation, let's not try to claim that things would not change whatever AMD's moves are.
Loser's mindset. I hope you don't work for AMD.

AMD have been late to react to Nvidia's graphic cards, they should have immediately countered the 900 series with their R300 series. Their failure to do that shaped the current landscape.

The truth is that it is up to them to shake things up.

Sorry, what? Stop being so sensitive. AMD screwed up big time, they totally dug the grave they are in today.

 

[Kezen]

IMO this accounts for maybe 5% of the people who claim they are. i think the other 95% just use it when its in their favor to suit their own illogical gpu biases.

No idea really, I have not discussed the matter with anyone in particular to try to understand their rationale, I've just come across some who would chose a GTX 960 instead of a R9 285/380, that seemed strange to me but alright.

I won't claim bias.

Sorry, what? Stop being so sensitive. AMD screwed up big time, they totally dug the grave they are in today.

Sensitive ? No, abrasive, brash ? Surely.
I was not voluntarily attacking you in case that is what you got from my post, you have your AMD preference and that is fine.

AMD can get back in the game, it only depends on them.

 

[zoozilla]

They are a couple % more powerful but get completely trounced in other areas (power consumption, heat, noise).

AMD usually wins as far as price-for-performance goes, though. And that's a pretty big thing for a consumer product.

It's too bad that right now the price gap isn't so significant that people are willing to move away from Nvidia.

 

[E-Cat]

Polaris is not a 'post-GCN' architecture, but a 'GCN optimization'.

 

[AmyS]

It is unclear. My interpretation is that it is a rebrand of GCN 2.0 to Polaris.

That makes sense.

 

[blastprocessor]

I'm looking to replace my 660GTX. I wonder how many TFLOPS i'll get for around 130 watts with these new cards.

 

[thematic]

aside from power/performance, I hoping they also focus on their open source "eye candy" features like Physx. with all consoles using their GPU, I think most PC port will have a huge chance using the features if they light and good enough for consoles.

And yeah, I chose nVidia because their Physx. I love eye candies!

 

[NeOak]

Polaris is not a 'post-GCN' architecture, but a 'GCN optimization'.

GCN 2.0 with a new codename.

 

[icecold1983]

No idea really, I have not discussed the matter with anyone in particular to try to understand their rationale, I've just come across some would chose a GTX 960 instead of a R9 285/380, that seemed strange to me but alright.

I won't claim bias.


Sensitive ? No, abrasive, brash ? Surely.
I was not voluntarily attacking you in case that is what you got from my post, you have your preferences and that is fine.

AMD can get back in the game, it only depends on them.

yeah my numbers arent factual, i just cant fathom any logical reason why power draw would matter. the only rationale ive heard people throw out is "i save a few bucks a year on my power bill" which is ridiculous. its absolutely bias. ill never understand how people can be biased to a hardware company. heres a very recent comparison of the 960 to said cards as well as the new 380x.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-amd-radeon-r9-380x-review

you would be a fool to purchase a 960.

 

[kabel]

aside from power/performance, I hoping they also focus on their open source "eye candy" features like Physx. with all consoles using their GPU, I think most PC port will have a huge chance using the features if they light and good enough for consoles.

Do you mean TressFX?


PhysX is Nvidia.

 

[Kezen]

yeah my numbers arent factual, i just cant fathom any logical reason why power draw would matter. the only rationale ive heard people throw out is "i save a few bucks a year on my power bill" which is ridiculous. its absolutely bias. ill never understand how people can be biased to a hardware company. heres a very recent comparison of the 960 to said cards as well as the new 380x.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-amd-radeon-r9-380x-review

you would be a fool to purchase a 960.

I never pretended to be paragon of objectivity but I would not buy Nvidia if I only had 200-250€ to blow on a graphics card, power draw matters very little to me.

 

[icecold1983]

I never pretended to be paragon of objectivity but I would not buy Nvidia if I only had 200-250€ to blow on a graphics card, power draw matters very little to me.

my use of you was just general, none of that was directed at you

 

[E-Cat]

I'm confused, is Polaris a new name for Arctic Islands, or are both names are correct, like one being a GPU name, one being an architecture name, or what?

Arctic Islands / Polaris.

The biggest GPU in this family is meant to be Greenland.

Arctic Islands = GPU family
Greenland = flagship GPU of Arctic Islands
Polaris = rebranded GCN architecture used in the Arctic Islands GPU family

 

[Kezen]

my use of you was just general, none of that was directed at you

It does not matter if it was, we are on a video game board so feel tree to target practice if you wish.

 

[thematic]

Do you mean TressFX?


PhysX is Nvidia.

I mean their open source "eye candy" features, just like Physx from nVidia

And yes, so far only TressFX got good enough publicity
hopefully their new open source initiative can at least match nVidia's Physx

 

[wachie]

Sensitive ? No, abrasive, brash ? Surely.
I was not voluntarily attacking you in case that is what you got from my post, you have your AMD preference and that is fine.

AMD can get back in the game, it only depends on them.

I have no preference, zero preference when it comes to GPUs. All my GPUs have been Nvidia, performance per dollar is my absolute preference.

Just because I don't shit on AMD at every chance I get like Durenle or whatever doesn't make then my preference.

 

[Kezen]

I have no preference, zero preference when it comes to GPUs. All my GPUs have been Nvidia, performance per dollar is my absolute preference.
Just because I don't shit on AMD at every chance I get like Durenle or whatever doesn't make then my preference.

Hum. I sure believe that.


Although to be fair I recall you (or someone whose views align almost perfectly with yours ) with a G-Sync avatar from my lurking days so there may be truth to your claims.

As for myself my Nvidia preference notwithstanding I have no problem recommending AMD to various friends IRL or people on this very board.

 

[Renekton]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcF36_qMd8M

Some factual errors, but overall Nvidia is a jerk.

 

[Herne]

Another AMD thread, another mud-slinging fest.

Looking forward to GCN2.0/Polaris (I'm assuming this is what it is).

 

[dr_rus]

What was previously stated, from AMD slides was that Arctic Islands was going to be GCN 2.0. Sounds like what they are doing is rebranding that into Polaris.

The big question is how much of a change this "GCN 2.0" even is to what we have in Fiji right now.

What? We were responding to your original post saying hopefully this isn't another rebrand. Obviously Polaris is an architecture. Any GPU using Polaris architecture will not be a rebrand. Your response post doesn't even make sense.

Edit: I see, if they are rebranding GCN into Polaris, I guess there is a possibility of rebrand using "Polaris" architecture. That seems unlikely. If Polaris is GCN 2.0, any GPU with that architecture would not be a rebrand though. And as myself and others have stated, if you're rebranding high end gpus into the midrange and lowering prices, that isn't a bad thing at least from a performance perspective.

A rebrand of GCN to Polaris is a rebrand. I don't know why you're talking about GPUs as neither is a GPU.

Rebrand or not it does not matter. Performance and to a lesser extent perf/watt efficiency is the only relevant metric. Considering most AAA stuff need to run on consoles for budgetary reasons AMD don't have to panic, those games will have to heavily consider the GCN's strengths and weaknesses. Do you believe those games would be build around the latter ?

You're right to a degree - it does matter if what Polaris will end up being is just Fiji's GCN 1.2 + HDMI 2.0/HDR stuff + 14LPE production node. This simply won't be enough as such an architecture will have troubles competing even with a theoretical Maxwell@16FF+ and we know already that Pascal will be bigger than that. So I really hope that this Polaris will actually improve in perf/watt not only because of a process switch but because they will actually rebuild the architecture like NV did with Kepler and Maxwell. Having 12_1 support would be nice as well as this would mean that all graphical h/w (NV, Intel and AMD) will have the same baseline capabilities.

 

[wachie]

Hum. I sure believe that.


Although to be fair I recall you (or someone whose views align almost perfectly with yours ) with a G-Sync avatar from my lurking days so there may be truth to your claims.

As for myself my Nvidia preference notwithstanding I have no problem recommending AMD to various friends IRL or people on this very board.

Care to share via PM? Don't want to go more off topic

 

[onQ123]

My guess is that they will have the Arm SoC on the GPU like Xbox One but it will be upgraded.


http://www.armtechforum.com.cn/2014...ogethertoDriveDownSystemPowerandBandwidth.pdf

 

[PFD]

Pascal is 2x as efficient as Maxwell right?

Nvidia PR and marketing is usually full of shit. I imagine it will be around 30% better in real world scenarios

 

[wachie]

My guess is that they will have the Arm SoC on the GPU like Xbox One but it will be upgraded.


http://www.armtechforum.com.cn/2014...ogethertoDriveDownSystemPowerandBandwidth.pdf

So far we only have vague confirmation that Pascal will have a co-processor to help out with the NV-Link? I could be wring.

 

[E-Cat]

Pascal is 2x as efficient as Maxwell right?

Sure, but the trick is NVIDIA won't release "Big Daddy" Pascal until 2017.

 

[Kezen]

Care to share via PM? Don't want to go more off topic

Done.

So far we only have vague confirmation that Pascal will have a co-processor to help out with the NV-Link? I could be wring.

Won't be used on the gaming segment anyway, but for sure 80gb/s between the CPU and the GPU sounds great.

I recall many devs not being happy with the PCI-E bus on PC. That could perhaps help.

 

[Mindman]

Maybe so, but it's people's mindsets they've got to change.
A lot of damage has been done.

In your mind, maybe.