OH SHIT ITS HAPPENING

OH SHIT ITS HAPPENING
wccftech.com/amd-r9-480x-470x-specs-allegedly-revealed/
experience.amd.com/amdwebinar?sf26238011=1

Other urls found in this thread:

arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/04/amd-promises-three-new-gaming-processors-coming-soon-is-one-for-xbox/
vrworld.com/2016/05/11/amd-confirms-sony-playstation-neo-based-zen-polaris/
wccftech.com
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

oh and thats just the mobile stuff

Late may early june polaris Desktop

>wccftech.com

>currytech
Notable for being less reliable than a random number generator

keep dreaming, amdead

AMD is going to be taking shit over. Polaris is going to be in Graphics cards, Xbox, Nintendo NX and Playstation Neo.

"AMD expects $1.5B in future revenue for three new gaming processors"
-arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/04/amd-promises-three-new-gaming-processors-coming-soon-is-one-for-xbox/

>when op is obs ucl shill
>no one in enngrand cares about KCL apart from UCL

i agree with titmonster

Who is this semen demen

>Polaris is going to be in Graphics cards, Xbox, Nintendo NX and Playstation Neo.
So its 5 years old outdated low end garbage?

Also on a side note while the revenue on the console market may be high, the profit margin is only the small royalty they get per card which is ~

Money is money once a profit is made. Outdated technology? No, it was Sony or Microsoft who requested the new FinFet chip design and paid the cost.

>polaris 10
Only real deal here is this. While the polaris 11 is a pretty efficient card, I'm not really looking for side grades.

Possible Polaris 10 upgrade from 7950 looks fine. I'd need more data points from Vega and 1070/1060 to make my final choice.

If Polaris 10, delivers 1070's performance at $100 less, I'd be fine with that. If its in between 1070/1060 but priced in between, neutral. Still Vega needs to come out faster.

You arent going to be able to fit a 200$ gpu(already low tier) in a pc build that should only cost ~300$ retail and will be sold as at a profit.
Yeah polaris will be low end tech for 100$ gpus if it is going to be used in consoles.

Heres to wishing i got AMD stock a while ago

Not the exact same chips they are different variants. You seem to have a lot of questions how about you have a read.

vrworld.com/2016/05/11/amd-confirms-sony-playstation-neo-based-zen-polaris/

The $300 price point is probably pretty legit for a 480X, and AMD is mostly going to be touting DX12 performance when they announce it, they'll be like

"titan X performance at $300! *under DX12"

The profit margin for consoles is very small.

Nvidia focus on professional solutions and makes more profit out of it.

Nvidia can't do the consoles as they don't have X86 CPUs

>If Polaris 10, delivers 1070's performance at $100 less, I'd be fine with that.


AMDtards are really totally deluded, thinking AMD is a holy cow that you can milk for free.

Retards stay retards.

>titan X performance at $300! *under DX12

And what is the problem with that?

Yeah they will be based on the retail chips, simply underclocked and some cores removed, just like what is currently in PS4/X1.
But they sure as hell cant take a card that can compete with a 1080/980 ti and castrate it so much that it fits in a console.

If pascal still doesn't support A-sync it'll be able to match it's performance in DX12

DX12 still isn't really here, and the 390 already has shown to make the titan X under DX12 in Hitman

It wouldn't really be hard to make a semi-custom chip to be low power but also still deliver solid 1080p performance

polaris 11 actually sounds pretty good, hype for this shit

No, because it makes no money.
I find it so funny that people already fully ignore that AMD is already prociding chips for every console, ps4, xbone, wii u. With the two biggest selling already being 100% AMD and it does jack shit for their financial.
On contrast last fiscal year their profit was nearly 0.

nice rebrands

It's still money coming into the company, plus now with 14nm there's way more yields for AMD.

?

Amd user here, Polaris 10 is the one that you should just stop even thinking about. 390 performance for $299? Just get a fucking 390. They have introduced nothing new to the table nor increased what performance is available for the price like Nvidia did. Polaris 11 will be amazing for laptops, Polaris 10 is an embarrassing waste of time

I'm waiting for specs and a release date on Vega, but if amd fuck that up I'm going with a 1080

Isnt vega just going to be a Fury X with 8GB vram?

Thats barely 980ti performance so i guess you will be going for a 1080ti

>R9 390x performance for $300
I really hope it's much better or cheaper than that. Otherwise AMD has just deeply disappointed me, and I hope they go under and get bought by somebody who actually knows how to be competitive.

What's the speculation on the 1080ti?

Just let Intel grab ATI.
AMD can burn for all I care.

No, are you fucking retarded?
It's going to be GCN 5.0 with 4096 stream processors. It should rival the 1080 at least

You mean let apple buy them
We need more competition, not less you retarded dumbass

2560 or 3000 cores
roughly %25 more power than the 1080

maybe 10-12gb?

That shits gonna be $800-1000usd+ because AMD cant touch it until Vega or after desu
It will probably be the same price if its just as fuck

Fuck why are GPU's $500-600usd+ now? Horse shit!

>Apple
>AMD
Nah their too spineless to back them fully. They have had the option to for years because their worth nothing but have done exactly that NOTHING.

Backing is not the same as buying
Apple enjoys having control over their technology; if they owned their cpu/gpu company it would be extremely beneficial to them

R9 380 was released at $199. 380X @ $229

R9 280X was $299. Before that 7970 @ $499

If AMD says they will go the cheap route, I will guess at max, the price will be $250. Most likely between $200-$250. Or maybe there will be two different variants of Pascal 10, 480X/480 with them being $249 and $229.

The Vega will probably come with multiple different tiers takes too. 490/490X, 495x, and the Fury replacement

if the polaris desktop card is a 290/390x rebadged i am fucking DONE with AMD until Vega

But thats what 6-12 months away

Will it drop when vega comes out? I'm trying to time when I should build my rig and I'm sold on the 1080ti if it has a good release.

You're a retard.

Yeah exactly
If it doesn't match the leaked 4000 firestrike benchmark then it's fucking toast

I hope so. A cool, quiet, R9 390 equivalent for $200 is what I'm hoping for. If they do, AMD wins this round in my book.

It won't be a rebrand; it's a completely new design and card, only it's a much smaller and cheaper one. Performance wise though, I agree

Who knows nvidia already has the market.

Guessing before xmas though

>AMD polaris
>Offering existing card specs for half the price
>at a later date than the competitor card that runs Doom on ultra at 200fps
They've literally just given up havn't they?

Even if it ships at 1.4Ghz and only 2048 shaders it has as much (theoretical) performance as a 290x (2048 * 1.4 = 2840)

Throw in all these new gpu changes we know nothing about and we can assume 480x should he somewhere between 390x and Fury perfoormance.
That's without overclocking a 14nm chip.

I'm tired of sitting on iGPU. Cant wait for polaris.

yeah a 14nm gpu will be a rebrand of a 28nm one.

autism?

Most of the money Nvidia makes from their consumer cards are from laptop variants and the OEM markets. Funnily enough those are the areas AMD is targeting with the various polaris SKUs.

If AMD is going to claw back market share thats how you go about it, not high end products which despite their high margins are bought by relatively few people.

If you have 700 burgers to spend Nvidia will most likely be the way to go, but if you have 300 burgers its going to be AMD all the way.

Just cut it in half

Why do Apple need AMD/ATI?

They have PowerVR, which has been the best mobile GPU in the smartphone/tablet segment for years.

A 290x with the 2.3x perf/w AMD are citing would be monstrous. You'd have a 140ish watt card that can compete against a 980ti (as hawaii has done in a few DX12 titles).

And when the lowest 10 series card outperforms the titan x that was faster than the fury, what's the point?

kek

There is no way a 1050 will outperform a titan x (the x40 chips tend to be under nvidia's GT branding, not GTX).

Because it's bettr?

>Doom ultra
All that tessellation.

-t nvidia

>titan x that was faster than the fury,

If the 1050 is at 970 levels I will be seriously impressed.

I wasn't aware there was anything lower than the 1070

>but if you have 300 burgers it's going to be 1070 all the way
Fixed.
There's a reason why 3.5GB still outsells all of AMDs offerings. Pretty sure 1070 is going to pull the same sales if not even better because I doubt they're going to pull a 3.5GB again.

Go back to Sup Forums.

>ignoring that I said Fury, not Fury X
stay mad.

why dont i just go buy a 390x then?

Why am i waiting for a Fury on 14nm which is basically Vega

In VR onle because it has special VR hardware features. It won't outperform Titan x in 4k dx11.

The marketing point of polaris is 300$ VR gaming.
So particularly in VR polaris 10 will also beat Titan X

Why did you compare to fury in the first place?

because it was a card the 1070/80 outperforms and it's one of the currest toppest range amd cards.

>wccftech.com

There isn't...yet. However you don't jsut throw away chips that don't make the cut for the 1070.

Similarly the fact that the 1070 has something like 20% less cores than the 1080 yields must be horrific for the 1080. You don't typically see that sort of disparity in core count at this tier.

We shall see.

Neither polaris (or by extension, vega) will be rebadged fury. AMD's own slides have them touting new features that current GCN cards lack.

Pic related, though I doubt Sup Forums has enough understanding to grasp the implications of what these new features mean (especially the command processor).

post the pics/slides then

Woops forgot picture.

1080 ONLY beats Titan X in vr thanks to new Nvidia VR features made to make VR possible.
1080 still weaker than titan

That's misleading Nvidia marketing.

I don't understand what youre trying to say. Seems like youre just dont know what to say.
>fastest nvidia card
vs
>fastest amd card
Amd is faster. Cuck yourself.

From last year

its only a 10% improvement over a 980ti oc

>inb4 the titan 980ti and every other nvidia card gets massively nerfed in drivers

Just ask Kepler owners.

Why compare Titan X to the "one of the current toppest range amd cards" and not the toppest? Educate yourself before you rek yourself senpai.

>3,5+0,5G
every time

We don't know if all the specs that have been "leaked" for the Polaris chips are for the mobile variants or the desktop ones.

If it's for the mobile versions desktop Polaris is going to be a beast. If not AMD are fucked.

>390x is as fast as the fury
WEW

Whats the point of buying a fury at all? Even the X barely pulls 10fps ahead

tempted to get a 390x 8gb and oc it but ill wait a month or so i am sure amd will have new cards out by then

According to this you will get like 60+ FPS gaming in 1440p for 299$

SOUNDS LIKE AMD FUCKING WON THE MARKET

See pic

The fury series scales like shit over hawaii primarily because its ROP starved. The limits of 28nm meant AMD couldn't increase the front end to balance out the increase core count.

Fury makes much more sense if the 20nm node had actually played out and not been scrapped.

Equally its why Nvidia ripped all the compute out of their design for maxwell and are adding it all back in for pascal.

AMD chips love their high resolutions.

Now compare to

Welp

Waiting till Vega

>No, because it makes no money.
Nvidia can't into x86 dipshit

If you have a 290 or faster card, go vega. If you have a 280x/7970 or slower card polaris is the chip for you.

Consider right now a 290x is generally faster than 7870 crossfire.

Yup. Literally no reason to buy top of AMD right now. I'm also waiting.

>it's a completely new design
It's still GCN, just on a smaller node.

i have a 680ti 4gb from fucking 2012 i need a faster card NOW

Tempted to get a 390 8gb and oc the shit out of it.

Getting under $300usd here so gonna jump on one soon next time a specials on

Here comes the retard.

>i need a faster card NOW
What the fuck man. For what game?

Each iteration of GCN has seen some very radical changes.

As long as you get a 390 with a decent cooler overclocking isn't a problem. Hawaii responds very well to more voltage as a rule, but that equally requires some monstrous cooling.

With custom cooling I can get just over 1200mhz core on my 290x, but the power draw is insane.

Because amd doesn't make smartphone cpus numbnuts

ALL GAMES

had a 290 4gb but it was a housefire so i got a 770 and ive really been hitting my head on the ceiling thes past 2 years

ordering a 390 now yolo

He's not wrong.

I have a Sapphire R9 390 and I can get it to 1100 MHz core clock without touching the voltage.

When I try to clock it even a little bit higher I get artefacts and I need to increase voltage by at least 50 mV.

...

>downgraded from a 970 competitor to a card that now competes against the 7950/280

What sort of person downgrades to a card thats best part of 40% slower?

He is wrong and is too stupid to understand why.