Where were you when AMD won the GPU wars?

Where were you when AMD won the GPU wars?

RX 480 for $200 is better than a GTX 980.

Other urls found in this thread:

overclock.net/t/1360884/official-top-30-unigine-valley-benchmark-1-0
seekingalpha.com/article/3977446-advanced-micro-devices-amd-44th-annual-jpmorgan-global-technology-media-telecom-conference
reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/4m39s2/amd_met_with_jpmorgan_techs_analysts_asserts/
videocardz.com/61007/amd-wants-gamers-to-start-the-uprising
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

another test showed 3,500

OC it and get 980ti performance

>~1000 mhz 3200
>~1.266 mhz 3500
>~1400 mhz 3700

i wanna see the hbm/next gen memory cards rather than gddr

Vega probably won't hit store shelves until 2017

how fast is the 8gb verision

Even faster than this, who knows. Should be another $20 or something though.

the extra VRAM is only going to matter where 4gbs of VRAM isn't enough, like the new Mirror's Edge on Hyper

the amount of memory by itself doesn't make the card faster

how good is it for stuff outside of gaming compared to nvidia cards? my friends say nvidia is always better in compatibility for shit like maya rendering and fluid sims. is there any weight to this?

Uhh actually it does

"My car can hold up to 80 litres of fuel it's sooo fast
"

AMD cards are better at compute, Nvidia only does well because they locked everyone to CUDA

>Fury X
>higher than 980Ti, just lower than Titan X

Since when? I have the card and it's a slow piece of shit compared to the 980 I had before

That's not even a remotely correct analogy

it is. you're comparing capacity to performance.

Do you use the new crimson drivers? That's why.

Yea, I do.

I played Warhammer TW with the 980 (OC) and then the Fury X and the X is slower.

It makes it operate better, because the 8gb vram usually has better timings and games that used 4gb can operate with more headroom.

Capacity? Do you think we're talking about hard drives?

This is RAM moron.

Going from 4GB to 8GB affects performance on the GPU just like going from 4GB to 8GB affects performance on a computer.

don't take the bait man

You dunce.

I think he got you

Thanks for proving me right.

thats funny because amd is way better in warhammer. Unless its an extremely oced card you are lying.

He is right you know... More memory IS good for performance. Picture related.

how long will it take for non references to come out?

Detrimental for witcher 3. So you're wrong.

There are noticeable improvements usually when they use a different ram brand altogether.

For example the 290 8gb used Samsung, while 4gb was Hynix.

You are borderline autistic the way you think you know what your talking about is hilarious. More ram on pc doesnt make jack shit faster unless you are using it or its different memory. If you have 4gb in a pc and you use 3 gb it will make 0 difference as opposed to using 3 gb with 8 gb avaible. Unless they offer gddr5x a faster type of memory 8 gb doesnt change performance.

If more RAM on PC means jack shit why don't you try using half of what you have right now you dumb speccy cunt?

So 8gb ddrx5 is faster than 4gb ddr5x?

You are retarded.

that makes no sense. what are you even saying? were you born inanimate?

For the newfags

AMD cards always score higher on benchmarks(check the overclockers.net club forums for both cards), the 390 gets the same FPS as a 980 on Valley, too bad that doesn't translated into actual performance on games.

>nvidia on top
DELETE THIS

>benchmarks don't translate to actual performance

except that's exactly why they exist you mouth breathing mongoloid.

390 is faster than 980 now.

Embarrassing yourself, son.

>that's what amd shills really believe

Meant to say 390x

>150W and 230 bucks for 980

Noice

You really are a newfag. Your information about AMD doing good on benchmark is incorrect. Valley benchmark utilizes strong tessellation. It was made to showcase absurd amounts of tessellation. Nvidia cards always beat AMD on that benchmark.

>overclock.net/t/1360884/official-top-30-unigine-valley-benchmark-1-0
Here's some user benchmarks.

>1080 > 980ti > Titan X > 780 ti > Titan > 980 > 780 > 290X > etc

3Dmarks11 benchmarks are really close to real world performance these days, so its pretty close to how real world performance of 480 would be, ON AVERAGE. The image on OP post corresponds perfectly with how DX11 games performs in benchmarks these days, ON AVERAGE.

Completely fake chart I knew AMDPOORFAGS were desperate but not this much!

That's pretty nice, but it's still nowhere near the performance level I'm looking for, sadly.

I'm disappointed in AMD for not releasing a 14nm GPU in the high-end/enthusiast sector as well. I was ready to give 'em the money if they put out something decent.

What a blatant fake!!!

>if
they will, in September the 490 will be released

Will the next gen fury x be out within the next 3 months or should I just bite the bullet and get a 1080 when they release a hybrid cooling model?

I think theres another event at oct or something where they'll show off Vega

>Nvidia only does well because they locked everyone to CUDA


lol

No, CUDA gained dominance because for a long long time it was the only solution.

Nvidia took advantage of this by getting research institutes and universities invested + had parallel computing education courses since nothing like GPGPU existed.

Until GCN (2012), AMD's GPUs used VLIW based cores and AMD's compilers were dog shit so it didn't even matter if you wanted to use OpenCL for GPGPU because performance was terrible.

One key piece people keep forgetting about OpenCL is that its just a standard. Just because its "portable" doesn't mean it wont require individual optimizations on each architecture giving developers little incentive to move code bases.

It's $200

AMD: innovators in last-gen performance

Wow you really are dumb.

if you think having access to multiple architectures is little incentive then you have a bleak understanding of how the world of technology works. the cost of having someone tweak the code is better than the losses you accrue for shunting yourself out of a market.

Nice, but Nvidia will most likely match that with the 1060.

>More ram on pc doesnt make jack shit faster

Please leave.

That's the MRSP, decent aftermarket versions won't sell for that.

math it at 100 more dollars sure.

Just like the 960 right? Because that was such a great performance/dollar card. Idiot.

Sooner or later he will be right. Nvidia keeps gimping old cards while AMD slowly improves drivers.

Source?

It was, not to brainwashed AMD fanatics obviously.

For people who actualy wanted a card with drivers that worked it was good value, the 970 even better

The source is common sense, and the fact that you should never trust marketing prices, and marketing performance claims

So no source...

This isn't an nvidia card. They will sell for msrp.

Uhh AMD cards actually sell for the MSRP

in no way was the 960 a good deal. it cost more than a 390 while having 3/4 of the performance. driver issues disappeared even before crimson during patch updates of the last quarter prior to polaris being declared.

He stated an obvious truism. RAM that is not being used does nothing.

That's 100% rumor, AMD have said absolutely nothing about it and according to their roadmap Vega with HBM2 is coming in 2017 and there's nothing between Polaris and Vega. I'm not going to base any purchasing decision on pure, unsubstantiated rumor.

Vega is coming Q4 2016, you cross-eyed faggot.

And a computer that is off doesn't do anything either. What a dumb thing to say.

This. Can confirm. Crimson drivers are pretty great.

>50% increase in clock
>15% increase in score

We aren't talking about Nvidia, buddy

Don't present actual evidence to fanboys, they are allergic to it

Must be nice living in your own fantasy land

But there's actually larger Polaris chips in store before Vega.

seekingalpha.com/article/3977446-advanced-micro-devices-amd-44th-annual-jpmorgan-global-technology-media-telecom-conference

>Polaris will ramp over a series of quarters, as we nail that performance and mainstream portion of the market...". They also said, "...and the things we want to achieve in the near-term for this product launch to go to mainstream first, and then proliferate product upwards and downwards, up into enthusiast and down into value..."

More like this.
1080 > RX490? > 1070 > 980ti > RX480 > 390x > 980 > 390 > 970

There will be a $300 Polaris card.

>, and then proliferate product upwards and downwards, up into enthusiast and down into value..."

So how do you know they aren't referring to early 2017?

Except aftermarket 980ti's beat the 1070

After taxes and shit and being in Europe, it will be 250 euros

Then Polaris would release too close to Vega which would make little sense, maybe the lowend/budget Polaris chips will release in 2017, but he explicitly stated mainstream first, enthusiast second, poorfag last.

October they announced they are moving faster with it.

Based on the fact Lisa su said Polaris will cover the price points from $100 to $300.

Mainstream is poolaris, then enthusiast is vega

Vega might even be the 490/490x

No idea where 490 will land as we have no information on that. We could do some theoretical math by shader/watt performance, but thats too much reaching. 480 isn't even released and to make a 490 prediction on an unreleased product is just too far.

Here's the entire interview since seeking has a paywall, it's pretty big.

reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/4m39s2/amd_met_with_jpmorgan_techs_analysts_asserts/

Also he confirmed Zen is 40% IPC increase over Excavator, not Bulldozer.

That was just a rumour, not something that came from AMD or has been confirmed by AMD in any way

He clearly said otherwise
>Polaris will ramp
>Polaris
>and the things we want to achieve in the near-term for this product launch to go to mainstream first, and then proliferate product upwards and downwards, up into enthusiast

They also said that they do not intend for Polaris to compete with Pascal and they repeatedly and consistently only mentioned Polaris 10 and Polaris 11.

If you also read the fucking interview you posted, it's abundantly clear that they are referring to Vega as the higher-end card.
>So if you see our new GPU roadmap that we rolled out in March, we have this Polaris family. And then that is followed-on by another family in 2017, which is actually a very tight cadence in terms of how you would normally launch products into the market.
So there's a new family of GPUs in 2017, we know this is Vega.
>So if you imagine, Polaris will ramp over a series of quarters, as we nail that performance and mainstream portion of the market, then you follow it on, and buy a new family in terms of the ultra-enthusiast portion of the market.
So, Polaris ramps over a few quarters and nails the PERFORMANCE and MAINSTREAM portions of the market, these are Polaris 10 and Polaris 11. Then you buy a NEW family for the ultra-enthusiast section, this is what we know to be called Vega. There's no indication of any sort of high-end Polaris.

Yeah and? That doesn't confirm anything in the slightest, I will wait for official announcements of AMD

>and nails the PERFORMANCE and MAINSTREAM portions of the market
Mainstream last year, what they offer is low end for this generations standards

There were some mystery benchmarks landing a team red chip in striking distance of the 1080. If it's for around $300 the 1070 will be dead in the water.

Sounds legit

>videocardz.com/61007/amd-wants-gamers-to-start-the-uprising

>amd
>not positioning themselves as a budget brand

Pick one

Clearly you are wrong, this is a response to the guy asking about competition to the 1080, and he clearly meant Polaris here, not Vega which was explicitly mention as a new generation earlier.

So let's say Polaris is only P10 and P11, when is Vega supposed to release then? Early 2017? Isn't that a new for a new generation?

Jesus christ that looks cringey as fuck
AMD actually adnitting theyre the poorfag company though, priceless

Around the start of 2017, but it won't be a GP100 contender, it will be around 420mm2 and very close to a GP102 and far faster than a 1080.
As for price, somewhere around $600-700?

The Fiji cards were also released much later than the 300 series.