I'm anxious to see some Polaris 10 benchmarks. They're targeting the mid range, mainstream market with Polaris, so the price to performance ratio should be pretty good.
Honestly though, I'm more interested in seeing the cost of thier upcoming Exascale Heterogeneous Processor APU's. They have up to 32x Zen cores, Greenland Vega 10 flagship GPU, and 32GB of HBM2 memory directly on a single die. The large HPC variations will be expensive, but the consumer versions may very well offer a price to performance ratio that Intel nor nVidia can come close to matching...
Also, they have a page up that details the features of their Polaris cards.
I'm anxious to see some Polaris 10 benchmarks. They're targeting the mid range, mainstream market with Polaris, so the price to performance ratio should be pretty good.
Honestly though, I'm more interested in seeing the cost of thier upcoming Exascale Heterogeneous Processor APU's. They have up to 32x Zen cores, Greenland Vega 10 flagship GPU, and 32GB of HBM2 memory directly on a single die. The large HPC variations will be expensive, but the consumer versions may very well offer a price to performance ratio that Intel nor nVidia can come close to matching...
Also, they have a page up that details the features of their Polaris cards.
AMD officially called it a mainstream card some time after these slides were posted. That's the reason you didn't post a source and instead just posted images. Nice try though. You get a gold star!
@tormentos: No, they don't. They put it at the 390X at best. Even if they did, it would prove my point because a replacement for the Fury lone would have to be much faster than it, not just on par. For example, the 1080 is the replacement of the 980, not this 980 Ti or the Titan X even though it's faster than them by a good margin.
I'm anxious to see some Polaris 10 benchmarks. They're targeting the mid range, mainstream market with Polaris, so the price to performance ratio should be pretty good.
Honestly though, I'm more interested in seeing the cost of thier upcoming Exascale Heterogeneous Processor APU's. They have up to 32x Zen cores, Greenland Vega 10 flagship GPU, and 32GB of HBM2 memory directly on a single die. The large HPC variations will be expensive, but the consumer versions may very well offer a price to performance ratio that Intel nor nVidia can come close to matching...
Also, they have a page up that details the features of their Polaris cards.
I'm anxious to see some Polaris 10 benchmarks. They're targeting the mid range, mainstream market with Polaris, so the price to performance ratio should be pretty good.
Honestly though, I'm more interested in seeing the cost of thier upcoming Exascale Heterogeneous Processor APU's. They have up to 32x Zen cores, Greenland Vega 10 flagship GPU, and 32GB of HBM2 memory directly on a single die. The large HPC variations will be expensive, but the consumer versions may very well offer a price to performance ratio that Intel nor nVidia can come close to matching...
Also, they have a page up that details the features of their Polaris cards.
I'm anxious to see some Polaris 10 benchmarks. They're targeting the mid range, mainstream market with Polaris, so the price to performance ratio should be pretty good.
Honestly though, I'm more interested in seeing the cost of thier upcoming Exascale Heterogeneous Processor APU's. They have up to 32x Zen cores, Greenland Vega 10 flagship GPU, and 32GB of HBM2 memory directly on a single die. The large HPC variations will be expensive, but the consumer versions may very well offer a price to performance ratio that Intel nor nVidia can come close to matching...
Also, they have a page up that details the features of their Polaris cards.
According to DF the 36 CU Polaris 10 at 800mhz has performance shy of the 290x, much less a Fury X/980 Ti. Assuming that the NEO runs at 911 on the PS4, it's looking to match a 380x or a 390x at best (he mentioned unideal test conditions)..so close to a GTX 970. If Digital Foundry is correct, your thread was hilariously off.
AMD officially called it a mainstream card some time after these slides were posted. That's the reason you didn't post a source and instead just posted images. Nice try though. You get a gold star!
If you read the source link, there's a road map that shows Polaris 10 replacing Fury Series LOL.
I'm anxious to see some Polaris 10 benchmarks. They're targeting the mid range, mainstream market with Polaris, so the price to performance ratio should be pretty good.
Honestly though, I'm more interested in seeing the cost of thier upcoming Exascale Heterogeneous Processor APU's. They have up to 32x Zen cores, Greenland Vega 10 flagship GPU, and 32GB of HBM2 memory directly on a single die. The large HPC variations will be expensive, but the consumer versions may very well offer a price to performance ratio that Intel nor nVidia can come close to matching...
Also, they have a page up that details the features of their Polaris cards.
Topic name: AMD Confirms Polaris 10 to replace Fury X
Your source has the following road map... LOL.
Question: Has AMD Confirm Polaris 10 to replace Fury X?
Answer: Yes.
You haven't debunked anything.
Your wccftech source didn't mention Vega 11. http://www.anandtech.com/show/10145/amd-unveils-gpu-architecture-roadmap-after-polaris-comes-vega
No, you're just misinterpreting the roadmap. All that it shows is what's releasing in what year. Of course, you're yet again reading what you want to read, which why you love posting vague images. I'm not going to bother arguing much this time though, since you'll be proven wrong in a couple of weeks anyway.
You'll probably come up with some BS way of proving that you're right anyway, though.
Topic name: AMD Confirms Polaris 10 to replace Fury X
Your source has the following road map... LOL.
Question: Has AMD Confirm Polaris 10 to replace Fury X?
Answer: Yes.
You haven't debunked anything.
Your wccftech source didn't mention Vega 11. http://www.anandtech.com/show/10145/amd-unveils-gpu-architecture-roadmap-after-polaris-comes-vega
No, you're just misinterpreting the roadmap. All that it shows is what's releasing in what year. Of course, you're yet again reading what you want to read, which why you love posting vague images. I'm not going to bother arguing much this time though, since you'll be proven wrong in a couple of weeks anyway.
You'll probably come up with some BS way of proving that you're right anyway, though.
No, you're just not reading the road map and this topic's question
Again,
Question: Has AMD Confirm Polaris 10 to replace Fury X?
If you read the source link, there's a road map that shows Polaris 10 replacing Fury Series LOL.
Nah, you're just wrong about what the slide means. I'm not saying that Polaris 10 won't be slightly faster than Fury X, but there's won't be a Polaris 10 Fury card.
@wizard said:
@tormentos:
2:30 - 3:50
According to DF the 36 CU Polaris 10 at 800mhz has performance shy of the 290x, much less a Fury X/980 Ti. Assuming that the NEO runs at 911 on the PS4, it's looking to match a 380x or a 390x at best (he mentioned unideal test conditions)..so close to a GTX 970. If Digital Foundry is correct, your thread was hilariously off.
FYI, full Polaris 10 has 40CUs. Add in high clocks and it should be slightly (20% tops) faster than Fury X or at least on-par, but that's not anywhere near good enough for a successor on a new node. The 1080 is something like 70% faster than the 980, for example.
According to DF the 36 CU Polaris 10 at 800mhz has performance shy of the 290x, much less a Fury X/980 Ti. Assuming that the NEO runs at 911 on the PS4, it's looking to match a 380x or a 390x at best (he mentioned unideal test conditions)..so close to a GTX 970. If Digital Foundry is correct, your thread was hilariously off.
145
""I THINK THEY ARE TARGETING 390 of performance.""
Is what they think AMD is targeting not the actual performance fool nice fail..lol
They did already with Tomb Raider for consoles and even make a benchmark,comparing 2 GPU on PC to show what the suppose gap would be between xbox one and PS4 the test failed,and the game was as big as 30FPS unlike what DF claimed it would be using PC cards.
So yeah you have nothing.
@techhog89 said:
@tormentos: No, they don't. They put it at the 390X at best. Even if they did, it would prove my point because a replacement for the Fury lone would have to be much faster than it, not just on par. For example, the 1080 is the replacement of the 980, not this 980 Ti or the Titan X even though it's faster than them by a good margin.
The freaking benchmark i quote claim it was matching a Fury X and holding 60FPS steadier to,so i have a link you have nothing but bitter tear.
If you read the source link, there's a road map that shows Polaris 10 replacing Fury Series LOL.
Nah, you're just wrong about what the slide means. I'm not saying that Polaris 10 won't be slightly faster than Fury X, but there's won't be a Polaris 10 Fury card.
No, you're just not reading the road map and this topic's question
Again,
Question: Has AMD Confirm Polaris 10 to replace Fury X?
Answer: Yes.
@techhog89 said:
FYI, full Polaris 10 has 40CUs. Add in high clocks and it should be slightly (20% tops) faster than Fury X or at least on-par, but that's not anywhere near good enough for a successor on a new node. The 1080 is something like 70% faster than the 980, for example.
According to DF the 36 CU Polaris 10 at 800mhz has performance shy of the 290x, much less a Fury X/980 Ti. Assuming that the NEO runs at 911 on the PS4, it's looking to match a 380x or a 390x at best (he mentioned unideal test conditions)..so close to a GTX 970. If Digital Foundry is correct, your thread was hilariously off.
R9-290 Pro is actually faster than R9-380X(Tonga XT)...
@techhog89: Talking about the PS4 NEO in reference to tormentos reference to his own thread. The 36CU Polaris 10, not the full one. I have no doubt a 40 CU 1.1ghz+ 175W Polaris 10 will mop the floor with most modern cards.
@tormentos:
They did already with Tomb Raider for consoles and even make a benchmark,comparing 2 GPU on PC to show what the suppose gap would be between xbox one and PS4 the test failed,and the game was as big as 30FPS unlike what DF claimed it would be using PC cards.
So...something completely unrelated?
I have Digital Foundry. You have your own interpretations. I think I'm in the clear here.
@ronvalencia:
I stand corrected. Still, we know that the 36CU Polaris 10 sure as hell isn't a Fury.
@techhog89: Talking about the PS4 NEO in reference to tormentos reference to his own thread. The 36CU Polaris 10, not the full one. I have no doubt a 40 CU 1.1ghz+ 175W Polaris 10 will mop the floor with most modern cards.
@tormentos:
That is funny because if Polaris 10 with 40CU mop the floor with most modern cards what do you think polaris Vega with 64 CU will do.
If you read the source link, there's a road map that shows Polaris 10 replacing Fury Series LOL.
Nah, you're just wrong about what the slide means. I'm not saying that Polaris 10 won't be slightly faster than Fury X, but there's won't be a Polaris 10 Fury card.
No, you're just not reading the road map and this topic's question
Again,
Question: Has AMD Confirm Polaris 10 to replace Fury X?
Answer: Yes.
@techhog89 said:
FYI, full Polaris 10 has 40CUs. Add in high clocks and it should be slightly (20% tops) faster than Fury X or at least on-par, but that's not anywhere near good enough for a successor on a new node. The 1080 is something like 70% faster than the 980, for example.
1080's gap will be smaller with 980 Ti.
Yes, it will be smaller, since the 1080 replaces the 980 and not the 980 Ti. Thanks for proving my point! :D
@techhog89: Talking about the PS4 NEO in reference to tormentos reference to his own thread. The 36CU Polaris 10, not the full one. I have no doubt a 40 CU 1.1ghz+ 175W Polaris 10 will mop the floor with most modern cards.
@tormentos:
That is funny because if Polaris 10 with 40CU mop the floor with most modern cards what do you think polaris Vega with 64 CU will do.
@techhog89: Talking about the PS4 NEO in reference to tormentos reference to his own thread. The 36CU Polaris 10, not the full one. I have no doubt a 40 CU 1.1ghz+ 175W Polaris 10 will mop the floor with most modern cards.
@tormentos:
They did already with Tomb Raider for consoles and even make a benchmark,comparing 2 GPU on PC to show what the suppose gap would be between xbox one and PS4 the test failed,and the game was as big as 30FPS unlike what DF claimed it would be using PC cards.
So...something completely unrelated?
I have Digital Foundry. You have your own interpretations. I think I'm in the clear here.
@ronvalencia:
I stand corrected. Still, we know that the 36CU Polaris 10 sure as hell isn't a Fury.
Log in to comment