AMD: Pirate Islands (R* 3** series) Speculation/Rumor Thread

Ok, maybe the FuryX will significantly beat the GTX 980 Ti, validating in the process the general opinion about AMD's ability to run a profitable business.

 

Any idea about the "Made in Korea"



Samsung, UMC, Hynix are all in Korea.
Also a lot of semiconductor packaging houses there.
http://anysilicon.com/vendor_category/ic_packaging/

Edit- Just found Amkor on a different list.
I guess it is marked "Made in Korea" due to being assembled and packaged by Amkor.


So we still don't know exactly who fabbed the Fiji die.
Interposer = UMC
HBM = Hynix
Packaging and assembly = Amkor
GPU die = ???

 

b-but gender equality. OT, how much are AMD saving on R&D by iterating the GCN design than going the kepler->maxwell route?

 

I wonder how long until we see a 'R9 Nano M' for laptops/AIOs. It could be comfortably ahead of the GTX 980M, and the smaller PCB area could interest OEMs (Apple especially).

 

Few changes in 3xx series:

http://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/3a4507/moor_the_amd_caribbean_islands_family_not_just_a/

Too bad they aren't on the level of 4870 to 4890 clockspeed increase. A 1150Mhz Hawaii would've been quite a card.

 

We hear nothing about GloFo, so I would think it is still TSMC with an improved 28 nm process.


Fury X won't push Crysis 3 to playable framerates at 4K.

 

Doesn't the 290x already average 30 at high settings?
Meaning the fury x should do around 45 at least.
That's playable.

 

Nope, I do not mean to lower the settings to some averages. Look:



http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/GTX_980_Ti_G1_Gaming/14.html

 

It's a sponsored paper.
Last year, AMD, ARM, and Nvidia had a fair presence at a different firm. A bit flashier than this year, but in defense of the latest mouthpiece there was a lot more to say and show.

For the long-time veterans of the Bulldozer thread, there's a familiar name in their About Us page.

(Just for fun, do a text search for AMD on that page.)

 

FC4 bench numbers from AMD, from the Beijing conference:

 

Way above Titan X, promising.

 

Yes, that's about as fast as the overclocked to 1152+ MHz 980 Ti.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/GTX_980_Ti_G1_Gaming/17.html

Let's assume that those TPU graphs show min FPS.

 

AFAIK those TPU graphs show average FPS, not min FPS.

 

There sure are a lot of instances of AMD there, I wonder if they got split-off by force/voluntarily or just coalesced later?

 

Far Cry 4 seems to be the best case scenario, where the 290X is equal or slightly faster than 980.

And now crossfire works rather well with the game after the patching up. Smacks the GM200 cards by 70% in TR's review.

www.techreport.com/review/28356/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti-graphics-card-reviewed/7

 

5 minutes to edit a post....

Anyway, the numbers from the "leaked" slides during Titan X's launch had far cry 4 as the best game against Titan X.

Titan X faster than 290X in far cry 4 by (TS?)29.1% TP - 31.5% TR- 25%

And 390X(now Fury, thanks moor?) faster than 290X by 55% , so 20.1% , 17.8% and 24% faster than Titan X respectively. Would be hard for 980Ti to catch up even with overclocking.

The other would be alien isolation where it's 18% or so faster, while BF4 and Tomb Raider had them at parity.

 

How would that be possible? A graph plots frequency over time, showing you actual FPS at any particular point of gameplay. It would by pure function be a direct indicator of minimum FPS.

Also, in most cases, average FPS is more interesting to a gamer, as you'd only encounter minimum FPS on a few - maybe just one - typically very short moments.

 

AMD published some area figures http://live.pconline.com.cn/483.html (scroll down a bit):

Interposer: 1011 mm²
Fiji Die: 596 mm²

The transistor density improved again from Hawaii ( 14,38 million per mm²) to Fiji (14,93 million per mm²), most likely because the memory PHYs take up much less space now.

 

Graphics analysis tools capture frame times - you can plot anything from this, including momentary FPS for each individual frame and aggregate FPS (min, max, average, etc.) over regular time intervals.

 

Has anyone seen the aircooled Fury non-X anywhere?
I'm really curious as to how long that card will be with an aircooler. I assume the PCB will be as small as the Fury X or the Nano, but the cooler should make it longer.

From Triskaine's post:



596mm^2

So Fiji manages to be a little bit smaller than GM200, despite having 11% more transistors.
Quite the feat for a first-gen HBM controller, I'd say.