Hallock confirmed on Reddit that 62.5 FPS was the average FPS result, and the average utilization for that result was 1.83x. 1.83x is 91.5% per card.
I don't know about the efficiency stuff, I think people are reading that to mean perf / W.
AMD: Speculation, Rumors, and Discussion (Archive)
- Thread starter iMacmatician
- Start date
- Status
Hallock confirmed on Reddit that 62.5 FPS was the average FPS result, and the average utilization for that result was 1.83x. 1.83x is 91.5% per card.
I don't know about the efficiency stuff, I think people are reading that to mean perf / W.
75+30 = 105
think its going to be a bit more than that. The only reason I say this is because otherwise, AMD would have shown something other than 150, cause at 105 watts, the performance this card is going to offer will match the 1070/1080 on the perf/watt metric. And if it did, they would have pointed it out, its an easy positive for marketing to point at.
Dead simple would be giving separate FPS values for each batch.
Deader would be giving FPS values for one card.
I'm still not sure what the numeric relationship is between whatever "utilization" is and the FPS.
FWIW, when I tried to derive what X the utilization percentages would come from to arrive at an average of 62.5, 86 theoretical frames per second. That's roughly 44, 62, 79, if that's what they're calling utilization.
I think it was 1.83x speedup, which may not be the same thing as utilization. Two cards that are each 51% utilized may see 1.8x speedup over one 51% utilized card, but I don't know anymore after trying to parse AMD PR.
That hadn't occurred to me, you're a much more nuanced thinker than I am. So what you're saying is I'm going to have to go out to the garage and dig up my old linear algebra textbook?
Damnit.
Edit: just so it's handy, the exact wording was, "All together for the entire test, there is 1.83X the performance of a single GPU in what users saw on YouTube."
It's piling so many things in the "all together" part that I'm not sure how a specific figure translates into another, or how many non-linear behaviors are creeping in. It might be that the CPU-limited portion has a worse speedup factor, although depending on how everything is put together it cannot be the sole bottleneck since it didn't drag the 1.83 value down further.
Perhaps it's an XT if some big customer like Apple hasn't called dibs. Maybe they're leaving pricing room for 8GB third-party factory-overclocked boards with water blocks?
I see no purpose of not showing the xt version if there is even one, since the 1070 goes on sale on June 19th, if there was a XT variety that has more performance, I think AMD would want to show it before June 10th just to stop any potential sales of the 1070. Even if it doesn't match the 1070 it would make people think twice to spending 100 bucks more.
We could always see it as a ploy to push nV's hand but again, nV isn't about to release the 1060 till after the June 29th launch I think, at least no rumors of it.
PlanarChaos
Newcomer
If Rx480 is full Polaris 10 than maybe $300 is a dual cut down Polaris 10? Dreams are okay right?
They certainly have people excited that two of their new card might be about as good as one of Nvidia's new cards. It's an unorthodox strategy, but I think it's going well so far.
Yes but it could be a selling strategy, get the "big" card reveal like a cheaper alternative to the 1070 and make the "300 vs 400 same performance". Im not saying this is the case just that it could be.
Why would you even get a water block on a card that consume less than 150W? Until the chip can hold 2v I dont see the need for it...
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20160530PD201.html
Not official but NX may use VR and it seens like PS and XB will also use it.
Could AMD design Polaris to specifically server as a chip for this 3 consoles? Because to me it seems that it fits all of their needs.
Last edited:
This has full Tonga written all over it. New 5k iMacs with XT.
Except that full Tonga was never used, there no SKUs out there under any name or brand with 384bit membus enabled
Well just because they have Nvidia Gameworks should not exclude them as AMD went out of their way to compare HW, and in a way this is where AMD needs to compete - as Carsten rightly mentioned AoTS has a limited narrative because it already plays to the strengths of AMD GCN architecture.
The benefit of both those games is that they have aspects worth showing, if AMD does compete.
They may had missed a trick not showing those games if the 480 does have great performance, but that would take away a bit of shine from the 2 cheap cards perform as well as a very expensive one narrative, which is what they wanted to push I think.
Not disagreeing just their narrative could had been a bit broader in terms of performance comparison because in theory the improvements to GCN should also reflect in both those games while also giving them an edge in terms of fidelity in one with setting maxed on Pure Hair (RoTR), while the other is known to be a headache in terms of tessellation for both GPU companies, so both good when promoting your product.
On the plus side from an AMD marketing perspective, a lot the talk-disussions since the event is again around DX12 and looking at AoTS, so maybe this is a success.
Cheers
I was putting forward the scenario that AMD is leaving room for premium third-party products that would be allowed to exceed the base limits as part of the price range for Polaris. Sometimes the things they add to those don't necessarily make the most sense, although thermal density or noise concerns might be lessened by such a decision.
Personally I think the RX 480 is a VR marketing PR release. If the Polaris 10 core actually is 232 mm2 there is no way that this is the top dog. No way!
I expect a Polaris 10 with at least 2 560 sp with higher clock speed and higher memory bandwidth. Maybe that is with Gddr5x or a 384 bus. Maybe I'm wrong but this feels like a carbon copy of the Tonga-release done again.
I expect a Polaris 10 with at least 2 560 sp with higher clock speed and higher memory bandwidth. Maybe that is with Gddr5x or a 384 bus. Maybe I'm wrong but this feels like a carbon copy of the Tonga-release done again.
Not really. If you do that by the time you place your card into availability Nvidia could just adjust their price and deny that "same performance less price" but if you reveal your card after 1070 availability then you can make compare price vs performance in "today market"That will only make sense if they reveal their bigger card before the availability of the 1070
- Status
