I don't think so. And HBM wouldn't bring enough power savings to bring that large of a bump in perf/watt compared to Polaris.
Apply the same math AMD did with Fiji and you might get there (didn't actually do it, just a wild guess).
I don't think so. And HBM wouldn't bring enough power savings to bring that large of a bump in perf/watt compared to Polaris.
Apply the same math AMD did with Fiji and you might get there (didn't actually do it, just a wild guess).
That's a train of thoughts I just cannot follow. Why would I as a consumer, interested in purchasing an enthusiast-level card (Vega), buy a mid-range card now for 200 bucks and 6-8 months later the card I originally desired? Being interested in an enthusiast-grade card, chances are, I went for that target as well during my last upgrade cycle, which might put me in the R9 290X/390 range - and coming from there RX480 is - after all that is known today - merely a sidegrade.
When talking about process maturity, a delay of a couple of months is of much lower importance than the fact that they're completely different processes from different fabs...
As others have mentioned there will be a GP102 (IMO designed to span Tesla/Quadro/Titan-ti model in similar trend as the GK110 GPU) - fingers crossed this one has a GPC/SM/Cuda structure more similar to P100 than Maxwell.
Also more an assumption but I would expect Volta to release initially as a large die Tesla, similar with what we saw with Pascal; this is due to many aspects being integral to both HPC and scientific research supercomputers, where they have contract commitments for 2017 such as with the US government DOE.
Cheers
According to AMD's slides, Vega has much higher perf/watt than Polaris.
Regards,
SB
If the explicit multi adapter(was that its name?) gets very popular between developers then you could have a Vega + a 5TFPs card helping with post-processing and or filters.That's a train of thoughts I just cannot follow. Why would I as a consumer, interested in purchasing an enthusiast-level card (Vega), buy a mid-range card now for 200 bucks and 6-8 months later the card I originally desired? Being interested in an enthusiast-grade card, chances are, I went for that target as well during my last upgrade cycle, which might put me in the R9 290X/390 range - and coming from there RX480 is - after all that is known today - merely a sidegrade.
I still don't see the point. Given that I'm not coming from an integrated graphics, there's nothing apart from a broken graphics card that would lead me to upgrade twice a year. But maybe I'm the exception to the rule.Christmas bonus? Desire for HBM2? Give yourself an upgrade and the 480 to your little brother? I don't know, what the heck...
Wait - you are not saying AMD is screwing over their customers by leading them to upgrade twice in a row?It's just more logical that some buyers of Polaris could want to upgrade to Vega. While a buyer of GP104 just won't buy a GP106 when it launches.
Only if your plating / ***hoping*** to use the explicit multi adapter of DX12 or having more than 1 PC you could possibly think in buying 2 different segments video cards. People who will buy Polaris wont Buy vega.I still don't see the point. Given that I'm not coming from an integrated graphics, there's nothing apart from a broken graphics card that would lead me to upgrade twice a year. But maybe I'm the exception to the rule.
Wait - you are not saying AMD is screwing over their customers by leading them to upgrade twice in a row?
Maybe but why would they use a more much expensive Vega chip with HBM just to cut down its power to make it into the Polaris territory instead of just use the more cheaper Polaris chip that already produce 5.6(?)TFPs I also dont think Xbox is going to have a mass production vega in December while consumers wont even have an announcement date for their release
In my opinion it would be easier and better to use P10 with HBM than Vega with GDDR. don't forget that a huge part of Vega pref/watt is the HBM use and not just the architecture.It isn't using HBM. It's using GDDR5 (appears to be going for 12 GB going by the render at the presentation). And otherwise I don't see how it's even possible for them to make Scorpio, it'd be approaching 200 watts or more for the entire console. For comparison launch X360 used slightly less than 180 watts when gaming and that was considered . This would put Scorpio at a higher power consumption than that. I guess not impossible that they would go for that, but I find it highly unlikely.
Regards,
SB
AMD's roadmap showed Polaris 2,5× above Hawaii and Vega 3,9× above Hawaii. That means Vega (HBM) is 1,5× above Polaris (GDDR5) just like Fiji (HBM) was 1,5× above Hawaii (GDDR5).
- Hawai/Tonga: 1,0× (base)
- Fiji (Fury X): 1,5×
- Fiji (Nano): 2,0×
- Polaris: 2,5×
- Vega: 3,9×
- Navi: 5,1×
All these numbers are taken (or extrapolated) from official slides and roadmaps.
In my opinion it would be easier and better to use P10 with HBM than Vega with GDDR. don't forget that a huge part of Vega pref/watt is the HBM use and not just the architecture.
I also dont see how much profit AMD could get to sell a new big chip aim for 400+ cards for a 300 console.
Would Vega only have HBM or will it be with DDR5x or something for the xbox?