AMD: Speculation, Rumors, and Discussion (Archive)

[Deleted member 13524]

Ask your professors see what they say. hmm, you are arguing something that makes no sense, if you were to get specs to make something, would you go out of spec to make it and then expect others to expect it to work but if it hurts their parts, would you think they would say its problem on their end our your end?

Specs are usually over-engineered and sometimes they're mostly just for indication (e.g. 8pin for >75W).

If we follow history, AMD was first with DX10.1 and DX11 and Mantle, and it hardly made a difference to their current status or product attractiveness.

Not true.
Lots of enthusiasts recommend AMD graphics cards for how much better they age, compared to their nvidia contemporaries.

You can argue that this doesn't top nvidia's advantage in perf/watt and gameworks' shady businesses, which is true, but don't take AMD's merit completely. Especially considering how much smaller and poorer are their R&D teams.

Even Mantle flopped and was quickly forgotten.

Mantle was forked into Vulkan. The API's aim was about the wide adoption of a close-to-metal API at the request of several high-profile developers, and no matter how you look at it, it was damn well successful at it.
I doubt forcing a single-IHV API was ever AMD's intention because they haven't had the marketshare to pull that one off in many years.

 

[Razor1]

Specs are usually over-engineered and sometimes they're mostly just for indication (e.g. 8pin for >75W).

So its good to do out of spec components then.....


Come on.....

Not true.
Lots of enthusiasts recommend AMD graphics cards for how much better they age, compared to their nvidia contemporaries.

Yeah an enthusiast that keeps his cards for more than a gen is he truly an enthusiast lol. More like a conscientious buyer and telling others of their experience we have been over a thousand times, it happens but its always a luck of the draw, just because Xbox and PS4 is holding back pushing things forward doesn't mean much in the life span and market placement of these cards.

You can argue that this doesn't top nvidia's advantage in perf/watt and gameworks' shady businesses, which is true, but don't take AMD's merit completely. Especially considering how much smaller and poorer are their R&D teams.

R&D is done over a period of time, you can't look at AMD's inability to compete with nV because of only that, the performance of P10 is decent the power usage is not, they messed something up, if they were able to get to the voltage on the core of p10 to what nV's fin fet gpu's are using what do you think will happen to the power usage.

 

[Clukos]

Apparently, 4gb retail 480s unlock to 8gb: https://www.techpowerup.com/223913/...to-8gb-memory-unlock-mod-works-we-benchmarked

 

[Deleted member 13524]

So its good to do out of spec components then.....

No, it's not. Specs/standards should be followed.
It's the recurrent discussion of the punishment for not respecting said standards even though the respective authorities gave them the go-ahead that is really stupid in this and many other threads.

Yeah an enthusiast that keeps his cards for more than a gen is he truly an enthusiast lol.

As if enthusiasts could only be spoiled rich kids whose mommys and daddys give them money for a new >$1000 graphics card every year.
Regardless, I said enthusiasts who recommend. E.g., up to 3 months ago at reddit's pcmasterrace the users would overwhelmingly suggest a R9 390 over a GTX970.

R&D is done over a period of time, you can't look at AMD's inability to compete with nV because of only that

Yes, you can.
There is a direct correlation between the scientific ouputs of R&D units with different budgets.
I'm so sorry that you can't grasp such a basic and predictible concept, though.


It seems you would like everyone in B3D to acknowledge that the folks at AMD are somehow mentally disabled and nvidia is made of the purest geniuses, but the world is a bit more complicated than that.

 

[Razor1]

No, it's not. Specs/standards should be followed.
It's the recurrent discussion of the punishment for not respecting said standards even though the respective authorities gave them the go-ahead that is really stupid in this and many other threads.

Then there is no point in discussing the matter......

As if enthusiasts could only be spoiled rich kids whose mommys and daddys give them money for a new >$1000 graphics card every year.
Regardless, I said enthusiasts who recommend. E.g., up to 3 months ago at reddit's pcmasterrace the users would overwhelmingly suggest a R9 390 over a GTX970.

Save up is always a good way to do things is what I say, if you love hardware as much as your primary hobby, its a fairly inexpensive hobby.

Yes, you can.
There is a direct correlation between the scientific ouputs of R&D units with different budgets.
I'm so sorry that you can't grasp such a basic and predictible concept, though.


It seems you would like everyone in B3D to acknowledge that the folks at AMD are somehow mentally disabled and nvidia is made of the purest geniuses, but the world is a bit more complicated than that.

So when nV had their screwed ups with FX, with the 2xx series, with Fermi, those must have been due to lower R&D right?

Come on mistakes can happen, doesn't matter how much money a company can throw in at a problem. Its not always all about R&D that can give you a successful product, although it gets harder as time goes on yes, but I don't think AMD is in this situation.

Intel had what, 5 times the R&D as AMD yet they came out with P4.....

its not all about money, and I'm not saying AMD has "bad" engineers or they are retarded by any means, what I am saying is MISTAKES CAN HAPPEN.

If you feel AMD has mentally disabled engineers well I don't know what to say to that

 

[CSI PC]

I mostly agree with you, but considering the GTX 970 is frying some MB PCIE slots shows that the potential exists. Especially as the Rx 480 is pulling more power from the slot than the GTX 970.

That likely comes down to a cheaply made MB or a defective PCIE slot. But the problem is that regardless of whether it is the Rx 480's fault, it will be attributed to the Rx 480 due to the bad press it is currently receiving. Bad press that is warranted to some degree due the card being more out of spec than other graphics cards wrt. power draw from the PCIE slot.

Heck, when one of Nvidia's drivers caused some of their graphics cards to fry MB's the blame was correctly attributed to Nvidia. However, I don't remember seeing the media frenzy and outrage over that which we now see for the Rx 480. It's a problem certainly. And one that AMD needs to address. And I certainly agree with you on the alarmist "the sky is falling" message a lot of sites and users are running with right now. But denying a problem exists is almost as bad.

Regards,
SB

It is right to be in the media because it depends upon ones view/context, those who do not see it as an issue probably exclude the customer from opening up Wattman and playing with setting like power target/clocks/voltage/etc, or exclude those using 2x480 in the lowest priced crossfire motherboards.
At least now consumers know to be very careful in this regard.

That said there will be a minority that buy budget motherboards and PSU who will also use this card, as I mentioned earlier I read some comments on other forums/youtube asking if their $45 motherboard can handle it....
That was the lowest I saw mentioned while I was surprised to see quite a few between that and up to $65.

But where it is likely to be an issue for the minority (if you exclude OC and mGPU) is over time and a few years down the line when they pull out the card and put in a new one (causing a complete failure), and then they will probably blame the new card for making their motherboard fail.
Fingers crossed AMD creates a reasonable solution soon so this is no longer a potential headache or consideration, because I can see more mainstream owners using Wattman and increasing fan speed profile and then power targets, because all the reviews mention how great that works on helping reference Nvidia 1070/1080 (which is still within warranty on those cards if doing that according to some reviews).

Cheers

 

[DavidGraham]

Not true.
Lots of enthusiasts recommend AMD graphics cards for how much better they age, compared to their nvidia contemporaries.

A rather unfounded observation, specifically with the Maxwell generation, one which amounted to what basically? nothing! According to steam charts GTX 970 is the most widely used GPU on the planet.

It's true the Kepler generation takes a bigger hit in contemporary games than the Hawaii generation. Due to a multitude of factors, memory shortage being one of them, an inherent weakness in compute, etc. However that doesn't exclude AMD cards from similar problems, one relating to higher CPU overhead, which makes them unfavorable when couple with low to mid range CPUs, like Core i3 for example. which pretty much makes the entire AMD med end GPUs less favorable when compared to NV's Maxwell counterparts. Unless you have a good CPU of course, which is not a common practice among buyers of this class of GPUs.

Mantle was forked into Vulkan. The API's aim was about the wide adoption of a close-to-metal API at the request of several high-profile developers, and no matter how you look at it, it was damn well successful at it.
I doubt forcing a single-IHV API was ever AMD's intention because they haven't had the marketshare to pull that one off in many years.

That's just marketing BS, AMD wanted Mantle to expand their marketshare, and to become more popular. it's why they incorporated it in several games, and announced more games to come. That's why they had plans to develop more versions of it. But in the end, it didn't ban out and developers simply dropped it even from the games that promised to have it. Because as you said they lacked the market penetration to do it and the resources to keep developing for it with each architecture iteration. Besides their lacking DX11 performance didn't help them either.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

Come on mistakes can happen, doesn't matter how much money a company can throw in at a problem. Its not always all about R&D that can give you a successful product, although it gets harder as time goes on yes, but I don't think AMD is in this situation.

And I'm pretty sure mistakes happened with Maxwell and Pascal too.
The huge difference will be noted if you have the resources to notice those mistakes and correct them on time or not. If one QA team has 200 people and another has 10, which one is more likely to detect a failure?

It's true the Kepler generation takes a bigger hit in contemporary games than the Hawaii generation.

Kepler takes a huge hit in current DX11 games against the Tahiti generation, Maxwell is taking a huge hit in DX12 games so far against the Hawaii and Fury generations (gameworks titles aside of course), and we'll see how Pascal behaves on 2nd generation DX12 games against Polaris and Vega when we're in late 2017 or so.
If I have to bet, we'll probably see the GTX 1060 easily beating the RX 480 in DX11 games but by the end of the year in newer games it'll be a lot closer to the RX470.

That's just marketing BS

No, it's just history.
If you can't even acknowledge that Vulkan is a fork of Mantle then this conversation is pointless because I won't engage with willful ignorance.

 

[Razor1]

And I'm pretty sure mistakes happened with Maxwell and Pascal too.
The huge difference will be noted if you have the resources to notice those mistakes and correct them on time or not. If one QA team has 200 people and another has 10, which one is more likely to detect a failure?

Some mistakes can't be fixed, doesn't matter how much money you throw at it.

You don't think Intel knew they had a hot mess with P4?

You don't think AMD had a hot mess with Bulldozer?

You don't think nV knew they had a hot mess with FX?

You don't think AMD knew they had a hot mess with the r600?

Yet they couldn't do anything to fix those issues, they released anyways, because the time to fix those mistakes, the gen is over..... instead of getting as much as they can, they would have lost everything.

AMD knew/knows what they have with Polaris, I don't think there is any question about them not knowing what they have. They are just trying to make the best of a bad situation.

If AMD takes the time to fix the issues, look what happened last year when they had no new products for 6-9 months to go up against Maxwell 2?

Major loss in marketshare and they will not recover that for maybe 2 years maybe longer.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

You don't think Intel knew they had a hot mess with P4?
You don't think AMD had a hot mess with Bulldozer?

I know (as in, it was documented and proven before a trial) that Intel during their P4 failure used their loads of cash to get exclusivity contracts with retailers and PC builders which kept AMD from gaining a sizeable chunk of marketshare.
I know AMD with Bulldozer couldn't do that, obviously, so it had to compete in price with ridiculously low margins.

You don't think nV knew they had a hot mess with FX?
You don't think AMD knew they had a hot mess with the r600?

FX is too far away to make a comparison, though nvidia did get Valve to develop a special path for FX cards using mixed PS1.4/2.0 code and forced FP16 precision shaders for Half Life 2, which was the coolest thing for years to come.
A fairer comparison would be how nvidia kept Fermi's 1st-gen hot mess from getting a significant hit in marketshare, through TWIMTBP money.

 

[sir doris]

Some mistakes can't be fixed, doesn't matter how much money you throw at it.

You don't think Intel knew they had a hot mess with P4?

You don't think AMD had a hot mess with Bulldozer?

You don't think nV knew they had a hot mess with FX?

You don't think AMD knew they had a hot mess with the r600?

Yet they couldn't do anything to fix those issues, they released anyways, because the time to fix those mistakes, the gen is over..... instead of getting as much as they can, they would have lost everything.

AMD knew/knows what they have with Polaris, I don't think there is any question about them not knowing what they have. They are just trying to make the best of a bad situation.

If AMD takes the time to fix the issues, look what happened last year when they had no new products for 6-9 months to go up against Maxwell 2?

Major loss in marketshare and they will not recover that for maybe 2 years maybe longer.

With regard to R&D funding, the more money you have the quicker you can fix things. Intel had a 2nd team to work on the Core architecture when they realised P4 was a dead end, AMD didn't with Bulldozer. R&D budget doesn't preclude whoopsies, but if you have multiple teams you can turn the situation around quicker and I would imagine less whoopsies would get through i the first place.

 

[Razor1]

I know (as in, it was documented and proven before a trial) that Intel during their P4 failure used their loads of cash to get exclusivity contracts with retailers and PC builders which kept AMD from gaining a sizeable chunk of marketshare.
I know AMD with Bulldozer couldn't do that, obviously, so it had to compete in price with ridiculously low margins.

Really, hmm we are talking about products and you are talking about marketing?

FX is too far away to make a comparison, though nvidia did get Valve to develop a special path for FX cards using mixed PS1.4/2.0 code and forced FP16 precision shaders for Half Life 2, which was the coolest thing for years to come.
A fairer comparison would be how nvidia kept Fermi's 1st-gen hot mess from getting a significant hit in marketshare, through TWIMTBP money.

Dude nV lost marketshare with both cards, Fx and Fermi, Fermi marketshare too!, the first Q after Fermi cards were launched..........

I can't believe you are just throwing out these things without knowing what those things did to nV.........

 

[Razor1]

With regard to R&D funding, the more money you have the quicker you can fix things. Intel had a 2nd team to work on the Core architecture when they realised P4 was a dead end, AMD didn't with Bulldozer. R&D budget doesn't preclude whoopsies, but if you have multiple teams you can turn the situation around quicker and I would imagine less whoopsies would get through i the first place.

Yeah I agree they can but at the end it took Intel 5 years to get their M ip over to desktops, which is coincidentally the life cycle of a full line up of a processor tech at that time.

 

[A1xLLcqAgt0qc2RyMz0y]

Is AMD having more problems with the FIX?

I have not seem any communication update on the issues they found that they said would be out today.

 

[Deleted member 2197]

Radeon RX 490: release still in 2016?
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/AMD-Radeon-Grafikkarte-255597/News/Radeon-RX-490-Release-2016-1200076/

 

[Razor1]

Is AMD having more problems with the FIX?

I have not seem any communication update on the issues they found that they said would be out today.

I hope they get the fix out before the reviews of the 1060 hit, cause ya know reviewers are going to mention that again and this time it will be every reviewer.......

 

[Razor1]

Radeon RX 490: release still in 2016?
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/AMD-Radeon-Grafikkarte-255597/News/Radeon-RX-490-Release-2016-1200076/

Wasn't Vega always q1 17 outside of a rumor of October?

 

[Geeforcer]

Sooo...Tuesday is almost over. Any word?

 

[Deleted member 2197]

 

[Razor1]

LOL wow they aren't even changing the box art guess its cheaper to make stickers hehe