I'm expecting nothing less than RV670->RV770 type gains. 2 years is a fuck of a long time in graphics.
Sure but RV670 was tiny! Also, not a very efficient design.
I'm expecting nothing less than RV670->RV770 type gains. 2 years is a fuck of a long time in graphics.
The same relative increase as between RV670 and RV770 but starting from the basically twice as large Tahiti would end up with about twice the RV770 size, a bit above 500mm². Would be definitly doable from that point of view. And GCN is still a relatively new architecture (RV670 was already the second try with VLIW5 as a shrinked and slightly modified R600, RV770 didn't just increase the amount of shaders, it also changed the internal organization quite a bit). While GCN looks well crafted in general, I'm sure AMD was able to find a few rough edges to smooth for VI. They also had some time for it. The emphasis this time can't be just pure performance of course, but the power consumption has to be kept in check, too. So it will most probably be a smaller jump than a factor of 2.5 in raw shader performance (and often almost factor 2 in games) in the same process as with the RV770.Sure but RV670 was tiny! Also, not a very efficient design.
Now that is fighting talk!I'm expecting nothing less than RV670->RV770 type gains
4. V.I. and Kaveri were both delayed about a year from original timelines.
<snip>
A lot of factors determine product release. Sometimes you don't need to look any further than the obvious to see timing; manufacturing.
I suppose I should be clear and say I'm referring to per-unit efficiency: units being area and power.Now that is fighting talk!
In term of price/perf, they likely will. But Nvidia can always adjust prices. The question is: will they?
If they can sell FirePros for thousands of $ and graphics cards for $500-600+, costs shouldn't be an issue. Especially with the relatively low supply in the beginning.
AMD sells the 7970 with a 365mm2 GPU for basically $300 with all the bundled games. I doubt that they don't make at least some money despice the low price. Even if 20nm were twice as expensive, if they raise prices to $600, they would still make money and gain market share.
30-40% faster than Titan for $499???
Why on earth would that erode their brand? Rather, it would be a tremendous boost to their brand!Do you honestly think AMD would erode it's brand again by selling a card that is 30-40% faster than Titan for $499???
Why on earth would that erode their brand? Rather, it would be a tremendous boost to their brand!
Titan at its current price is underperforming and overpriced. Even something 30-40% faster, at a thousand bucks it's still going to be hella overpriced.
And still it is sold. As are Porsches, Mercedes, Apple etc.
You can build a brand on value and always be perceived as the second and cheap option. This is what AMD currently is. Or you can sell excellent products at higher prices. ATI sold the X800XT - X1900XT(X) for $500-600. Their market position and market share was excellent, their brand strong. And then their brand image took a deep plunge due to the price dumping and is only now slowly recovering.