AMD: Volcanic Islands R1100/1200 (8***/9*** series) Speculation/ Rumour Thread

Discussion in 'Architecture and Products' started by Nemo, May 7, 2013.

Tags:
  1. LordEC911

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    789
    Likes Received:
    74
    Location:
    'Zona
    There are gaming situations that GK110 based cards aren't running at their "guaranteed" average boost clocks...
     
    #2221 LordEC911, Dec 5, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 5, 2013
  2. gongo

    Regular

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    582
    Likes Received:
    12
    What i see from the TR piece is...if AMD can get the 290x (AIB) to stay in boost state longer, it should perform as good as 780Ti! Those tested 290x seems to run at >50mhz slower than the 780Ti...

    Although overclocking potential, 780Ti is much better...

    It is impressive that Nvidia got the 780Ti fan to spin faster yet sounded less noisy...could be the metal casing softening the noise better than AMD plastic shroud.
     
  3. silent_guy

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Messages:
    3,754
    Likes Received:
    1,379
    Similarly, in the case of AMD, you could state that there are cases where you can meet the boost clock. E.g. In the first 3 minutes of operation. Or when you happen to be in the possession of a reviewers card. :wink:

    AMD has been extraordinarily clumsy in this whole affair. Not spending the time and effort for a decent cooler. Specifying maximum possible clocks instead of a lower bound. Instead of delighting a customer with much higher than minimum expected performance in most cases, they left the door wide open for ridicule. With exactly the same technical solution (well, except for the cooler) and a better understanding of human psychology, they could have created a much better story.

    I don't think it matter all that much in the short term: these cards will sell like hotcakes no matter what, thanks to whatever crypto currency du jour is popular.

    But they do create/reinforce an image of flakiness that will linger for a long time. It's similar to the perennial to claims that AMD drivers are worse. I have no idea if they are, but the perception exists. Or take the Crossfire jitter, or the 4K vertical tearing. It doesn't really matter for 99% of the users, but Nvidia is so incredibly good at magnifying these kind of flaws and creating a feeling of being more reliable. This is why they can charge higher $ for the same !.
     
  4. 3dilettante

    Legend Alpha

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    8,122
    Likes Received:
    2,873
    Location:
    Well within 3d
    We know that PowerTune keeps track of the power draw of chip, which means it should be running close to max power in that time period. That it drops down afterwards puts a fair amount of blame (most?) on the cooler.

    You're not seeing the big picture--the sheer genius of it all.
    They're outsourcing their QA and product followup to their competitor, and look at all the quality frame variance tools and statistical data they're getting for free!
    At this rate, they're bankrupting Nvidia with the wealth of bugs it has to track down for them.
    Clumsy? Clumsy like a fox. ;)

    Their clock scheme might be aggressive enough that its ability to dial back clocks when the GPU queues are low might violate any non-embarrassing minimum given, while forcing a higher minimum would leave performance on the table.
    The way around it would be some kind of profiling tool that would distinguish between throttling and idling so that they or reviewers could provide more complete messaging. If not that, a performance-monitoring API or toolset with a function that provides average non-idling clocks.

    Then there's the whole "complete messaging" thing.

    Might be a business model. Think MantleCoin, or the like.

    Apparently, Nvidia is on top of both their products and their competition, like they take their craft seriously.
    Their competition put its emphasis on other things besides looking at the output or consistency of their own products, going by the latency problems and microstutter, because that's how you show you care.
     
  5. homerdog

    homerdog donator of the year
    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2008
    Messages:
    6,153
    Likes Received:
    928
    Location:
    still camping with a mauler
    [yoda]Read article you must[/yoda]
     
  6. leoneazzurro

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Messages:
    518
    Likes Received:
    25
    Location:
    Rome, Italy
    Sorry, I did not read the article (I did it now), but it was baffling to me that Nvidia criticized AMD for the exact same thing they already did in the past. But I did not see TR bashing Nvidia publicy for this reason, instead that very tech site reviewed TurboBoost as a great feature, not they did an article about the differences between sample and retail cards (like othere sites did). I am not happy the way AMD is addressing these issues, because they are real and the variance is somewhat too big, but the funny thing is that they are only following the footsteps of NV... When they had guaranteed performance for each card, they were bashed. Now they implemented their "TurboBoost" and they get bashed again. Really, these are two measures and the bias tech sites are putting in one direction or another is really a bad thing.
     
  7. 3dilettante

    Legend Alpha

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    8,122
    Likes Received:
    2,873
    Location:
    Well within 3d
    There is an element of human psychology to all this.
    One vendor provides a product with variable performance past a mostly consistent published baseline clock.
    The other provides no baseline, but a maximum it does not guarantee.

    Uber mode handles much of this this, I think, but I think it was sub-optimal to make the non-default mode the more consistent one, and to set everything relative to a marketed max clock the card can only fall short of.
    The default silent mode then becomes one where individual cards provide varying levels of disappointment.
    That the retail samples were consistently below AMD's expectations (don't know what methods it used to set those expectations) doesn't help, because that means the product as sold will have by default an implication of misrepresentation on top of the inferior power consumption and acoustics.

    Compare that to a quieter, more efficient card that provides varying amounts of icing on the cake turbo.

    There is variation, but we can see how having a few different positives or negatives and appropriate framing can change perception.
     
  8. silent_guy

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Messages:
    3,754
    Likes Received:
    1,379
    In their latest press release, AMD claims to not understand how retail performance is biased towards the lower side: http://techreport.com/news/25733/amd-issues-statement-on-r9-290x-speed-variability-press-samples

    At the same time, Nvidia is so confident that they are all biased towards the low side that they're willing to play the Newegg lottery on this.

    Let's assume that AMD is speaking the truth: that means that they really didn't have a clue about the behavior of their own product. Stunning.
     
  9. 3dilettante

    Legend Alpha

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    8,122
    Likes Received:
    2,873
    Location:
    Well within 3d
    I really think there's something more going on with this.
    1) Discounting deceit on the part of AMD.
    2) Discounting a screwup on the part of AMD for the press samples or retail.

    Why would Nvidia be so confident on this?
    Did it buy a big selection of cards and profile them?
    Even if there was a higher chance of lower performance, Techreport's sample was two cards. It would only take one sample from the minority to blow up in Nvidia's face.

    Is there something physical in the cards that they picked up on, like a noted change in manufacturing tolerances, the rough handling of retail warehousing and shipping, or a lack of curing period on fresh retail samples?

    Did Nvidia offer this deal to other sites?
    What were the publishing conditions of this deal?
    Can Nvidia decide what can be published if the results were different?
    Would sites that found no significant variation decide there was nothing to publish?

    See microstutter and frame latency in the last year, although I believe at least the crossfire stutter was known and considered WAD.
     
  10. no-X

    Veteran

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Messages:
    2,298
    Likes Received:
    247
    Almost every editor removes the cooler of the press sample to look at the GPU, PCB etc. It's necessary to clean remains of the original TIM and apply a new one (almost everything is better than the original one). It may improve the thermal transfer and performance, of course. Couldn't this be the reason why are the press samples slightly faster than most retail boards?
     
  11. 3dilettante

    Legend Alpha

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    8,122
    Likes Received:
    2,873
    Location:
    Well within 3d
    I don't believe TR did that.
    Would reviewers tear apart and potentially wreck the cards prior to testing?
     
  12. gongo

    Regular

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    582
    Likes Received:
    12
    I wonder what will go through AMD engineers' minds when they see perf graphs like such....
    [​IMG]
    It is like...20nm comes early...7970/280x to 290x gets you 30% more fps..while 680/770 to 780Ti overclocked gains 80% more fps!!.

    and this...
    [​IMG]
    Dave you guys need to get your Powertune bios correct soon...please dont wait until next gen to make fix...
     
  13. silent_guy

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Messages:
    3,754
    Likes Received:
    1,379
    In the comments, Scott Wasson says explicitly that he never removed the cooler of any of his samples.
     
  14. 3dilettante

    Legend Alpha

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    8,122
    Likes Received:
    2,873
    Location:
    Well within 3d
    What's wrong with that picture specifically?
    Discounting the special OC versions, the wobblier line is on average likely better than if AMD made it flat for Hawaii.
     
    #2234 3dilettante, Dec 6, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 6, 2013
  15. Alexko

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    4,496
    Likes Received:
    910
    Is this really such a common practice? Did the Tech Report do it?

    Edit: oops, Silent Guy answered that last part.
     
  16. no-X

    Veteran

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Messages:
    2,298
    Likes Received:
    247
    Alexko: Every site showing a photo of the die / PCB / memory modules etc. had to remove the cooler.
    But in this case the cause is likely somewhere else...

    The clocks are related to temperature and (temperature is related to) fan speed. Fan speed variability was fixed, TIM was untouched in this case, so the last thing, which could affect thermal transfer is the heatsink / vapor chamber. Simple swap of coolers between the press sample a an another board would likely tell us more.
     
  17. silent_guy

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Messages:
    3,754
    Likes Received:
    1,379
    Here's what he writes in the comments:
     
  18. homerdog

    homerdog donator of the year
    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2008
    Messages:
    6,153
    Likes Received:
    928
    Location:
    still camping with a mauler
    Lol so many questions from people who didn't read the article :)
     
  19. 3dilettante

    Legend Alpha

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    8,122
    Likes Received:
    2,873
    Location:
    Well within 3d
    If they swap coolers, they need to also test the case where they remove the cooler and reinstall it back on the same card with whatever process for applying TIM done as they would normally.

    Otherwise, swapping is changing the cooler and TIM simultaneously.
    A more rigorous test would wind up reseating and testing multiple times, and reseating and testing multiple times after swapping. There can measurable differences between compound applications, so multiple tests would be needed to get an idea of how variable that is.

    Even past that, I would wonder about secondary contributors to power draw and temperature.
    What is the power draw of the fan, and does that figure a little into when the card is power-limited?

    What if we had a heat source of controllable power output, and we used it to test the behavior of the heatsink over time? There's definitely a period where the mass of the cooler can keep temps low, which probably explains the first part of each test run where clocks run at max.
    Is there a power level where performance degrades, such as heat pipe or vapor chamber dry out?

    We don't have a good idea of how consistent the mechanical and physical portions of the card are, aside from the fans we know can vary very significantly.
     
  20. Otto Dafe

    Regular

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    400
    Likes Received:
    59
    A more rigorous test would record the ambient temperature. All that other stuff would be good too though.
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...