Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [Reddit] RX 480 fails PCI-E specification
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Reddit] RX 480 fails PCI-E specification - Page 54  

post #531 of 1129
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnLai View Post

Not sure if this is posted yet...but here goes since many people keep using GTX960 Strix as arguments......

Evaluating-ASUS-GTX-960-Strix
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Power-Consumption-Concerns-Radeon-RX-480/Evaluating-ASUS-GTX-960-Strix

Thanks for the update. I can't believe the PCper folks felt forced to feed the trolls about that GTX960 review.
post #532 of 1129
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperZan View Post

I may just be an optometrist but I'm not convinced that the issues the 480 has will substantially affect Vega. I think that Polaris was always designed to be a mobile/super-mainstream part and their attempt to 'performasize' (my new term, patent pending) the 480 effectively is pushing the chip beyond what it's supposed to do within specific efficiency parameters. The PCIe deal and the general Maxwell efficiency is a pretty good indicator, all the more so if the 460 and 470 are substantially better in terms of perf/watt. Vega being designed for performance from the jump will probably end up being better in terms of relative perf/watt simply because it's not going to be shoehorned into an odd niche like the 480 was. They can build the chip for performance, tune it to be as efficient as possible without significant performance loss, and let you decide via overclocking how much efficiency you'd like to lose.

No, no, no, don't you get it? The performance of their $200 budget chip locks in stone the performance of every chip they will ever make on 14nm silly girl! 480 is a fail (because it uses more power than Pascal) regardless of performance or the rumored 1600MHz OCing and Vega is going to absolutely be exactly the same. I know because all of the Nvidia fanboys have told me so repeatedly! lachen.gif
post #533 of 1129
Quote:
Originally Posted by variant View Post

Polaris is Graphics IP v8.0 and Vega is Graphics IP v9.0. Polaris is closer to Fiji/Tonga which is also Graphics IP v8.0 than to Vega. Vega has never been called 4th generation GCN.

Polaris is the architecture that was designed for 20nm and they shrunk it down for 14nm, while Vega is AMD's architecture they designed for 14nm.

Hawaii was the architecture originally intended for 20nm, not Polaris.
My home PC
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Threadripper 1950x Gigabyte Aorus X399 Gaming 7  MSI Geforce GTX 1080ti Gaming X G.Skill DDR4 3600 CL16 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung Evo 840 500GB Samsung 960 Pro 500GB Noctua NH-U14S TR4 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2711 Samsung 55" 4k Corsair K70  EVGA SuperNova G2 1300W 
CaseMouseAudio
Corsair Carbide Air 540 Logitech G502 Denon AVR-X3300W 
  hide details  
My home PC
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Threadripper 1950x Gigabyte Aorus X399 Gaming 7  MSI Geforce GTX 1080ti Gaming X G.Skill DDR4 3600 CL16 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung Evo 840 500GB Samsung 960 Pro 500GB Noctua NH-U14S TR4 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2711 Samsung 55" 4k Corsair K70  EVGA SuperNova G2 1300W 
CaseMouseAudio
Corsair Carbide Air 540 Logitech G502 Denon AVR-X3300W 
  hide details  
post #534 of 1129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kpjoslee View Post

Hawaii was the architecture originally intended for 20nm, not Polaris.

What??? Hawaii came out less than two years into 28nm. No way in hell they were expecting 20nm anytime soon when they designed Hawaii...
post #535 of 1129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Majin SSJ Eric View Post

What??? Hawaii came out less than two years into 28nm. No way in hell they were expecting 20nm anytime soon when they designed Hawaii...

I am pretty sure both Maxwell and Hawaii were intended for 20nm but forced to release on 28nm when TSMC just couldn't get anything right on 20nm and decided to go straight to 16nm much later lol. It was unfortunate for AMD since AMD really needed that node shrink, by looking at its power draw.
We were supposed to be getting 20nm somewhere on the middle betweeen 28nm n 16nm if everything went to the TSMC's plan.
Edited by Kpjoslee - 7/1/16 at 10:13pm
My home PC
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Threadripper 1950x Gigabyte Aorus X399 Gaming 7  MSI Geforce GTX 1080ti Gaming X G.Skill DDR4 3600 CL16 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung Evo 840 500GB Samsung 960 Pro 500GB Noctua NH-U14S TR4 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2711 Samsung 55" 4k Corsair K70  EVGA SuperNova G2 1300W 
CaseMouseAudio
Corsair Carbide Air 540 Logitech G502 Denon AVR-X3300W 
  hide details  
My home PC
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Threadripper 1950x Gigabyte Aorus X399 Gaming 7  MSI Geforce GTX 1080ti Gaming X G.Skill DDR4 3600 CL16 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung Evo 840 500GB Samsung 960 Pro 500GB Noctua NH-U14S TR4 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2711 Samsung 55" 4k Corsair K70  EVGA SuperNova G2 1300W 
CaseMouseAudio
Corsair Carbide Air 540 Logitech G502 Denon AVR-X3300W 
  hide details  
post #536 of 1129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kpjoslee View Post

I am pretty sure both Maxwell and Hawaii were intended for 20nm but forced to release on 28nm when TSMC just couldn't get anything right on 20nm and decided to go straight to 16nm much later lol. It was unfortunate for AMD since AMD really needed that node shrink, by looking at its power draw.
We were supposed to be getting 20nm somewhere on the middle betweeen 28nm n 16nm if everything went to the TSMC's plan.

Maxwell was designed for 20nm, but pretty sure it was Fiji and not Hawaii that was supposed to be designed for 20nm.
post #537 of 1129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Majin SSJ Eric View Post

What??? Hawaii came out less than two years into 28nm. No way in hell they were expecting 20nm anytime soon when they designed Hawaii...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kpjoslee View Post

I am pretty sure both Maxwell and Hawaii were intended for 20nm but forced to release on 28nm when TSMC just couldn't get anything right on 20nm and decided to go straight to 16nm much later lol. It was unfortunate for AMD since AMD really needed that node shrink, by looking at its power draw.
We were supposed to be getting 20nm somewhere on the middle betweeen 28nm n 16nm if everything went to the TSMC's plan.

Yes Pirate Islands was supposed to be on 20nm. Now it was speculation whether Hawaii or Fiji would be the first one on it. Fiji most definitely was designed with 20nm in mind. As was Maxwell. 750ti just happened to be small enough to port onto 28nm without a lot of effort.
post #538 of 1129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vowels View Post

Read PCPer's actual article instead of a summary. No one is astro-turfing for Nvidia.
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Power-Consumption-Concerns-Radeon-RX-480

The current going through the PCI-E slot is out of spec even at stock settings. There's also a third page that tests the so-called out of spec GTX 960 but it's average wattage and current are within spec even if it does spike higher than the RX 480.

I am not talking about PCPer or some review site astro-turfing. I am talking about fake user accounts being created and claiming that the card has killed their motherboard-type of astro-turfing. I am not sure if you have noticed but so far... the two guys whose motherboards have died are brand new accounts with zero posting history and their description of the symptoms they have suffered makes no logical sense whatsoever.

In other words... they are astro-turfing.
Kn0wledge
(20 items)
 
Pati3nce
(14 items)
 
Wisd0m
(10 items)
 
Kn0wledge
(20 items)
 
Pati3nce
(14 items)
 
Wisd0m
(10 items)
 
post #539 of 1129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahigan View Post

I am not talking about PCPer or some review site astro-turfing. I am talking about fake user accounts being created and claiming that the card has killed their motherboard-type of astro-turfing. I am not sure if you have noticed but so far... the two guys whose motherboards have died are brand new accounts with zero posting history and their description of the symptoms they have suffered makes no logical sense whatsoever.

In other words... they are astro-turfing.

Not to mention the few, and very few reports, come from people who have beefy mobos. Yet the RX 480 is a high volume, low cost, marketshare part. These cards will be mainly going into older systems, low costs systems, and OEM systems. Most of these motherboards that the RX 480 will be plugged into will be the low end boards. And yet, with thousands of these cards sold per store, we're not seeing a high rate of these claims, in fact, have we heard of more than 10 of these claims? Sure theres a lot of reports of it using too much power over PCIe, and that it can possibly cause damage over a long period of time, but are we actually getting reports of mobos dying left and right? Why are high end boards affected but I have yet to see a budget board go up in flames?

It's almost as if this issue isn't true... It's almost as if its complete BS... But hey, lets wait a few more days. Surely if high end mobos are dying from a mainstream GPU, then low end and mainstream boards will start catching fire by the truckload right? So yea, lets wait a few more days to a couple weeks and watch the thousands and thousands of reports of mobos bursting into flames, killing first born sons, and stealing wives.
M06
(20 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX6300 Gigabyte 990FXA-UD5 XFX 7950 - 3GB G.Skill Sniper 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3 2133 CL9 @ 1733... 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
WD Blue 500GB WD Black 1.5TB Crucial M4 128GB (OS) LG ODD 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Deepcool Lucifer v2 Win7 Ultimate 64 bit Acer X223w (1050) LG 22EN33 (1080) 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Sharkoon Tactix OCZ ModXstream Pro 700w Modular Corsair 300R CM Storm Xornet 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
Steelseries Qck+ DOTA2 Edition Edifier e1100+  Sennheiser HD215 Plantronics Gamecom 307 
  hide details  
M06
(20 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX6300 Gigabyte 990FXA-UD5 XFX 7950 - 3GB G.Skill Sniper 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3 2133 CL9 @ 1733... 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
WD Blue 500GB WD Black 1.5TB Crucial M4 128GB (OS) LG ODD 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Deepcool Lucifer v2 Win7 Ultimate 64 bit Acer X223w (1050) LG 22EN33 (1080) 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Sharkoon Tactix OCZ ModXstream Pro 700w Modular Corsair 300R CM Storm Xornet 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
Steelseries Qck+ DOTA2 Edition Edifier e1100+  Sennheiser HD215 Plantronics Gamecom 307 
  hide details  
post #540 of 1129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahigan View Post

I am not talking about PCPer or some review site astro-turfing. I am talking about fake user accounts being created and claiming that the card has killed their motherboard-type of astro-turfing. I am not sure if you have noticed but so far... the two guys whose motherboards have died are brand new accounts with zero posting history and their description of the symptoms they have suffered makes no logical sense whatsoever.

In other words... they are astro-turfing.

If true that's a huge red flag for me, and instantly casts huge doubt on their credibility.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [Reddit] RX 480 fails PCI-E specification