Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [Wccftech] AMD Vega 10 3DMark Fire Strike Benchmark Entry Spotted
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Wccftech] AMD Vega 10 3DMark Fire Strike Benchmark Entry Spotted - Page 14

post #131 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjdubb View Post

I'm pretty sure that's exactly what they did, it's called tegra.

i don't think so, Tegra is for Mobile and Embedded systems.

i'm talking about this.
https://www.techpowerup.com/174856/nvidia-tesla-could-integrate-64-bit-arm-cores
post #132 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic1337 View Post

well yes, and its because the CPUs has a wider field that it can cover, even GPUs can't cover certain fields where an IGP or being headless are more than enough.
though on that matter, Intel's sales on their CPUs are mostly on their Xeon lines, the sales on their desktop SKUs are only a fraction of the overall sales.
not if its written in CUDA or OCL/OGL, all GPUs within their respective camps supports these code regardless of which model it is.
The client group has 8 bil of revenue compared to the data center group's 4.2, and I'd expect the former to exclude most Xeons for businesses. Xeons are a larger portion of the sales than desktop, but mobile quite easily trumps them both. The current <=4C CPUs with an iGP easily make up the largest part of Intel's revenue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic1337 View Post

not if its written in CUDA or OCL/OGL, all GPUs within their respective camps supports these code regardless of which model it is.
I was referring to switching from Nvidia to AMD or vice versa. It's usage dependant, but generally you want to run Cuda on Nvidia and OCL on AMD.
post #133 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmericanLoco View Post

If nvidias revenues are a drip in the ocean, then AMDs are a fart in the entire observable universe. Getting half of the GPU marketshare would increase AMD's revenue by over 200%
I'm just gonna stop replying now, cant tell if your trolling or not, every single post you've taken out of context. Drip in the ocean compared to intel but go ahead and tell me again how awesomely awesome nvidia are and how amd are the wooooorst lol or maybe I should reply with why I like GM more than Ford because thats as relevant to your replies to anything I've said.
post #134 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmericanLoco View Post

If nvidias revenues are a drip in the ocean, then AMDs are a fart in the entire observable universe. Getting half of the GPU marketshare would increase AMD's revenue by over 200%

Can your read?
OCTARINE
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1700 Asus X370 Crosshair VI Hero EVGA 1080 Ti Ballistix Elite 3466 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
SM961 Samsung 850 evo Custom Loop Windows 10 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell S2716DG Asus VC239H Corsair K70 RGB Brown In Win 750w 
CaseMouseAudio
In Win 805 Logitech MX Master 2s Kento YU3 
  hide details  
Reply
OCTARINE
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1700 Asus X370 Crosshair VI Hero EVGA 1080 Ti Ballistix Elite 3466 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
SM961 Samsung 850 evo Custom Loop Windows 10 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell S2716DG Asus VC239H Corsair K70 RGB Brown In Win 750w 
CaseMouseAudio
In Win 805 Logitech MX Master 2s Kento YU3 
  hide details  
Reply
post #135 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tojara View Post

Xeons are a larger portion of the sales than desktop, but mobile quite easily trumps them both. The current <=4C CPUs with an iGP easily make up the largest part of Intel's revenue.

i could see why, mobile devices has become the go-to standard of most consumers, specially so for the students.

AMD's presence on mobile is effectively non-existent, presumably the Zen-based APUs would turn this around with more affordable chips.
at the very least we'll be able to see much more affordable 4C/8T laptops with a more than adequate IGPs, hopefully those "very-smart" OEMs doesn't insist on putting in a GT920M into their laptops.
post #136 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by delboy67 View Post

I'm just gonna stop replying now, cant tell if your trolling or not, every single post you've taken out of context. Drip in the ocean compared to intel but go ahead and tell me again how awesomely awesome nvidia are and how amd are the wooooorst lol or maybe I should reply with why I like GM more than Ford because thats as relevant to your replies to anything I've said.
My replies aren't irrelevant just because you don't agree with them. It's really quite simple, you are excusing AMD's terrible GPU performance by saying they should be focusing on taking market share from Intel, since nvidia's revenue is so much smaller than Intel's. The reality is that nVidia selling GPU products alone has far higher net profit than AMD - far, far higher. Taking just half of market back from nvidia would result in AMD going from losing hundreds of millions of dollars each year to being well within the black. You guys keep saying high end GPUs aren't profitable, but that's what nvidia has been doing for the past 3-4 years, and they're showing record profits for it. Not to mention nvidia's midrange offerings outsell AMD's 2:1 or more. The GeForce 1060 has barely been out a year, and it's already the 4th most popular GPU among steam users, with 5% of the market share. The RX480 is languishing with 1%.

I'm in no way saying nvidia is the best either. I don't like nvidia, I don't own a single nvidia product either. I've been a big fan of AMD for the past 13 years, but I'm not blinded by fanboyism to pretend they're perfect and ignore their faults. You can even go through my post history to see where I've defended AMD tooth and nail.
Edited by AmericanLoco - 5/8/17 at 3:07pm
post #137 of 209
wasn't the bulk of Nvidia's consumer GPU sales on the 960/970 and 1060/1070?
i doubt they were able to sell a billion dollars worth of Titan Xs.
post #138 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmericanLoco View Post

My replies aren't irrelevant just becaus you don't agree with themt. It's really quite simple, you are excusing AMD's terrible GPU performance by saying they should be focusing on taking market share from Intel, since nvidia's revenue is so much smaller than Intel's. The reality is that nVidia selling GPU products alone has far higher net profit than AMD - far, far higher. Taking just half of market back from nvidia would result in AMD going from losing hundreds of millions of dollars each year to being well within the black. You guys keep saying high end GPUs aren't profitable, but that's what nvidia has been doing for the past 3-4 years, and they're showing record profits for it. Not to mention nvidia's midrange offerings outsell AMD's 2:1 or more. The GeForce 1060 has barely been out a year, and it's already the 4th most popular GPU among steam users, with 5% of the market share. The RX480 is languishing with 1%.

I'm in no way saying nvidia is the best either. I don't like nvidia, I don't own a single nvidia product either. I've been a big fan of AMD for the past 13 years, but I'm not blinded by fanboyism to pretend they're perfect and ignore their faults. You can even go through my post history to see where I've defended AMD tooth and nail.
I believe thats what they have tried to do for the best part of a decade and I believe it caused the bulldozer fiasco and very nearly destroyed them and ati, naples is looking really good on most metrics, I bet it gets them more revenue by a mile than anything they've ever done in the gpu space and THEN they can attack nvidia from a position of strength and with apus better market/mindshare. They done right with polaris and ryzen imho.
Edited by delboy67 - 5/8/17 at 6:41pm
post #139 of 209
The only thing I care about is having 10+ gigs of vram.
post #140 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by blue1512 View Post

If you had followed Polaris properly you would have seen that at its comfort clock, around 1100 MHz, the 14nm of AMD is MORE efficient than Pascal. Believe it or not but that's why AMD are still getting the money from GPGPU. The only advantage of nVidia is the more popular CUDA, which is slowly diminishing along the rise of OpenCL.

You're talking complete non-sense.
More fake newz won't help AMD, their products are bad and late and it's a fact.
Why AMD didn't lauch Polaris in the 1100MHz clockframe ? Because it can't do the job Vs Pascal. Plain and simple.
Even AMD themselves admit that the GPU segment was not so good last quarter.
Quote:
CG revenue declined 1% sequentially, which was better than normal seasonality, as significant growth in desktop processor sales driven by the first month of Ryzen CPU sales largely offset seasonal declines in GPU and notebook APU sales.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/4067646-advanced-micro-devices-amd-q1-2017-results-earnings-call-transcript?part=single
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [Wccftech] AMD Vega 10 3DMark Fire Strike Benchmark Entry Spotted