Originally Posted by Shatun-Bear
Over the past few months I have seen countless comments along the lines of 'GCN needs to die it can't compete with Nvidia's' but after this launch and looking at how the Radeon 7 stacks up, it's pretty clear to me GCN is not the problem. BF5 and Prey, games that have been focused on by both driver teams shows the Radeon 7 is nearly 15% faster (in DX12 of course). AMD and GCN's problem is a mix of software-side things:
- Games targeting Nvidia hardware as well as Nvidia propriety features as you say
- Poor drivers in smaller/older titles (this is an issue due to their resource-stretched driver team)
- Reviewers benching majority of titles in DX11, which compounds the above issue
They could change their architecture completely, but unless they reverse engineer Turing and its successor to create a mirror image arch of their own, these problems will remain just as they are with GCN. GCN is compute focused but it wouldn't make sense to abandon that when the coming PS5 has an APU with heavy compute customization (speculation, but it has Navi-based GPU cores).
GCN is more futureproof compared to CUDA cores. People who are speculating that Nvidias are better optmized for gaming and AMD for computing should look at raw data about the graphical chips. Nvidia usually has less Shaders and much more ROPs, while they are pushing GPU and GDDR frequencies as high as possible - thats why their VRMs and Coolers are so much of an overkill, while it has little to do with GCN or Turing as a whole.
In most cases the improvements in FPS may look nice on graph, but in reali life, you either play at 1080p, 1440p, or 4K at 30, 60 or 120 FPS (in few cases more). Therefore its a question whether it really matters that one graphic card can do 1440p at 130FPS or 160FPS? Not really unless you can display that.
Also Nvidia has its logo pasted on 60-70 percent of PC gaming titles, therefore optimizations towards this architecture is expected. AMD is in exactly oppossite situation because they have won the console market and they really dont need to push anything to anyone. Their job is based on reliability and compatibility = its expected that porting from PC to consoles should be as easy as is technically possible.
Originally Posted by ilmazzo
Temperature and noise are again, like vega, due to a high stock voltage........ at least I hope people are not taking as operational noise the furmark scenario.....
Temperatures are very good from my tests. During MSI Kombustor 1080p test, GPU did not went over 83°C (its very good considering the shape and mass of the cooler). It was just Tjunction which was too high - that indicates only poor pressure and bad contact with the cooler.
--- Building in progress
* AMD Threadripper 1900x * Asrock X399M Taichi * Radeon VII * Gskill Xflare / Samsung B-die 3200 14-14-14-32 * Samsung 970 PRO 512gb * Fractal Design Node 804 * Seasonic Prime Ultra 850 Titanium *
--- Desktop * AMD Phenom II x6 1090t @ 3,8GHz * ASUS M5A99FX PRO R2.0 * Gigabyte R9 FuryX * A-Data XPG 2.0 / Elpida Hyper MNH 1866 @ 1600 6-6-6-18
* LSI 9211-8i / Raid 0 / 5x Corsair Force 3 GS * Creative Xfi Fatal1ty * Intel I210-T1 * Steelseries 6Gv2 * Logitech MX518 * Samsung U28E590D *