[TechSpot] Navi vs. Turing: An Architecture Comparison - Page 2 - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

[TechSpot] Navi vs. Turing: An Architecture Comparison

Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #11 of 109 (permalink) Old 08-09-2019, 09:19 PM
Waiting for 7nm EUV
 
tpi2007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 11,259
Rep: 890 (Unique: 501)
Quote: Originally Posted by Imouto View Post
The non-Super RTX 2070 (10.8b) matches the transistors in the RX 5700 XT (10.3b) and it is 10% slower by their own testing. Yet, it is within the margin of error at 2% when going against the RTX 2070 Super (13.6b) and with the same amount of shaders (and same everything basically).

If anything, RT and Tensor cores are bloat at this point in time for gaming. Fun thing is that for once it wasn't AMD that jumped the gun implementing new features.

I wonder how Nvidia is facing the problem of over-provisioning die space for their next arch when it doesn't show in benchmarks. Let's not forget that the TU104 die is massive at 545 mm². That's flagship ballpark for their previous generations.

Next year RTX will start to show in benchmarks with the new games coming out. At that point in time Nvidia would do well to accompany those launches with 7nm EUV Ampere to make an impact, before AMD is able to respond. I think pretty much everyone is waiting for a more muscled RTX solution and 7nm EUV will be able to provide for a much more balanced and less bottlenecked experience. And the pricing. Nvidia needs to look at EPYC 2 (well, hang on, no, we don't want $7k GPU's Nvidia, that's not what I meant, ok? )

Is your CPU bottlenecking your GPU ? Find out: CPU and GPU usage along with FPS in-game
Read my reviews here.
Clubs (founder): The rare / unusual CPU club
Clubs (member): Corsair Professional HX / AX Series PSU Owners Club || The Official Cooler Master HAF X/932/922/912(+) Club
CPU
Core i7-3820
Motherboard
Asus Sabertooth X79
GPU
MSI GTX 1060 6 GB Gaming X
RAM
16 GB Corsair DDR3 1866 Mhz Dominator
Hard Drive
Samsung SSD 830 128GB + WD Caviar Black 2TB
Optical Drive
Sony Optiarc DVD-RW
Power Supply
Corsair AX750 Professional Modular 80 Plus Gold
Cooling
Corsair A70 + Noiseblocker M12-P
Case
Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus
Operating System
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit
Monitor
BenQ RL2455HM
Keyboard
Cooler Master Octane
Mouse
Cooler Master Octane
▲ hide details ▲


tpi2007 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #12 of 109 (permalink) Old 08-09-2019, 09:46 PM
professional curmudgeon
 
looniam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,568
Rep: 778 (Unique: 446)
Quote: Originally Posted by maltamonk View Post
The article was fine until they did the comparison of the 5700xt and the 2070s. Once they did that price became an omission. Both archs are parts of products which have prices and unless they are giving them away, they cannot be separated. Bias is ignoring price when it is integral.


are you really not understanding or just being obtuse? it was pointed out to you why the 570XT and 2070 were compared, for the configuration (cores/processors) similarities not the pricing.

pricing is subjective, explaining how an architecture works is objective. articles as ian cutress (anand) and david kanter (real world technologies) as biased because none of their articles don't include pricing is plain ignorant. pricing changes over time, an arch will stay the same. so no, it is not integral.

if you were looking for anything about pricing than:
Quote:
Welcome to our architectural and feature comparison of the newest GPUs from AMD and Nvidia: Navi vs Turing.
Quote:
This article is an observation of architectural design, features and functionality, but having a direct performance comparison would be a good way to round up such an analysis.
ought to gave you the hint it that wasn't going to be there.

or did you somehow read pricing was included in that? never read a research paper in your life?

regardless , it's a great article nonetheless.

edit: typo mania.

Remember the golden rule of statistics: A personal sample size of one is a sufficient basis upon which to draw universal conclusions.
Upload the computer to Dropbox and provide a link to it so others may download it to examine and give advice for repairs.
loon 3.2
(18 items)
CPU
i7-3770K
Motherboard
Asus P8Z77-V Pro
GPU
EVGA 980TI SC+
RAM
16Gb PNY ddr3 1866
Hard Drive
PNY 1311 240Gb
Hard Drive
1 TB Seagate
Hard Drive
3 TB WD Blue
Optical Drive
DVD DVDRW+/-
Power Supply
EVGA SuperNova 750 G2
Cooling
EKWB P280 kit
Cooling
EK-VGA supremacy
Case
Stryker M [hammered and drilled]
Operating System
Win X
Monitor
LG 24MC57HQ-P
Keyboard
Ducky Zero [blues]
Mouse
corsair M65
Audio
SB Recon3D
Audio
Klipsch ProMedia 2.1
▲ hide details ▲



Last edited by looniam; 08-09-2019 at 09:53 PM.
looniam is online now  
post #13 of 109 (permalink) Old 08-09-2019, 09:55 PM
Waiting for 7nm EUV
 
tpi2007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 11,259
Rep: 890 (Unique: 501)
It's a decent article when it comes to laying out the specs, but it makes a cop-out at the end and switches from comparing archs to comparing products. The truth is, Turing is viable at 12nm whereas Navi needs 7nm to exist at a similar TDP.

Is your CPU bottlenecking your GPU ? Find out: CPU and GPU usage along with FPS in-game
Read my reviews here.
Clubs (founder): The rare / unusual CPU club
Clubs (member): Corsair Professional HX / AX Series PSU Owners Club || The Official Cooler Master HAF X/932/922/912(+) Club
CPU
Core i7-3820
Motherboard
Asus Sabertooth X79
GPU
MSI GTX 1060 6 GB Gaming X
RAM
16 GB Corsair DDR3 1866 Mhz Dominator
Hard Drive
Samsung SSD 830 128GB + WD Caviar Black 2TB
Optical Drive
Sony Optiarc DVD-RW
Power Supply
Corsair AX750 Professional Modular 80 Plus Gold
Cooling
Corsair A70 + Noiseblocker M12-P
Case
Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus
Operating System
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit
Monitor
BenQ RL2455HM
Keyboard
Cooler Master Octane
Mouse
Cooler Master Octane
▲ hide details ▲


tpi2007 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #14 of 109 (permalink) Old 08-09-2019, 10:04 PM
professional curmudgeon
 
looniam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,568
Rep: 778 (Unique: 446)
Quote: Originally Posted by tpi2007 View Post
It's a decent article when it comes to laying out the specs, but it makes a cop-out at the end and switches from comparing archs to comparing products. The truth is, Turing is viable at 12nm whereas Navi needs 7nm to exist at a similar TDP.
how else can an be observation made of the differences without a comparison of products?



bejesus i'm a typo fest.

Remember the golden rule of statistics: A personal sample size of one is a sufficient basis upon which to draw universal conclusions.
Upload the computer to Dropbox and provide a link to it so others may download it to examine and give advice for repairs.
loon 3.2
(18 items)
CPU
i7-3770K
Motherboard
Asus P8Z77-V Pro
GPU
EVGA 980TI SC+
RAM
16Gb PNY ddr3 1866
Hard Drive
PNY 1311 240Gb
Hard Drive
1 TB Seagate
Hard Drive
3 TB WD Blue
Optical Drive
DVD DVDRW+/-
Power Supply
EVGA SuperNova 750 G2
Cooling
EKWB P280 kit
Cooling
EK-VGA supremacy
Case
Stryker M [hammered and drilled]
Operating System
Win X
Monitor
LG 24MC57HQ-P
Keyboard
Ducky Zero [blues]
Mouse
corsair M65
Audio
SB Recon3D
Audio
Klipsch ProMedia 2.1
▲ hide details ▲


looniam is online now  
post #15 of 109 (permalink) Old 08-09-2019, 10:15 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
treetops422's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 125
Rep: 1 (Unique: 1)
Quote: Originally Posted by tpi2007 View Post
It's a decent article when it comes to laying out the specs, but it makes a cop-out at the end and switches from comparing archs to comparing products. The truth is, Turing is viable at 12nm whereas Navi needs 7nm to exist at a similar TDP.
How dare they leap ahead to 7nm! Its its just not fair!


treetops422 is offline  
post #16 of 109 (permalink) Old 08-09-2019, 10:40 PM
Waiting for 7nm EUV
 
tpi2007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 11,259
Rep: 890 (Unique: 501)
Quote: Originally Posted by looniam View Post
how else can an be observation made of the differences without a comparison of products?



bejesus i'm a typo fest.

The question is that they don't draw the logical conclusion from what they have in front of them when comparing the architectures: Turing in that specific configuration that they chose to compare is viable at 12nm whereas Navi needs 7nm to exist at a similar TDP, and thus Turing is the superior architecture, not even counting the RTX features. If it's an article that's about the architectures, that is.


Edit: To make it clearer, these are the two paragraphs I don't agree with and where they made the cop-out, by switching from an arch analysis to a product comparison:

Quote:
So what does this all mean? Is one architecture really better than the other? Turing certainly offers more capability than Navi thanks to its Tensor and RT Cores, but the latter certainly competes in terms of 3D rendering performance. The differences seen in a 12 game sample just aren't conclusive enough to make any definitive judgment.

And that is good news for us.

Is your CPU bottlenecking your GPU ? Find out: CPU and GPU usage along with FPS in-game
Read my reviews here.
Clubs (founder): The rare / unusual CPU club
Clubs (member): Corsair Professional HX / AX Series PSU Owners Club || The Official Cooler Master HAF X/932/922/912(+) Club
CPU
Core i7-3820
Motherboard
Asus Sabertooth X79
GPU
MSI GTX 1060 6 GB Gaming X
RAM
16 GB Corsair DDR3 1866 Mhz Dominator
Hard Drive
Samsung SSD 830 128GB + WD Caviar Black 2TB
Optical Drive
Sony Optiarc DVD-RW
Power Supply
Corsair AX750 Professional Modular 80 Plus Gold
Cooling
Corsair A70 + Noiseblocker M12-P
Case
Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus
Operating System
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit
Monitor
BenQ RL2455HM
Keyboard
Cooler Master Octane
Mouse
Cooler Master Octane
▲ hide details ▲



Last edited by tpi2007; 08-09-2019 at 10:57 PM.
tpi2007 is online now  
post #17 of 109 (permalink) Old 08-09-2019, 11:15 PM
professional curmudgeon
 
looniam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,568
Rep: 778 (Unique: 446)
Quote: Originally Posted by tpi2007 View Post
The question is that they don't draw the logical conclusion from what they have in front of them when comparing the architectures: Turing in that specific configuration that they chose to compare is viable at 12nm whereas Navi needs 7nm to exist at a similar TDP, and thus Turing is the superior architecture, not even counting the RTX features. If it's an article that's about the architectures, that is.
since there is no navi on other than 7nm and turing on 12nm, what are they going to do?

in a perfect world they would be on the same node but well, i think we both know that world doesn't exist. in simple straight forward testing, you use what you have.

but having said all that, i have really no problem with what you're stating; pointing out differences is part of a peer review. but calling an article biased because it doesn't include pricing, that is irrelevant for it's purposes, is a major misunderstanding.

fwiw, i'll concede my overstated great to your good since you have some good points.

late edit:
watching tv while typing so missed your edit w/quote. i personally don't see that as a conclusion but understand if one does.

editII to be clear:
Quote:
aren't conclusive enough to make any definitive judgment.
tells me no conclusion can be drawn . .

Remember the golden rule of statistics: A personal sample size of one is a sufficient basis upon which to draw universal conclusions.
Upload the computer to Dropbox and provide a link to it so others may download it to examine and give advice for repairs.
loon 3.2
(18 items)
CPU
i7-3770K
Motherboard
Asus P8Z77-V Pro
GPU
EVGA 980TI SC+
RAM
16Gb PNY ddr3 1866
Hard Drive
PNY 1311 240Gb
Hard Drive
1 TB Seagate
Hard Drive
3 TB WD Blue
Optical Drive
DVD DVDRW+/-
Power Supply
EVGA SuperNova 750 G2
Cooling
EKWB P280 kit
Cooling
EK-VGA supremacy
Case
Stryker M [hammered and drilled]
Operating System
Win X
Monitor
LG 24MC57HQ-P
Keyboard
Ducky Zero [blues]
Mouse
corsair M65
Audio
SB Recon3D
Audio
Klipsch ProMedia 2.1
▲ hide details ▲



Last edited by looniam; 08-09-2019 at 11:21 PM.
looniam is online now  
post #18 of 109 (permalink) Old 08-10-2019, 01:16 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
guttheslayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 3,659
Rep: 109 (Unique: 64)
They are trying to compare architecture vs architecture, nothing to do with 12nm vs 7nm or $399 vs $499.


Pricing is less relevant becz profit margin does markup differently between company. Greedy jacketman will charge for premium for a same performance card than Lisa would do.


The article actually give a good insight to Big Navi, if it ever matches up to RTX Titan in term of core counts. We might have true competition in high end space

guttheslayer is offline  
post #19 of 109 (permalink) Old 08-10-2019, 02:24 AM
Down and out, for now.
 
G woodlogger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Copenhagen surbubia
Posts: 924
Rep: 14 (Unique: 12)
Looking forward for AMD aib cards for equal comparison We always have to think ourself anyways!!!
G woodlogger is offline  
post #20 of 109 (permalink) Old 08-10-2019, 03:31 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
Imouto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,910
Rep: 215 (Unique: 100)
Quote: Originally Posted by tpi2007 View Post
Next year RTX will start to show in benchmarks with the new games coming out. At that point in time Nvidia would do well to accompany those launches with 7nm EUV Ampere to make an impact, before AMD is able to respond. I think pretty much everyone is waiting for a more muscled RTX solution and 7nm EUV will be able to provide for a much more balanced and less bottlenecked experience.
So you would divert more transistor budget to RTX not knowing if there would be a guarantee to make it successful. The current implementation is a no go because it brings down any GPU at least a tier down performance wise. The bracket from RTX 2060 to RTX 2080 goes from being pretty decent 1440p cards to 1080p cards. "Balancing it" could mean the current extra 10%-15% transistor budget for RTX to shoot up and make it more expensive to make. If you look at Nvidia's quarterly results since the RTX launch you can tell they aren't selling that many RTX cards. Nvidia needs to adjust their pricing and get down their high horse as RTX is not worth the price tag.

I'm quite sure Nvidia is doing the same as always and it is gimping everything around it to make it look like it is the only option to have a feature (G-Sync, PhysX, GameWorks, DLSS, Tessellation, etc) and then AMD will prove it overkill releasing a more sensible alternative (and cheaper while at it) that will also be present at next-gen consoles.

#EnthusiastLivesMatter
Imouto is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off