Joined
·
3,685 Posts
Previously it was known that AMD are planning to launch 2 Polaris 10 GPUs (67DF and 67C0)
List here
Specifications can be found here: http://ranker.sisoftware.net/show_device.php?q=c9a598ae99dd9ba1e2d6f097aa87b690e2dfefc9a09dac8ae2dfeaccb489b89efb9ea393b5c6fbc2&l=en
67DF (Polaris 10) have been found on GFXBench and here is a comparison against R9 390X

I would guess that the Polaris 10 above is the one with disabled shaders. R9 290 was 10% slower than 290X, so I would guess you can add 5-15% for Polaris 10 to find the full Polaris 10 performance.
Videocardz found more, also Polaris 11 GPUs
http://videocardz.com/59468/amd-polaris-10-and-11-opengl-benchmarks-spotted
So it looks like disabled Polaris 10 is close to R9 390 in performance and full Polaris 10 is close to 390X.
I would like to add something that backs up that as well as the benchmark above, and that is a post from Chiphell today where they write that full Polaris 10 (Ellesmere XT) = 390X

List here
Specifications can be found here: http://ranker.sisoftware.net/show_device.php?q=c9a598ae99dd9ba1e2d6f097aa87b690e2dfefc9a09dac8ae2dfeaccb489b89efb9ea393b5c6fbc2&l=en
67DF (Polaris 10) have been found on GFXBench and here is a comparison against R9 390X
I would guess that the Polaris 10 above is the one with disabled shaders. R9 290 was 10% slower than 290X, so I would guess you can add 5-15% for Polaris 10 to find the full Polaris 10 performance.
Videocardz found more, also Polaris 11 GPUs
http://videocardz.com/59468/amd-polaris-10-and-11-opengl-benchmarks-spotted
So it looks like disabled Polaris 10 is close to R9 390 in performance and full Polaris 10 is close to 390X.
I would like to add something that backs up that as well as the benchmark above, and that is a post from Chiphell today where they write that full Polaris 10 (Ellesmere XT) = 390X