Overclock.net banner

21 - 40 of 177 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,755 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by headd View Post

GTX970/980 runs at 40% higher clock than 780TI.
At OC, relatively normal standards are about 1300 for Kepler and 1500 for Maxwell with benchers exceeding those by about 100-200mhz, especially when using good samples and high voltages.

Maxwell clocks higher than Kepler, that's just part of the architectural design

28nm Kepler was solidly twice as fast as 40nm Fermi.

28nm Kepler (780ti) to 28nm Maxwell (980ti / titan x) was a smaller gain, but around 60-70% or so i guess just from the architectural changes.

Since we're getting a die shrink and major architectural changes from both sides, the expectation is for medium sized chips to compete with the flagships of today, like this Polaris 10(?) being comparable to Fury X. Anything else would be a huge failure considering previous trends in GPU advancements.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,213 Posts
Polaris is Amd's gtx 980.. Which did the same to the 780ti..

2560 cores 256bit 8gb to be similar or a bit better than fury x but much cheaper to produce.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
627 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyro999 View Post

At OC, relatively normal standards are about 1300 for Kepler and 1500 for Maxwell with benchers exceeding those by about 100-200mhz, especially when using good samples and high voltages.

Maxwell clocks higher than Kepler, that's just part of the architectural design

28nm Kepler was solidly twice as fast as 40nm Fermi.

28nm Kepler (780ti) to 28nm Maxwell (980ti / titan x) was a smaller gain, but around 60-70% or so i guess just from the architectural changes.

Since we're getting a die shrink and major architectural changes from both sides, the expectation is for medium sized chips to compete with the flagships of today, like this Polaris 10(?) being comparable to Fury X. Anything else would be a huge failure considering previous trends in GPU advancements.
GTX780Ti runs at 900Mhz
GTX980 runs at 1250Mhz
38% difference

Sp difference:
780TI 2880
GTX980 2048
40% difference
At day1 review GTX980 was 5-8% faster.
Yes today 780TI sucks because NV focusing on maxwell in drivers.But maxwell really is not 60 or 70% faster Clock/clock.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,685 Posts
Discussion Starter #26
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyxagamemnon View Post

Polaris is Amd's gtx 980.. Which did the same to the 780ti..

2560 cores 256bit 8gb to be similar or a bit better than fury x but much cheaper to produce.
Actually not a bad guess.
I too starting to feel that Polaris is AMD`s Maxwell.

10% faster than Fury X based on the Polaris 10 presentation they did. Thats roughly GTX 980 over GTX 780Ti.

But I have to wonder what happens if Polaris 10 match GTX Titan X and GTX 1080 perform 20% faster than Titan X. I hope AMD only showcased the weakest Polaris 10, perhaps the one in OP, and have a faster Polaris 10 chip to match the GTX 1080.

One can guess:
R9 490: 2304 cores matching GTX 1070
R9 490X: 2560 cores matching GTX 1080

?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
627 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by iLeakStuff View Post

Actually not a bad guess.
I too starting to feel that Polaris is AMD`s Maxwell.

10% faster than Fury X based on the Polaris 10 presentation they did. Thats roughly GTX 980 over GTX 780Ti.

But I have to wonder what happens if Polaris 10 match GTX Titan X and GTX 1080 perform 20% faster than Titan X. I hope AMD only showcased the weakest Polaris 10, perhaps the one in OP, and have a faster Polaris 10 chip to match the GTX 1080.

Possible scenario:
R9 490: 2304 cores matching GTX 1070
R9 490X: 2560 cores matching GTX 1080

???
doh.gif

Maybe if polaris 10 is clocked at 1500Mhz.Then it can match furyX.I dont know why you expecting such nonsense gains?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,685 Posts
Discussion Starter #28
Quote:
Originally Posted by headd View Post

doh.gif

Maybe if polaris 10 is clocked at 1500Mhz.Then it can match furyX.I dont know why you expecting such nonsense gains?
Why do I have to repeat myself:

A) Its only +30% core performance over GCN required.
B) AMD showed a presentation where Polaris 10 beat Fury X. The one in OP with 2304 cores is Polaris 10. One would assume its close to Fury X too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
662 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by iLeakStuff View Post

Why do I have to repeat myself:

A) Its only +30% core performance over GCN required.
B) AMD showed a presentation where Polaris 10 beat Fury X. The one in OP with 2304 cores is Polaris 10. One would assume its close to Fury X too. We have seen Baffin Pro and Baffin XT at Zauba. They are Polaris 10.
R9 490 and R9 490X anyone?
Baffin is Polaris 11. Ellesmere is Polaris 10.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,685 Posts
Discussion Starter #30
Quote:
Originally Posted by variant View Post

Baffin is Polaris 11. Ellesmere is Polaris 10.
Oh yeah, sorry. You are right. My point still stands. There will be a full chip and a disabled chip out of Polaris 10 too. Which makes room for 490 and 490X

AMD have said many times now that they will only bring Polaris 10 and Polaris 11 to the market this year. The only entries that was added in the Linux driver was of 2 Polaris 10 GPUs, the rest was a bunch of Polaris 11 chips, which are low end. One would assume AMD plans to take on GP104 this year. They will not let them have the high end market alone this entire year...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
627 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by iLeakStuff View Post

Why do I have to repeat myself:

A) Its only +30% core performance over GCN required.
B) AMD showed a presentation where Polaris 10 beat Fury X. The one in OP with 2304 cores is Polaris 10. One would assume its close to Fury X too.
"Only" 30% LOL.Yes Only 30% IPC.Thats easy Pz.
rolleyes.gif
30% is pretty damn hard to achieve.
30% will need new architecture and not only some tweaks to GCN
Also they will need much much better delta compression because current delta compression is not that good on tonga.
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/945-24/tonga-vs-tahiti-round-2.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,685 Posts
Discussion Starter #32
Quote:
Originally Posted by headd View Post

"Only" 30% LOL.Yes Only 30% IPC.thats easy Pz.
rolleyes.gif

30= will need new architekture and not only samoe tweaks to GCN
Its not just a small tweak like GCN 1.2 etc. Its a major change.
And we are not talking Intel and +5-8% IPC here.

Its GPUs. We will see, but you have not posted any arguments to why it would be impossible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
627 Posts
Ok keep dreaming that 2560SP polaris with 256Bit 6Ghz DDR5 with 192GB/S will beat fury X.
Maxwell was faster than kepler because clock differences.Not because some miracle 70% IPC gain.
780Ti stock runs at 900Mhz
GTX980stock runs at 1250-1260Mhz.
Thats 40% difference.
At day1 review GTX980 was 5-8%Faster.After that Nv focuses only on maxwell in drivers and gap is Now bigger around 15%

If polaris 10 runs stock at 1400-1500Mhz then sure it will beat FURYX because it will have 50% higher clock (if its not memory bandwidth bottleneck)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,685 Posts
Discussion Starter #34
Quote:
Originally Posted by headd View Post

Ok keep dreaming that 2560SP polaris with 256Bit 6Ghz DDR5 with 192GB/S will beat fury X.
Maxwell was faster than kepler because clock differences.Not because some miracle 70% IPC gain.
780Ti stock runs at 900Mhz
GTX980stock runs at 1250-1260Mhz.
Thats 40% difference.
At day1 review GTX980 was 5-8%Faster.After that Nv focuses only on maxwell in drivers and gap is Now bigger around 15%

If polaris 10 runs stock at 1400-1500Mhz then sure it will beat FURYX because it will have 50% higher clock (if its not memory bandwidth bottleneck)
What does GTX 980 and GTX 780Ti got to do with these cards? I only mentioned them because I think total performance of Polaris 10 will only exceed previous AMD cards by small amounts while reducing power drastically like Maxwell.
Polaris 10 doesnt have to run at 1500MHz if they improved IPC
tongue.gif
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,021 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by headd View Post

Ok keep dreaming that 2560SP polaris with 256Bit 6Ghz DDR5 with 192GB/S will beat fury X.
Maxwell was faster than kepler because clock differences.Not because some miracle 70% IPC gain.
780Ti stock runs at 900Mhz
GTX980stock runs at 1250-1260Mhz.
Thats 40% difference.
At day1 review GTX980 was 5-8%Faster.After that Nv focuses only on maxwell in drivers and gap is Now bigger around 15%

If polaris 10 runs stock at 1400-1500Mhz then sure it will beat FURYX because it will have 50% higher clock (if its not memory bandwidth bottleneck)
If Polaris 10 doesn't equal or beat Fury X it is going to be a flop. I don't see AMD letting that happen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
627 Posts
Well even Nv didnt manage 30% IPC gain with maxwell.And that was with new architecture and like 10x more money than AMD have.I really dont see how AMD can manage that big IPC gain..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
627 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by criminal View Post

If Polaris 10 doesn't equal or beat Fury X it is going to be a flop. I don't see AMD letting that happen.
OMG polaris 10 is 232mm2 its 7870 /Pitcairn replacement.
7870/Pitcairn was also around 230mm2(212mm2)
Wait for vega for hawaii replacement.That card will beat furyx by 30-40%
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,713 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by iLeakStuff View Post

AMD added support for Polaris to Linux today.
https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2016-March/103422.html

Along with that we saw entries of Baffin and Ellesmere.
Luckily, one AMD developer shed some light on the entries to find out what is what:

Specifications of one upcoming Polaris 10 GPU have also been found.
Its name is "67DF:C4" which is Polaris 10/Ellesmere if you look at the list above.

Specifications of this Ellesmere is 2304 cores running at 800MHz, 36 CUs (which means 64 cores per compute units as before) and 256bit with 8GB VRAM running at 1500MHz.


http://ranker.sisoftware.net/show_run.php?q=c2ffcdfbddbcdde0d2e3d4e7d0e8cebc81b197f297aa9abccff2c2&l=en

FYI: Polaris 10 is AMD`s upcoming high end GPU from the Polaris architecture. Which means that atleast some of these will have GDDR5
... Specifications: Except at the press conference He said they weren't making any GDDR5 Polaris.
 

·
I <3 narcissists
Joined
·
6,771 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by prjindigo View Post

... Specifications: Except at the press conference He said they weren't making any GDDR5 Polaris.
I don't recall them saying that but I didn't watch all of it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,713 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by headd View Post

Maybe in some crazy dream.
If polaris 10 have 2304SP,256bit 6Ghz DDR5 with 192GB/s it will be miracle if polaris 10 can match even 390/390x.

No way Its faster than FuryX
They said, at the conference, that it's HBM... that they're not bothering with trying to make two different memory architectures.

Where is this 256bit GDDR5 8GB IDIOCY coming from?!? 8GB can only be done at 512bit!
 
21 - 40 of 177 Posts
Top