Nvida BTFO: faked Pascal board edition
http://semiaccurate.com/2016/01/11/nvidia-pascal-over-a-year-ahead-of-1416nm-competition/
>That silicon was manufactured in mid-January of 2015!!! Everyone including the author was assuming that Pascal didn’t even tape out until Q3 of 2015
>Those WW3/2015 date codes mean Nvidia had to tape their Pascal designs out in late 2014, even before the TSMC process was ready for such tapeouts much less stable. The Nvidia designers were obviously so good and so far ahead of the game that they were able to put out a design that worked so well out of the box that even on an unstable, some go so far as to say non-existent, process it worked on the A1 stepping. Not only that it worked so well that once TSMC stabilized the 16FF+ process months after Nvidia produced their Pascals, no update to the GPUs were even needed! Imagine that, so many critical PDK updates from TSMC and none managed to do any better than those plucky geniuses at Nvidia could get quarters before. That is a commanding lead if there ever was one, simply staggering process tech.
>It all has to be true because as an executive in a publicly traded company with press and analysts who cover and trade Nvidia in the room, he is obliged by the SEC to be truthful. The only other explanation is that he knowingly lied to the press and analysts and showed a fake card in his keynote, something that would clearly be illegal. Jen-Hsun would never do something like that, right?
>>52364308
kek, didn't AMD show a fully working Polaris 14nm chip the other day as well?
OOooOoh yeah I can't wait for the memes that come out of this. I live off memes. Meme is what makes my miserable life worth living. I loOoOOve memes
>>52364308
*memes*
*shitposts*
>>52364344
I suppose nvidia faking stuff has got so common it's too mainstream for you?
NVIDIAFAGS ON SUICIDE WATCH
FLASHBACKS LIKE PORK SHOULDERS, WOODSCREWS, HOUSEFIRES, 1.7 YIELDS AND SCALING SENDING NVIDIAFAGS INTO SHOCK.
STATE OF EMERGENCY. REMEMBER THE DEAD PANELS AND THE DRIVER OF CERTAIN DEATH.
WARNING: THIS THREAD MAY INDUCE POST TRAUMATIC STRESS
>>52364352
did they said it's a working chit he is holding for the press? did they sell it? no? so shut up, cancerous faggot
also I bought maxwell on release and I will switch to pascal when it's out. stay irrelevant amemed. you don't even have nothing to show
>>52364370
You forgot 3.5.
>>52364308
good goy
>>52364384
>you don't even have nothing to show
http://videocardz.com/58069/amd-demonstrates-revolutionary-14nm-finfet-polaris-gpu-architecture
http://anandtech.com/show/9886/amd-reveals-polaris-gpu-architecture
>8 posts
>still no memes
Alright let me start
PascBTFO
LOL!!!!
Mods! Delete this fake faggotry.
This is just shitposting nothing more
>>52364394
>>52364418
>>52364384
>THIS hard
It's raining wood screws again.
>>52364326
The problem is that there are several inconsistencies with the board Nvidia have shown. They also have a history of faking things, which makes this even more suspect.
I don't get? The article says that Pascal has been pretty much ready since 2015, but will be better for consumers because of HBM. So why is Nvidia BTFO'd?
>>52364732
Because the article is sarcastic. The point is that at the date on the chip, TSMC 16nm didn't work yet.
>>52364732
It's hard to read.
>>52364612
You do realize wood screws are just as strong as your meme screws and the only difference is color, head type, and tip.
>>52364732
The article is being very sarcastic when it's claiming that NVidia have had this available since early 2015 because it would be impossible.
It's also noting that everyone else is claiming that making a chip that can handle both GDDR5 and HBM is impossible, meaning that the card shown couldn't be what it's claimed.
>>52364789
In fairness it's not actually impossible, just stupid.
>>52364802
Yes, it's not impossible for ham to be made before the swine is killed, it's just stupid.
Are you retarded?
>>52364732
It's said that autistic people can't read sarcasm very well.
How feasible is it to make a batch of chips, considering nvidia is a major customer and they were working on tweaking 16nm for mass production anyways?
It's especially believable since the pascal shown is using the older gddr where the new consumer ones will use hbm.
>>52364874
Those are HBM modules on that GPU being shown family member. Now look at the dates.
>>52364910
No, this is hbm
special batch + gddr5 sounds reasonable. charlie is just fishing for clicks again.
>>52364874
TSMC did not get their 16nm process up to bare minimum production standards until nearly the middle of '15
The chip Nvidia showed is dated for the third week of January, is presented as a working board, and this implies they had functioning test units (NOT THE SAME AS A WORKING CHIP) on 16nm as far back as October/September '14
The semiaccurate article is trying to tell you that what Nvidia showed is purely impossible.
>>52364966
No, it isn't reasonable.
It's as far from reasonable as it gets.
Charlie doesn't spew filth and is one of the most often correct people in the industry.
WOOD SCREWS
DELAYED HOUSEFIRES
WOODSCREWS
This isn't as easy to understand as WOODSCREWS so it won't take off as le maymays.
>>52364308
>The only other explanation is that he knowingly lied to the press and analysts and showed a fake card in his keynote, something that would clearly be illegal.
CHING CHONG DING DONG
>>52365010
>Charlie doesn't spew filth
lol
that man exists to shit on nvidia
He writes tabloid tier shit and is only a tier above currytech. I wouldn't count on him to know what's going on behind the industry.
>>52364308
This writer had Nvidia's dick so far down his throat. Jesus christ.
>>52365074
>The Anon formerly known as "No Child Left Behind"
>>52364732
>Burgerfats in charge of understanding sarcasm
>>52365060
Not that guy but that's some nice debunking you did there. You managed to destroy all of the arguments without even addressing a single one! Wow!
>>52365060
>right about intel code name changes two years in advance
>right about cannonlake being incorrectly placed/pushed back
>right about the 10nm delay and kaby being a refresh 18 months ago
>has insider sources you can only dream of
Sorry bud, some of us can actually pay for subscriptions and do in fact have a working memory.
Shills. Shills everywhere
>>52364966
BRUH.
"The first chip utilizing HBM is AMD Fiji which was released on June 24, 2015 powering the AMD Radeon R9 Fury X."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Bandwidth_Memory
>>52365090
The only shill here is you, AMDKEK.
>>52365107
This is weak stuff, Pajeet. Up your game or you're not getting paid for the day.
>>52365120
The only payment I need is the metal relief when I know I destroyed another AMDKUCK in an argument again.
>>52365137
>>52365137
Unacceptable. Report to your line manager at once for discipline!
>>52365151
>>52365146
Fuck you, retarded shill.
>>52365085
lol? I'm not even trying to debunk him or anything. Can't people have a discussion without "destroying" someone? You must be a blast to hang out with.
>>52365090
He claimed Maxwell got cancelled and it got released 4 months later.
The site is called semi accurate for a reason.
That poor sod is desperately trying to stay relevant.
>>52365161
nothin' personnel, kid
In the end all that matters is how the card performs. Benchmarks sell cards, nothing else.
>>52365107
We're not even shilling for AMD here. We feel sorry for you nvidiacucks. Your company blatantly lies and cucks you so much it's just embarrassing to point it out anymore.
Yeah AMD has fucked up before but wooden screws, 3.5 gb of gddr5, drivers killing gpus, 1.7 yields, etc. And now blatantly lying about having a pascal gpu, god damn.
It's almost like nvidia doing stupid shit is a normal thing now, a fucking real world meme.
>>52365060
Didn't he come out and say kepler would beat GCN1?
>>52365168
>He claimed Maxwell got cancelled and it got released 4 months later
[citation needed]
>>52365184
But Kepler was better than GCN1.
It wasn't better than GCN2 though.
>>52364308
It's not nvidia's fault that amd is too incompetent to produce a card or cpu worth buying.
They won the market and are allowed to do this. Blamed AMD.
>>52365204
I agree. My point is he reported reality despite it benefiting nvidia.
>>52365204
Kepler absolutely destroyed gcn until the last year or so where amd worked its rebranding magic and optimized the drivers.
>>52365213
Rajesh, my friend, it's good that you are being here!
>>52365213
>blame AMD for something nvidia does
The mind of a fanboy.
Nvidia pulled this shit back when AMD wasn't losing badly.
>>52365230
What the fuck are you smoking, Hawaii made Kepler look like a joke.
>>52365245
And Kepler still sold more because absolute champion at performance/watt
>>52365270
Yeah buddy that whole 20 watts really makes a difference!
WANNA BUY THIS 660TI? IT ONLY DRAWS 170 watts!
BUT HEY WAIT THIS 7870 IS JUST AS GOOD, BUT CHEAPER! HEY WAIT TI DRAWS 185 WATTS!
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
>>52365270
Then try to explain Fermi and Fermi 2, which were barely faster than Evergreen and Northern Islands while so far behind on the perf/watt they made POWER7 designs look efficient.
>>52365270
Nice meme. The power consumption difference isn't significant especially for desktops and you'll save like a dollar over a year if you use nvidia.
>>52365245
Hawaii wasn't released until q4 2013 and wasn't widely available until q2 2014 due to miners
I'm taking about 2012 where everybody got a 680 over a 7970 and where a 680 oc'ed would outperform a 7970 by a good 30%
>>52364414
why the fuck would you name your tech site "semi accurate" jesus fuclk
>>52364612
top fucking kek, real comedy gold right here
Wait so if there is no legit Pascal GPU does that mean it's going to be shit because nvidia is rushing it as much as possible?
I have a GTX 960 and I'm very scared Pascal will be a piece of shit. Might have to go with AMD for an upgrade this time.
>>52365270
>>52365245
It made the 780 look like a joke and beat the titan a little (making that look like a joke too because lolprice), the 780Ti that was released after it was a little faster on account of being a much bigger die with more transistors.
Nvidia have always had the fastest single chip because they make fuckhuge chips with no regard for yields, they usually put it in stupid expensive cards no-one buys (eg titan x) but use it to convince consumers that nvidia are better in general just because their biggest chip is bigger than amd's biggest chip.
>>52365344
Supply issues rarely mean a thing is shit.
Usually it means they're hard to get and expensive.
>>52365344
There are basically no known facts about release, availability, or how many of the Pascal chips they will be able to make.
Don't worry about it as this doesn't really change anything, it just shows that Nvidia are up to their old shenanigans.
>>52365344
It's going to be late and expensive. Absolute performance will probably be fine but the fact that nvidia have fucked up their yields yet again means AMD will be available first and have much better price/performance.
So why is this even a thing?
It's clearly a fucking working prototype board using modules of older shit for testing, swap those little sub boards out for pascal and it's the exact same thing.
>>52365374
>all that from that sarcastic shitpost
wew lad
I don't get what's the issue
>>52365353
He's right about nvidia rushing the shit out of pascal. Something is bound to go wrong. AMD is set to release artic islands around Q2 2016, nvidia is going to be raped violently by amd is pascal is shit.
I get this strange feeling that pascal is just maxwell with a few hot fixes burned onto 14nm lithography. Probably just me being paranoid I hope.
>>52365408
There is no real pascal gpu you nigger. Nvidia fucking lied to us again.
>>52365417
To be fair that's probably the only thing they need to do to be competitive:
>implement HBM controllers in high end chips
>update maxwell design for better 14nm compatibility
>add in some hardware async scheduling for feature competition
A shrunk Maxwell can probably reliably hit 1.8Ghz boost, if not 2Ghz flat out, while drawing 2/3rds the power
>>52365436
the pascal names were leaked in the drivers a year ago.
>>52365402
>So why is this even a thing?
>It's clearly a fucking working prototype board using modules of older shit for testing, swap those little sub boards out for pascal and it's the exact same thing.
This. I don't understand the issue
>>52365417
It's literally shrunk maxwell+hbm+FP16. Not necessarily a bad thing taken alone, maxwell isn't bad and die shrinks mean more cores in the same power envelope. It's just that it's gonna get nuked by Polaris, which has big architectural improvements alongside the shrink.
So does this mean I should buy my 980ti now? Or wait to see what happens with this?
>>52365471
desu senpai u baka
>>52365417
Nvidia and AMD have had dieshink plans for a long ass time.
>>52365478
Depends if you suck nvidia's dick so hard that you refuse to consider buying an AMD card even when they're clearly superior.
>>52365436
What the fucking hell are you spacks talking about?
The pictured shit is from nvidia talking about their car shit, that's the internals of a processing box that lives in the car to drive everything.
It's going to come with pascal, why the fuck is this prototype board being blown up to be such a big deal when any retard could see fucking VRAM modules and a tiny little chip and therefore see it's not HBM and not pascal?
>>52364308
so, 4.5 this time around?
>>52365478
Depends on your current GPU.
Overally though, you shouldn't. Dieshrinks in GPU land are a big deal.
>>52365436
Are you tarded? They just had a test model that's not a retail model show some numbers that made some spaz go all caps lock in the news article/OP
>>52364308
>semiaccurate
People still read this shit?
>>52365471
Yeah, so it's probably just a Maxwell ASIC with GDDR5 chips being passed off as a Pascal ASIC with HBM, no big deal, they're just lying about everything.
>>52365505
>>52365519
>i-its a test model
>yfw maxwell lacks all of the 'muh deep learning' features that nvidia say are the whole point
>>52365473
>It's just that it's gonna get nuked by Polaris, which has big architectural improvements alongside the shrink.
N-no. nvidia is going to work very hard on pascal. Beside amd has less money so that means they spend less on r&d.
There's no way pascal is just maxwell on a smaller process, stop spreading FUD. nvidia can't risk to do another fiasco, I'm certain pascal will do just fine.
>>52365528
Where is your proof of that since nothing has hit retail yet?
I am not trying to bait, I am just stupid and don't see the fuss.
>>52365537
Faggot i have a 280X in my desktop right now, i couldn't give less of a flying fuck what nvidia do, i just want to know why a bunch of retards are making a big deal over what is very clearly a prototype module-accepting board in no way designed for PCs and, as far as i can tell, with no claim to actually be related to pascal at all apart from it being said to come with it upon release, which is what you'd expect from something designed to run MXM being TESTED with 980s
>>52365572
Did you actually read the article? You may not trying to be bait but by now you're coming across as either wilfully ignorant or a troll.
>>52365496
Kek
What a beta
>>52365560
>nvidia can't risk to do another fiasco
Except they can. The 970 is their best-selling high end card ever.
>>52365560
N-no. AMD is going to work very hard on polaris. Beside Nvidia has more money so that means they spend more on r&d.
There's no way Polaris is just GCN on a smaller process, stop spreading FUD. AMD can't risk to do another fiasco, I'm certain Polaris will do just fine.
Nvidia is so far ahead of AMD they can release year old tech and still perform better baka
>>52365609
Who isn't so far ahead of amd?
>>52365609
Like GM204 which is still performance competitive with a 2 year old Hawaii
>>52365609
AYYY LMAO
So this is what a true nvidiacuck sounds like, wow.
so Pascal is something nVidia has had ready for a year? and that it's not coming with HBM?
Is that what the article is saying/implying?
>>52365603
Except AMD have already shown running polaris silicon.
>>52365633
kek
>>52365609
Is that why the R9 295X2 is still the single most powerful graphics card ever released?
>>52365657
The article is written by retards for these retards on /g/ to spout bullshit about.
"hurr pascal hurr fake"
It's a fucking prototype for nvidias car processor that's using 2x 980 MXM modules in place of the actual pascal ones it'll be using upon release.
>>52365657
Nah, heavy sarcasm basically calling nvidia on a massive hand filled with bullshit.
>>52365683
Except nvidia didn't say that, they said what they were showing was the drive px2.
Look, the wood screws thing was bad because it was so poorly done,
But is it really that big of a deal to show a model instead of a final product? Why do you care so much? Particularly in the drive px thing, where it was really about showing the form factor of the final product, and that it can be put into existing cars with small engine spaces.
Why is this such a huge deal?
>nvidia already got a working pascal card a year ago
spooky
They're probably working on volta now
>>52365779
Anything that gives amd a chance allowing me to dump the stock
>>52365779
Because they're lying to people in order to bait fanboys into waiting for their overprice crap rather than buying a superior AMD product, just like with fermi.
>>52365817
>5000 series is dead
>Fermi still going strong
>>52365787
probably too ahead of the game that they decides to release pascal just to milk more people since amd cant compete.
Woodscrews and pork shoulders for dinner boys
>>52365843
Considering what they did to Kepler after they released Maxwell I'd prefer if they didn't even glance in Fermi's direction.
>>52365779
There is no working pascal gpu you turd. AMD is already diamonds for nvidias vagina and is set to release polaris GPUs around June 2016.
This means Polaris GPUs will hit the market first. Pascal better fucking anihilate polaris GPUs else everyone is going to flock to AMD.
To compound the problem even further, polaris is the 4th gen of GCN not just a die shrink. Pascal is rumoured to just be maxwell with a die shrink. All of this is extremely bad news for nvidia.
>>52365817
... Lying about what, exactly? Do you think that Steve Jobs went on stage with working final iPhones months before their release?
And if you only care about graphics cards for gaming, then paying attention to the brand argument makes sense, but there's literally no better option for professional users than nvidia cards, and they still manage to work perfect on games, so again, the question is, literally why investigate that they had a fucking display model on stage
>>52365864
Nice strawman
>>52365876
So nvidiacucks are actually this dense? dam, nvidia is so lucky to have zombies like you.
>>52364308
The card is prefixed with T. What the fuck is this?
>>52364384
>>52365213
>can't defend own brand loyalties because there's no base to stand upon
>therefore we must attack everybody else
>this is a political issue for my favorite brand and not an issue of hardware functioning as advertised because my feelings are more important
>bbut they make more money th-they're better sh-shut upt!
>>52365168
max damage control
Corporate vomit speak plz go
>>52365817
Not to mention share-holders
>>52365876
Lying about it being a real, functional card at the time of presentation, and then continuing to say it when they were proven wrong. Steve Jobs has nothing to do with this lol also AMD is going to start interpreting CUDA on their cards get fucked
>>52364385
heh you forgot botnet email drivers
>>52365874
Did you watch nvidias conference at all? Tell me how putting new technology on the chip means its JUST a die shrink.
and showing an on stage model does not equal not having a working design. Why would they produce a whole working functional chip just to show people what it looks like?
>>52364308
>http://semiaccurate.com/2016/01/11/nvidia-pascal-over-a-year-ahead-of-1416nm-competition/
Ah! I love Charlie. I mean, i quit reading S|A years ago, i occasionally read Charlie when he posts on RWT. But, still i love him.
What to say:
2009: Jen-Hsun Huang will never bring Nvidia share price back to 18$.
2010 Fermi is broken and unfixable.
2012 Why purchasing SeaMicro was important for AMD
And so on... LOL-Charlie is best-Charlie.
>>52365918
No, nvidias just lucky that I need drivers to CAD with.
>>52365911
The quoted post said they're lying and said they're keeping people from going to AMD. What strawman did i make, oh master debater sir?
>>52365876
>Do you think that Steve Jobs went on stage with working final iPhones months before their release?
Sorry, do you think Steve Jobs showed products months before they were ready for release? You might want to go back and take a look. The average time between announcement and release of iPhones was less than two *weeks*.
This is ignoring the point that in this case, lying about the product is actually illegal.
>>52365921
Never said it was a working card, just that the tech demos were done on working Pascal.
>>52365953
>lying about the product
Lying about something in marketing (eg 3.5) is illegal. Demonstrating a model for the press isn't.
>>52366001
>model
>>52365953
>This is ignoring the point that in this case, lying about the product is actually illegal.
It's bad enough polaris is set to rape nvidia before pascal is out but now nvidia is going to be in legal trouble as well. Bad times are ahead for nvidia. Those who were retarded enough to invest in nvidia must so fucking pissed off right now.
>>52365934
Enjoying the attempts at character assassination from the resident Nvidiots in an attempt to deflect attention. :^)
>>52366026
You post that image several times a day. I know because I'm a NEET. You edit the image a little to avoid people reverse searching it on the archive to hide the fact.
>>52366001
Holding up something and saying "This is a new thing that we've made!" when it's not is lying and very, very illegal when a large company is doing it to a large crowd with journalists and what have you.
>>52366022
Let's lay off the fanboyism,eh? This certainly is problematic but it's not the end of the world and it's a little bit early to say "lol NVidia bankrupt & BTFO top kek"
>>52366070
He didn't say that, he could have just meant that Nvidia is going to be in bad times. In the red, not out of business. 0/10 work on your reading comprehension.
>>52366070
>Let's lay off the fanboyism,eh? This certainly is problematic but it's not the end of the world and it's a little bit early to say "lol NVidia bankrupt & BTFO top kek"
I'm not even an AMD cuck and I've mostly used nvidia products in the past. But yeah, it's still too early to say how badly this fiasco is going to affect nvidia.
>>52364370
The fuck is pork shoulders?
>>52365843
>amd announce end of perofrmance optimisations because transparency, release crimson for 5000 series anyway
>nvidia stopped working on fermi the moment kepler came out and just didn't announce it
>nebulous claims about hacked-in pseudo-dx12 compatibility coming in some imaginary future
>>52366164
One happened and the other didn't
>>52366164
>Fermi will receive DX12 support later this year (expected around the first wave of DX12 content).
It will be interesting to see if they stay true to their word.
>>52366379
Got wddm 2.0 a couple of weeks ago for my GTX460, as promised. wddm 2.0 is a prerequisite for DX12 support (though they're not supposed to be fully compatible, they'll get virtual memory addressing and multithreading paralellism).
>>52365010
Hello Charlie!
>>52365779
>Look, the wood screws thing was bad because it was so poorly done,
>But is it really that big of a deal to show a model instead of a final product?
It is when the silicon is stamped with impossible dates and said to be working.
>Why do you care so much?
Because Nvidia has lied directly to consumers several times in the past now. All the memes about them didn't show up just because someone thought they would be funny to say. Nvidia vomited out the source material and people ran with it.
The only true humor is the truth.
>>52365967
And yet, there was no physical way they had a working 16nm Pascal at the time they claimed.
There was no 16nm node even online at the time, much less ready for tapeout or sampling.
>>52365921
>also AMD is going to start interpreting CUDA on their cards get fucked
this is literally wrong, AMD is writing a converter to port CUDA to OpenCL.
>>52366154
A separate meme that came from misspelling/mispronouncing the name of some vampire from a vn
>>52365934
>2009: Jen-Hsun Huang will never bring Nvidia share price back to 18$.
Obviously wrong and opinionated.
>2010 Fermi is broken and unfixable.
They never actually fixed Fermi, just the underlying fabric it was built on. Reduced
>2012 Why purchasing SeaMicro was important for AMD
Aaaaand evidently you don't understand the server industry.
I will always buy Nvidia™ because I only play games The Way It's Meant to be Played™. Nvidia also pioneers innovative new technologies like PhysX™, Gameworks™ and the highest quality driver to ever grace Windows.
When I boot up with a brand new Nvidia™ Geforce™, I can experience the game just like it's mean to be played. Nvidia™ also delivers a far more silkysmooth experience.
Nvidia Geforce™ is also very power efficient. A graphic card is the most power hungry device in your house. Refrigerators, air conditioners, water heaters, dish washers, lights, etc all use significantly less power than a graphic card. Which is why Nvidia™ puts gamers first by ensuring that their gaming experience is of the highest quality while looking out for gamers by giving them the most value in their electrical bill.
At this point in time, there's really no reasons to consider an AMD graphic card at all. I tried one one time, it caused so much heat that it exploded. It also consumed so much power that it gave on an EMP and destroyed the rest of my computer.
Nvidia™ also pioneered how useless GPGPU is with CUDA™. Years ago, everyone thought GPGPU, CUDA™, and OpenCL were the future. Now, Nvidia™ has removed those useless features from their GPUs and increased efficiency. Now you can save thousands a year in electricity thanks to Nvidia™ ensuring that useless features like GPGPU are "optimized" for gamers.
It's quite clear that OP's an AMD shill trying to convince you to settle on something less than The Way It's Mean to be Played™. Nvidia™ is the only real way to play games. We have seen recently that they offer incredible libraries for software developers like Nvidia Gameworks. He is probably too poor to afford the Nvidia Geforce Experience and can not afford to play any games The Way It's Mean To be Played™.
Don't be a poor gamer with bad drivers and a huge power bill. Play games with the Geforce™ Experience™: The Way It's Mean To Be Played™
>>52366480
It will be funny if Fermi ends up performing better than Kepler because of the front end thread scheduler and vastly better FP64 compute.
>>52366783
This must of taken so much effort to write. Too bad it's not actually worth the effort to read it.>>52366783
>>52366783
keks were had
>>52366783
nice shitpost m8
>>52365296
those 680's
quad sli?
>>52365303
It's a website about semiconductor news leaks. It's a pun.
>>52366783
I will always buy Intel™ because I only play games with Intel Inside™. Intel also pioneers innovative new technologies like Hyper Threading Technology™, Intel Rapid Start Technology™ and the highest quality chipsets to ever grace motherboards.
When I boot up with a brand new Intel™ i7™ with the latest Z chipset, I can enjoy the games the way they where meant to be with Intel Inside™. Intel™ also delivers a far more silkysmooth experience with its Hyper Threading Technology™.
Intel i5™ is also very power efficient. A processor is the most power hungry device in your house. Air conditioners, water heaters, lights, etc all use less power than a processor. Which is why Intel™ puts gamers first by ensuring that their gaming experience is of the highest quality while looking out for gamers by giving them the most value in their electrical bill.
At this point in time, there's really no reasons to consider an AMD processor at all. I tried once, it caused so much heat that it exploded and nearly burnt down my house. It also consumed so much power that it produced an EMP and destroyed not only the rest of my computer but my entire neighborhood.
Intel™ also pioneered how useless MORE CORES is with the i™ series processors. Years ago, everyone thought MORE CORES were the future. Now, Intel™ has debunked that myth entirely and increased efficiency. Now you can save thousands a year in electricity thanks to Intel™ with its powerful IPC. MORE CORES will never be part of Intel's™ line up.
It's quite clear that OPs an AMD shill trying to convince you to settle on something less than the optimal experience with Intel Inside™. Intel™ is the only real way to play games. We have seen recently that they offer incredible libraries for software developers like Intel C++ Compiler. He is probably too poor to afford the Intel Inside™ experience and can not afford to play any games.
Don't be a poor gamer with bad chipsets and a huge power bills. Play games with Intel Inside™
>>52366059
Nice meme.
Who cares.
Is the card good? That's all I want to know
Pascal so badly wants to be fermi again it needs watercooling lol.
>>52367229
There was a reason why Nvidia encouraged their AIBs to invest in water-cooling solutions for Maxwells.
>switch from old 6870 to r9 390
>game crashes everywhere & crimson is AIDS
>send it back
>get nvidia
>it just werks
>>52367310
Given board partners managed to create effective cooling for the 250w hawaii monsters ands the fuck knows what TDP of Fury (275w?) it seems like a step backwards for Nvidia.
>>52367314
(you)
>>52367330
No, it's that AIOs are the future for graphics cards. I think air-cooled cards might go the way of the dinosaur for high-end cards and be the mainstay for the enthusiast and some mainstream cards. The lower budget cards will still be air-cooled, but the overall trend seems to point towards an AIO-dominated future for anything higher than $300.
![R6QmJvy[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/JQEBTgf.jpg "R6QmJvy[1].jpg")
KEK, Novideo is pathetic.
>>52364414
>writing about yourself in third person
absolutely disgusting.
do these people have some kind of personality disorder?
>>52367382
A lot of people recommend you write your personal statement in your CV like that.
>Wanting NVidia to fail
>Wanting the only good option to be cheap, power-hungry cards with crippled drivers and poor support.
>Not wanting NVidia to improve on Maxwell's excellent power-to-performance ratios and functional software, and for AMD to step their game up in a big way and push technology further for once.
We should be rooting for both teams.
>>52367377
Problem is with asetek's AIO patent shenanigans and general cost associated with AIO's you are aren't truly any better off than straight up air cooling given gpu AIO's tend to be hybrid solutions (i.e you are still air cooling the power delivery).
Having the core cold isn't that impressive if you need a screaming fan to cool the vrms as you pump more and mroe voltage through them.
>>52367377
Maybe, but it doesn't really matter if NVIDIA fixes Maxwell's abysmal compute problems. Even a lower end card (1060?) will perform great, and even better if you buy an adaptive sync monitor. Max them settings and get 36fps that still feels like 60.
Honestly I wish I would have bought a G-Sync monitor already so I can do shit like max hairworks in TW3 and not make the game unplayable.
Shit like Hairworks is the future so compute needs to go up, and fast, or G-Sync needs to come down in price from $300-400 premium to like $50-100 or even 0 because of how needed it is for demanding games.
Even a Titan-X will choke with hairworks on high, but maybe that's Maxwell's fault.
>>52367428
>wanting the jewest jew to win
Not really.
>>52364336
Inelite pls
>>52367485
>Shit like Hairworks is the future
>Honestly I wish I would have bought a G-Sync monitor already
Words cannot describe how shilltastic your post is.
>>52367441
>screaming fan to cool the vrms
Both of my Hybrids are surprisingly quiet, despite putting slightly more voltage than needed through them, so the VRMs are not the problem.
The issue I have is that the VRAM isn't getting enough cooling, so I'm limited in how much I can overclock the memory. I regret not waiting for the Gigabyte Waterforce to come out, which does cool the VRMs and VRAMs via a massive water-cooling block.
>>52364761
At the very least they could have used self tapping metal screws. But they just did the equivalent of installing their Honda body kit with drywall screws.
>>52367557
>Both of my Hybrids are surprisingly quiet, despite putting slightly more voltage than needed through them,
Depends what hybrids we are talking - maxwell gets away with it as it doesn't respond well to voltage in general (i.e you overclock as far as you can on stock voltage normally). Hybrid cooling a hawaii or fat kepler for example would have your overclocks fairly limited by the fairly so-so vrm cooling most hybrid solutions have.
My 290x is fucking monster clocked and a small fan would not be enough to contain the enormous voltage I am slamming through my vrms (My max overclock wants in the region of a +180mv offset).
Question, do Nvidiashills poo in loo?
>>52367643
One trick I learned from an old ATI fan was to buy thermal pads to put tiny copper heatsinks designed for motherboard MOSFETs onto the VRMs. They're almost the same size (if not the same) and the heatsinks really does bring down their temps by a handful of degrees.
>>52367718
I don't think you realise how much cooling a 290x running at near 1.4v needs when on air.
>>52367382
>I have never had a real job
>>52366746
Evidently you don't know that 2015 already passed:
http://anandtech.com/show/9170/amd-exits-dense-microserver-business-ends-seamicro-brand
>>52367756
>1.4V
Good luck. You're better off with a full-card water block for that shit.
Overclocking card like the 290X will cause a 120mm thin low-FPI radiator to suffer from heat soak.
>>52367828
>Good luck
I can do it but prefer not to simply because cooling vrm1 becomes a real bitch.
>>52367864
Just put that card on its own watercooling block. An R9 290X is one of those cards that is begging to have its own dedicated cooling loop. You're not doing it any favors by air-cooling it with an aftermarket monstrosity.
>>52364966
thats a render you dumb fuck
>>52367901
A custom loop ain't cheap and I plan to jump onto high end arctic islands and a 4k screen soon™.
>>52364416
> AMD has an established track record for dramatically increasing the energy efficiency of its mobile processors, targeting a 25x improvement by the year 20202
> 20202
>>52367945
>20202
RIP AMD
>>52367864
that's actually pretty damn great
what's your ambient temps at?
>>52367969
more like rip everyone else
>>52367974
Around 20c as I live in bongland. Shame SP120's aren't the best fans for sound as I need to run them at 12v to cool like that and even my R4 can't dampen out 2300rpm fans easily.
>this means Pascal will probably be terrible at scheduling asynchronous tasks
>just like Maxwell
LOVING
EVERY
LAUGH
>>52368054
You're a retard if you really think Pascal isn't going to have support for hardware async computing and other features not implemented on Maxwell because the standards were not finalized by Maxwell's release.
Same thing with AMD's Polaris. Both GPU families will be 100% DX12 compatible for once.
>>52368293
Just what do you think the lead time on gpu development is? I'd be surprised if either polaris or pascal supported every single feature under the dx12 umbrella.
>>52368383
DX12 features were finalized in Q2 2015, if I remember correctly. And those new features are mostly firmware related rather than hardware, or ride upon existing DX12_0 standards.
>>52368439
To give you an idea of how long GPU development takes, AMD had an HBM prototype in 2012.
>>52368293
>>52368439
Remember that Mantle pioneered the idea of async compute, and it was basically just designed to be an interface to GCN that only incidentally worked on other GPU architectures
>>52364308
sage
>>52364308
>>52364308
>pascal is using HBM2
>picture clearly shows GDDR5
well duh
>>52364308
It's funny when nvidiafags tried to turn the housefire meme towards amd when it originated from nvidia in the first place. And now AMD has a card that is nearly 50% more efficient than Maxwell GPUs
>>52364308
>prototyping is a meme.
>every company prototypes
get the fuck over it already.
>>52368928
>AMD has a card that is nearly 50% more efficient than Maxwell GPUs
What the hell?
>>52368928
>AMD has a card that is nearly 50% more efficient than Maxwell GPUs
wew lad
>>52369016
Yeah, every company prototypes but if you read the thread you'll essentially see that NVidia tried to pass off some old junk they had laying around with GDDR5 as a prototype of Pascal with HBM.
>>52369025
>>52369069
Look guys, if you're going to shill for Nvidia effectively, you need to keep up with the latest tech news. Ask either Raj or Sanjay upstairs if you need guidance on where to look.
>>52369580
>competition
What competition?
>>52369580
>believing AMD's lies
How much do you want to bet that this is one of the high-end GPUs that they throttled to 25% of its peak power to get those low-ass numbers? This will never pan out in the real world with their mainstream GPUs. They're pulling the old bait-n-switch trick.
>>52369580
>leaks from
>card is not launched
>compare polaris with maxwell and not pascal
>28nm vs 14nm
>4790k with...ddr4
I'm sorry
>>52369714
How about you read what actually happened? They tested out a 120mm^2 Polaris GPU in front of the press.
Real highend shit, right there.
>>52369580
>two different generation
WHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>>52369714
>>52369746
>lies
They showed this same demo running at CES
Their system pulled 88w, the Nvidia system pulled 146
146 - 88 = 56
Let's assume both cards were frame locked at 60, and running an average of 85% their TDP
(90 * .85) - 56 = 20.5 / .85 = 24 and change
AMD has a 25w (14nm) GPU capable of the performance of a 90w (28nm) GPU
This is fucking huge, regardless of it was a large chip downclocked/power limited.
And considering their recent order of 30 of their lowest-end Polaris chips, I would wager that the showcased product was in fact their low end.
>>52367314
390 was my first card ever. I'm straight out of peasantry at 23yo. I have no complaints but I do want to know what the hype behind nvidia's all about. I hope the next generation of either company rapes my 390
>>52369796
>compare polaris with maxwell and not pascal
>28nm vs 14nm
>>52369828
Ah, yes, the famed Pascal everyone has in their hands right now.
>>52369752
>>52369796
And that's my point
A GM200 will be able to do 1080p at 60FPS capped using much less power than a GM206 would be able to do at those same settings. You're getting played. It may be more energy efficient to play less demanding resolutions and settings with a more expensive card, but not everyone will be able to afford those cards, and those that do will not play at those settings.
It's an unrealistic and downright misleading display of power efficiency when you're running a GPU just a tad bit over its idle power.
You will NOT be able to replicate those power consumptions with a mainstream Polaris GPU at the same settings, since they WILL draw more power since their workload is that much higher.
Idiots.
>>52364326
AMD gets their chips from Samsung, not TSMC though.
>>52369746
>>leaks from
It was leaked a few hours before it went official. It is an official slide.
>>card is not launched
Showing the performance of a next gen card is pretty common.
>>compare polaris with maxwell and not pascal
Considering that Pascal will be launching later than Polaris, it makes sense. It's also very common, NVidia does the same all the time.
>>52369764
Not as good as NVidia comparing the 9xx series to the 6xx series in their slides. That one was a good laugh.
>>52369828
>>28nm vs 14nm
Please point to NVidia 14nm performance numbers that AMD can use as a comparison.
>>52369807
>I have no complaints
http://support.amd.com/en-us/kb-articles/Pages/AMD-Radeon-Software-Crimson-Edition-16.1-Hotfix-Release-Notes.aspx
AMD Radeon Software Crimson Edition 16.1 Hotfix Drive
[82645] Fallout 4 – The compass flickers during gameplay on AMD Radeon™ R9 290 and AMD Radeon™ R9 295X2
[84118]/[59475] Elite: Dangerous - Poor performance may be experienced in Supercruise mode under Windows® 10
[82887] The driver installer appears to hang at various stages of the install process
[84116] Call of Duty: Black Ops 3 – random frame freezes may be observed during gameplay
[84112] Frame Rate Target Control (FRTC) setting do not apply consistently to all games. In order for FRTC to function properly, Vertical Refresh/VSync must be turned off
[58978] DiRT Rally – A crash may occur when starting a new race with AMD Crossfire™ and AMD FreeSync™ enabled
[83370] The AMD Gaming Evolved overlay may cause a black screen, or introduce game stutter
[82497] Assassins Creed Syndicate - Using "Very High" graphics settings in 3x1 Eyefinity mode may cause displays to switch off
[82093] Star Wars™: Battlefront - Some flickering may be experienced in shaded areas of the screen while game levels are loading
[82788] Call of Duty: Black Ops 3 - Frame freezing during gameplay may be experienced
[82794] Just Cause 3 - The system may hang when task switching on systems with AMD CPUs and GPUs
[82777] Just Cause 3 - Application profile setting added for laptops with Switchable Graphics
[82779] Fallout 4 - Gameplay may be choppy in AMD FreeSync™ mode in Ultra mode at 1440p resolution
[82895] Fallout 4 - Brightness flickering observed with AMD FreeSync™ enabled on certain displays
[80254] cnext.exe intermittently crashes during Windows® shutdown
>>52369838
I'm going to need some specific sources which show that two cards from the same family, one being the high/highest end and one being the low end, draw different amounts of power for doing the same work.
Like, say, frame capped benchmarks.
>>52369838
THEY
TESTED
A
LOW
END
CHIP
Is it being 120mm^2 not indication enough for you? Want some reference? That's a bit bigger than a fucking Intel CORE M.
There's no throttling, there's no capping, there were two systems run off a power meter in front of the press.
>>52369828
AMD can't help it if Nvidia is being slow.
>>52369884
part 2
[81809] A crash may be experienced if an HDMI™ display is a cloned display device on an HP Envy 15 notebook
[82485] "Failed to create OpenGL context" error message may appear after installation
[82842] "Cannot find RadeonSettings.exe" error message may appear during installation
[83277] "AMD Install Manager has stopped working" error message may appear during installation
[83484] "Cannot find cncmd.exe" error message may appear during installation
[82902] Display may flicker on certain laptops after prolonged gameplay with AMD FreeSync™ enabled
[81489] Unable to create 4x1 or 2x1 portrait mode SLS with 4K displays
[82042] Video corruption may appear in Movies & TV app when is VSR enabled and scaling mode is set to "Full panel"
[82492] Portrait Eyefinity mode may not be configured correctly using Radeon Additional Settings
[82695] No display on certain laptops when toggling display mode or connecting an HDMI™ display
[82900]/[81859] Flickering may be experienced on some monitors when AMD FreeSync™ is enabled
[80064] Notifications reverting back to English on non-English systems after reboot
[82490] Misaligned UI may be observed on the Bezel Compensation screen
[81777] Launching a game from the Game Manager may launch on a single display after enabling and disabling AMD CrossFire™ in a 3x1 AMD Eyefinity™ setup
[81856] Marginally increased power consumption may be observed during video playback
>>52364308
new meme cards incomming ?
mmmmh I can already smell the new memes rushing in
>>52369900
I don't think you understand, its AMD's fault Nvidia is slow on the release of pascal because _____.
>>52369909
part 3
[79428] StarCraft II: Flickering may be observed in the 'Episode 3' campaign
[80836]/[59701] Call of Duty: Black Ops 3 - Flickering or poor performance may be experienced when running in AMD Crossfire™ mode
[81736] Call of Duty Online - The game may crash if the Print Screen key is pressed on a 4K monitor
[81448]/[77961] A system restart may be experience when waking the system from sleep mode on some systems with Intel processors
[81651] Star Wars™: Battlefront - Texture corruption may be experienced if the game "Field of View" setting is > 100
[82213] Star Wars™: Battlefront - Some users may experience minor flickering or corruption at different game location or while viewing the in-game cinematics
[81915] Assassin's Creed Syndicate - Building textures may be missing on some AMD Freesync™ displays with VSync enabled
[82387] Assassin's Creed Syndicate - The game may crash if the Gaming Evolved "In Game Overlay" is enabled. A temporary workaround is to disable the AMD Gaming Evolved "In Game Overlay"
[82789] Total War™: Rome II - Choppy gameplay may be experienced
[84509] Gaming Evolved client does not initiate when launching Metro Last Light if AMD CrossFire™ is enabled
[84434] Far Cry 4 – A crash may occur after performing (ALT + Enter) to switch between windowed/full screen modes with the AMD Gaming Evolved "Video Capture" feature turned on
>>52369892
>I'm going to need some specific sources which show that two cards from the same family, one being the high/highest end and one being the low end, draw different amounts of power for doing the same work.
Can't you google it for yourself? Jesus Christ, this is common knowledge. A card uses far less power at idle and if it works barely any harder than it does at idle, then the card will use drastically less power than a card that has to work near its total limits.
>>52369897
>THEY
>TESTED
>A
>LOW
>END
>CHIP
Proof? Other than what they claimed? I don't consider Greenland to be "low-end" when it's going to be a replacement for the 390X and Fury series of cards.
>>52369932
final part
[82499] Talos Principle - A crash may occur while changing Gaming Evolved Video settings or pressing ALT + Enter when "In Game Overlay" is enabled
[84591] Mad Max – Low FPS performance may be experienced in game when AMD FreeSync™ and AMD CrossFire™ are enabled
[84428] Battlefield Hardline – A crash may occur when changing graphics settings from "Ultra" to "High" during gameplay
[83839] Some games may experience brightness flickering with AMD FreeSync™ enabled
[83833] Radeon Settings - AMD OverDrive™ clock gauge needles for the secondary GPU may be in wrong position when the system is idle and the secondary GPU is inactive
[83832] Radeon Settings – AMD OverDrive™ Power setting changes on the secondary GPU are not immediately displayed. This is seen only on dual GPU graphics cards, such as the AMD Radeon™ HD 7990 and Radeon R9 295x2
[83287] Game stuttering may be experienced when running two AMD Radeon™ R9 295X2 graphics cards in AMD CrossFire™ mode
[82892] Display corruption may occur on multiple display systems when it has been running idle for some time
[83031] Star Wars™: Battlefront – Corrupted ground textures may be observed in the Survival of Hoth mission
[82824] Call of Duty: Black Ops 3 – Flickering may be observed is task switching is used during gameplay
[81915] Assassin's Creed Syndicate – Building textures are missing and game objects stutter if VSync is enabled in Quad AMD Crossfire configurations
I want my gamework
>>52369941
>Proof?
>giving him die size of the chip
>wants proof
You know what, just fuck off.
>>52369580
>28nm vs 14nm
Jesus Christ...
>>52369838
It was a small chip retard
>>52369884
I got my card in december, I haven't noticed any issues and I'm not reading that again
>>52369960
>we still don't have physical proof or pictures that the GPU was that small
You first, AMDrone
They should permaban you for shilling so hard. I bet you're an employee or a paid poster.
>>52369970
See >>52369852
That has to be one of the stupidest complaints I've seen in a while, almost as bad the anon going through the knowledgebase. That can just as easily be done for NVidia.
>>52369991
>AMDrones going all out
desperate retards.
Intel + Nvidia > Amdcuck30fpsoverheatingindianshit
>>52369932
>>52369909
>>52369884
Nice spamming, Nvidiafag
>>52369941
This was a public presentation, in which they told everyone they were running their low-end 120mm chip.
In any case, "use google" is not an answer.
You made a claim, I asked for proof (of which their isn't any), and you failed to deliver.
Further, a larger GPU would in fact use more power than a smaller one for the same workload. Simply because the larger chip has more circuitry to suck power even if those units are idle.
Your logic is pure fiction. It makes no sense and is probably the same reason we won't find any power draw comparisons for frame-capped benchmarks between the same family of GPUs, one high end and the other low.
You nvidia shills should know better than to come to /g/, you guys get BTFO every time.
>>52368928
>And now AMD has a card that is nearly 50% more efficient than Maxwell GPUs
NO
>>52370033
>in which they told everyone they were running their low-end 120mm chip
They told, but THEY NEVER SHOWED
All they needed to do was pull the GPU out of the system, remove the heatsink, and present the physical die to the audience. Or at least have the same card on display with its heatsink removed so people can draw their own conclusion.
All we have to go by is their assurances that it is 120mm^2.
Hang yourself, Pajeet
AMDone
>>52369746
>4790k with...ddr4
Underrated post
>>52370079
How is that chart relevant when the post is referencing AMD's presentation at CES?
>>52370079
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9ZIcztgcNY
BTFO
>>52369997
http://anandtech.com/show/9886/amd-reveals-polaris-gpu-architecture
In any case, the GPU RTG showed off was a small GPU. And while Raja’s hand is hardly a scientifically accurate basis for size comparisons, if I had to guess I would wager it’s a bit smaller than RTG’s 28nm Cape Verde GPU or NVIDIA’s GK107 GPU, which is to say that it’s likely smaller than 120mm2. This is clearly meant to be RTG’s low-end GPU, and given the evolving state of FinFET yields, I wouldn’t be surprised if this was the very first GPU design they got back from Global Foundries as its size makes it comparable to current high-end FinFET-based SoCs.
>>52370083
Where is your proof that a larger GPU would use less power than a smaller one for the same workload?
I don't want bullshit personal anecdotes, I want cited, sourced facts and figures.
>>52370126
>maxwell vs polaris
>28nm vs 14nm
>
>>52365137
nice peddling there newfriend.
do you make a cardboard trophy each time you convince yourself you actually "won" an argument as well?
wood screws
fermi
3.5
fake cards
>>52370141
>Where is your proof that a larger GPU would use less power than a smaller one for the same workload?
Here >>52370079
Literally stupid. Do you even remember to breathe?
>>52370138
This isn't proof at all, Anandtech has been known to be on AMD's payroll
>>52365296
i had 2 day 1 290x leafblowers.
mad cards, but the noise and heat output was such a joke.
they didnt overclock at all, but i sold them last week, for the same fucking price i bought them
think about that. just think about that.
3 year old cards, no value lost.
>>52370175
Despite them constantly getting GCN specs wrong?
>Steve Jobs shows a non-retail iPhone in January 2007, 6 months before release
>literally has a different motherboard to support video out
>Mercedes shows a non-retail concept car at Geneva Motor Show
>doesn't even have an engine, not even a real car
According to AMD fanboy logic, publicly traded companies are not allowed to show prototypes ahead of release.
I guess that's why AMD is on the verge of bankruptcy and worthless.
>>52370175
They're only on AMD's payroll when it makes Nvidia look bad.
>>52370166
No, no, no
When talking about this specific argument we need to not only isolate the GPU type, but also the process of manufacture.
For any benchmark to prove that a larger GPU would use less than a smaller for the same work you would need to take, say, a 7970Ghz and a 7770Ghz, or a 290X and a 7790, and measure how much they draw when frame capped to 60 in a game (and with settings) that ensure the smaller card can maintain 60fps.
I posit that it's impossible, and you posit that you don't know what you're talking about.
>>52370227
All Maxwells use the same core architecture, dumbass
Compare all the Maxwell cards and their power efficiency ratings, dipshit
How fucking dumb are you, cuckball?
>>52370199
I bought a 290x in Canadialand for $240usd almost a year ago now and I could sell them for profit right now if i wanted to. They really do hold their value
>>52367381
10/10!
novidya
>>52367428
you do realise what you just said applies to nvidia just as much.
amd drivers are way better newfriend.
>>52370257
That is because hawaii is looking set to replace tahiti as the GOAT cards. I mean, Nvidia has had 3 years to surpass hawaii and has only done it recently.
>>52370251
You're fucking kidding right? Those benchmarks are the opposite of frame locked, they are for maximum output.
You have absolutely no understanding of empirically correct testing, and have no way to show me what you say is true.
>>52366744
I think you're talking about arcade bumstead from porkslope turkeyhandle
