OH SHIT ITS HAPPENING
http://wccftech.com/amd-r9-480x-470x-specs-allegedly-revealed/
http://experience.amd.com/amdwebinar?sf26238011=1
>>54541534
oh and thats just the mobile stuff
Late may early june polaris Desktop
>>54541534
>wccftech.com
>currytech
Notable for being less reliable than a random number generator
>>54541534
keep dreaming, amdead
AMD is going to be taking shit over. Polaris is going to be in Graphics cards, Xbox, Nintendo NX and Playstation Neo.
"AMD expects $1.5B in future revenue for three new gaming processors"
-http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/04/amd-promises-three-new-gaming-processors-coming-soon-is-one-for-xbox/
>>54541534
>when op is obs ucl shill
>no one in enngrand cares about KCL apart from UCL
>>54542532
i agree with titmonster
>>54542532
Who is this semen demen
>>54542532
>Polaris is going to be in Graphics cards, Xbox, Nintendo NX and Playstation Neo.
So its 5 years old outdated low end garbage?
Also on a side note while the revenue on the console market may be high, the profit margin is only the small royalty they get per card which is ~<1%.
>>54542855
Money is money once a profit is made. Outdated technology? No, it was Sony or Microsoft who requested the new FinFet chip design and paid the cost.
>polaris 10
Only real deal here is this. While the polaris 11 is a pretty efficient card, I'm not really looking for side grades.
Possible Polaris 10 upgrade from 7950 looks fine. I'd need more data points from Vega and 1070/1060 to make my final choice.
If Polaris 10, delivers 1070's performance at $100 less, I'd be fine with that. If its in between 1070/1060 but priced in between, neutral. Still Vega needs to come out faster.
>>54542997
You arent going to be able to fit a 200$ gpu(already low tier) in a pc build that should only cost ~300$ retail and will be sold as at a profit.
Yeah polaris will be low end tech for 100$ gpus if it is going to be used in consoles.
>>54542532
Heres to wishing i got AMD stock a while ago
>>54543062
Not the exact same chips they are different variants. You seem to have a lot of questions how about you have a read.
http://vrworld.com/2016/05/11/amd-confirms-sony-playstation-neo-based-zen-polaris/
>>54543058
The $300 price point is probably pretty legit for a 480X, and AMD is mostly going to be touting DX12 performance when they announce it, they'll be like
"titan X performance at $300! *under DX12"
>>54542532
The profit margin for consoles is very small.
Nvidia focus on professional solutions and makes more profit out of it.
>>54543179
Nvidia can't do the consoles as they don't have X86 CPUs
>>54543058
>If Polaris 10, delivers 1070's performance at $100 less, I'd be fine with that.
AMDtards are really totally deluded, thinking AMD is a holy cow that you can milk for free.
Retards stay retards.
>>54543147
>titan X performance at $300! *under DX12
And what is the problem with that?
>>54543145
Yeah they will be based on the retail chips, simply underclocked and some cores removed, just like what is currently in PS4/X1.
But they sure as hell cant take a card that can compete with a 1080/980 ti and castrate it so much that it fits in a console.
>>54543194
If pascal still doesn't support A-sync it'll be able to match it's performance in DX12
>>54543204
DX12 still isn't really here, and the 390 already has shown to make the titan X under DX12 in Hitman
>>54543206
It wouldn't really be hard to make a semi-custom chip to be low power but also still deliver solid 1080p performance
polaris 11 actually sounds pretty good, hype for this shit
>>54543193
No, because it makes no money.
I find it so funny that people already fully ignore that AMD is already prociding chips for every console, ps4, xbone, wii u. With the two biggest selling already being 100% AMD and it does jack shit for their financial.
On contrast last fiscal year their profit was nearly 0.
nice rebrands
>>54543295
It's still money coming into the company, plus now with 14nm there's way more yields for AMD.
>>54543058
Amd user here, Polaris 10 is the one that you should just stop even thinking about. 390 performance for $299? Just get a fucking 390. They have introduced nothing new to the table nor increased what performance is available for the price like Nvidia did. Polaris 11 will be amazing for laptops, Polaris 10 is an embarrassing waste of time
I'm waiting for specs and a release date on Vega, but if amd fuck that up I'm going with a 1080
>>54543369
Isnt vega just going to be a Fury X with 8GB vram?
Thats barely 980ti performance so i guess you will be going for a 1080ti
>R9 390x performance for $300
I really hope it's much better or cheaper than that. Otherwise AMD has just deeply disappointed me, and I hope they go under and get bought by somebody who actually knows how to be competitive.
What's the speculation on the 1080ti?
>>54543406
Just let Intel grab ATI.
AMD can burn for all I care.
>>54543400
No, are you fucking retarded?
It's going to be GCN 5.0 with 4096 stream processors. It should rival the 1080 at least
>>54543439
You mean let apple buy them
We need more competition, not less you retarded dumbass
>>54543426
2560 or 3000 cores
roughly %25 more power than the 1080
maybe 10-12gb?
That shits gonna be $800-1000usd+ because AMD cant touch it until Vega or after desu
>>54543444
It will probably be the same price if its just as fuck
Fuck why are GPU's $500-600usd+ now? Horse shit!
>>54543457
>Apple
>AMD
Nah their too spineless to back them fully. They have had the option to for years because their worth nothing but have done exactly that NOTHING.
>>54543487
Backing is not the same as buying
Apple enjoys having control over their technology; if they owned their cpu/gpu company it would be extremely beneficial to them
>>54543369
R9 380 was released at $199. 380X @ $229
R9 280X was $299. Before that 7970 @ $499
If AMD says they will go the cheap route, I will guess at max, the price will be $250. Most likely between $200-$250. Or maybe there will be two different variants of Pascal 10, 480X/480 with them being $249 and $229.
The Vega will probably come with multiple different tiers takes too. 490/490X, 495x, and the Fury replacement
>>54543516
if the polaris desktop card is a 290/390x rebadged i am fucking DONE with AMD until Vega
But thats what 6-12 months away
>>54543463
Will it drop when vega comes out? I'm trying to time when I should build my rig and I'm sold on the 1080ti if it has a good release.
>>54543532
You're a retard.
>>54543532
Yeah exactly
If it doesn't match the leaked 4000 firestrike benchmark then it's fucking toast
>>54543516
I hope so. A cool, quiet, R9 390 equivalent for $200 is what I'm hoping for. If they do, AMD wins this round in my book.
>>54543532
It won't be a rebrand; it's a completely new design and card, only it's a much smaller and cheaper one. Performance wise though, I agree
>>54543564
Who knows nvidia already has the market.
Guessing before xmas though
>>54541534
>AMD polaris
>Offering existing card specs for half the price
>at a later date than the competitor card that runs Doom on ultra at 200fps
They've literally just given up havn't they?
>>54543602
Even if it ships at 1.4Ghz and only 2048 shaders it has as much (theoretical) performance as a 290x (2048 * 1.4 = 2840)
Throw in all these new gpu changes we know nothing about and we can assume 480x should he somewhere between 390x and Fury perfoormance.
That's without overclocking a 14nm chip.
I'm tired of sitting on iGPU. Cant wait for polaris.
>>54543532
yeah a 14nm gpu will be a rebrand of a 28nm one.
autism?
>>54543602
Most of the money Nvidia makes from their consumer cards are from laptop variants and the OEM markets. Funnily enough those are the areas AMD is targeting with the various polaris SKUs.
If AMD is going to claw back market share thats how you go about it, not high end products which despite their high margins are bought by relatively few people.
If you have 700 burgers to spend Nvidia will most likely be the way to go, but if you have 300 burgers its going to be AMD all the way.
>>54543655
Just cut it in half
>>54543457
Why do Apple need AMD/ATI?
They have PowerVR, which has been the best mobile GPU in the smartphone/tablet segment for years.
>>54543532
A 290x with the 2.3x perf/w AMD are citing would be monstrous. You'd have a 140ish watt card that can compete against a 980ti (as hawaii has done in a few DX12 titles).
>>54543652
And when the lowest 10 series card outperforms the titan x that was faster than the fury, what's the point?
>>54543681
kek
>>54543724
There is no way a 1050 will outperform a titan x (the x40 chips tend to be under nvidia's GT branding, not GTX).
>>54543700
Because it's bettr?
>>54543602
>Doom ultra
All that tessellation.
-t nvidia
![perfrel_3840_2160[2].png](https://i.imgur.com/cgvYWr1.png "perfrel_3840_2160[2].png")
>>54543724
>titan x that was faster than the fury,
>>54543724
If the 1050 is at 970 levels I will be seriously impressed.
>>54543740
I wasn't aware there was anything lower than the 1070
>>54543658
>but if you have 300 burgers it's going to be 1070 all the way
Fixed.
There's a reason why 3.5GB still outsells all of AMDs offerings. Pretty sure 1070 is going to pull the same sales if not even better because I doubt they're going to pull a 3.5GB again.
>>54543760
Go back to /v/.
>>54543754
>ignoring that I said Fury, not Fury X
stay mad.
>>54543720
why dont i just go buy a 390x then?
Why am i waiting for a Fury on 14nm which is basically Vega
>>54543724
In VR onle because it has special VR hardware features. It won't outperform Titan x in 4k dx11.
The marketing point of polaris is 300$ VR gaming.
So particularly in VR polaris 10 will also beat Titan X
>>54543771
Why did you compare to fury in the first place?
>>54543794
because it was a card the 1070/80 outperforms and it's one of the currest toppest range amd cards.
>>54541534
>http://wccftech.com
>>54543760
There isn't...yet. However you don't jsut throw away chips that don't make the cut for the 1070.
Similarly the fact that the 1070 has something like 20% less cores than the 1080 yields must be horrific for the 1080. You don't typically see that sort of disparity in core count at this tier.
>>54543766
We shall see.
>>54543779
Neither polaris (or by extension, vega) will be rebadged fury. AMD's own slides have them touting new features that current GCN cards lack.
Pic related, though I doubt /v/ has enough understanding to grasp the implications of what these new features mean (especially the command processor).
>>54543827
post the pics/slides then
>>54543827
>>54543835
Woops forgot picture.
>>54543724
1080 ONLY beats Titan X in vr thanks to new Nvidia VR features made to make VR possible.
1080 still weaker than titan
That's misleading Nvidia marketing.
>>54543812
I don't understand what youre trying to say. Seems like youre just dont know what to say.
>fastest nvidia card
vs
>fastest amd card
Amd is faster. Cuck yourself.
>>54543812
From last year
its only a 10% improvement over a 980ti oc
>>54543842
>inb4 the titan 980ti and every other nvidia card gets massively nerfed in drivers
>>54543864
Just ask Kepler owners.
>>54543812
Why compare Titan X to the "one of the current toppest range amd cards" and not the toppest? Educate yourself before you rek yourself senpai.
>>54543873
>3,5+0,5G
every time
We don't know if all the specs that have been "leaked" for the Polaris chips are for the mobile variants or the desktop ones.
If it's for the mobile versions desktop Polaris is going to be a beast. If not AMD are fucked.
>>54543873
>390x is as fast as the fury
WEW
Whats the point of buying a fury at all? Even the X barely pulls 10fps ahead
tempted to get a 390x 8gb and oc it but ill wait a month or so i am sure amd will have new cards out by then
>>54543873
According to this you will get like 60+ FPS gaming in 1440p for 299$
SOUNDS LIKE AMD FUCKING WON THE MARKET
>>54543892
See pic
>>54543901
The fury series scales like shit over hawaii primarily because its ROP starved. The limits of 28nm meant AMD couldn't increase the front end to balance out the increase core count.
Fury makes much more sense if the 20nm node had actually played out and not been scrapped.
Equally its why Nvidia ripped all the compute out of their design for maxwell and are adding it all back in for pascal.
>>54543909
AMD chips love their high resolutions.
>>54543901
Now compare to >>54543754
>>54543929
>>54543930
Welp
Waiting till Vega
>>54543295
>No, because it makes no money.
Nvidia can't into x86 dipshit
>>54543959
If you have a 290 or faster card, go vega. If you have a 280x/7970 or slower card polaris is the chip for you.
Consider right now a 290x is generally faster than 7870 crossfire.
>>54543959
Yup. Literally no reason to buy top of AMD right now. I'm also waiting.
>>54543585
>it's a completely new design
It's still GCN, just on a smaller node.
>>54543982
i have a 680ti 4gb from fucking 2012 i need a faster card NOW
>>54543986
Tempted to get a 390 8gb and oc the shit out of it.
Getting under $300usd here so gonna jump on one soon next time a specials on
>>54543991
Here comes the retard.
>>54544001
>i need a faster card NOW
What the fuck man. For what game?
>>54543991
Each iteration of GCN has seen some very radical changes.
>>54544001
As long as you get a 390 with a decent cooler overclocking isn't a problem. Hawaii responds very well to more voltage as a rule, but that equally requires some monstrous cooling.
With custom cooling I can get just over 1200mhz core on my 290x, but the power draw is insane.
>>54543700
Because amd doesn't make smartphone cpus numbnuts
>>54544021
ALL GAMES
had a 290 4gb but it was a housefire so i got a 770 and ive really been hitting my head on the ceiling thes past 2 years
ordering a 390 now yolo
>>54544005
He's not wrong.
>>54544032
I have a Sapphire R9 390 and I can get it to 1100 MHz core clock without touching the voltage.
When I try to clock it even a little bit higher I get artefacts and I need to increase voltage by at least 50 mV.
>>54543812
>>54544039
>downgraded from a 970 competitor to a card that now competes against the 7950/280
What sort of person downgrades to a card thats best part of 40% slower?
>>54544051
He is wrong and is too stupid to understand why.
>>54544032
Hmm gonna be running it on air for now it seems
>>54544055
Hmmm
>>54544055
To hit 1200mhz that particular 290x wants +180mv.
>>54544065
>Hmm gonna be running it on air for now it seems
That is air cooling - a good water loop never gets that hot.
>>54544060
>He is wrong and is too stupid to understand why.
How so?
Polaris is still GCN.
>>54544039
>ordering a 390 now yolo
Cant wait for month?
>>54544051
>He's not wrong.
He is not right though. Sure its stll GCN but its new architecture.
>>54543295
You are very uninformed
>>54544060
a fucking idiot
the 290 kept artifacting and i quit gaming not long after
Came back this year to find my card was useless
>>54541557
>Late may early june polaris Desktop
aka two fucking weeks.
>>54543214
I would put my money on that it can't, atleast not in hardware. I've specualted before that they'll try to mitigate this with crazy clock speeds.
>>54541637
>Notable for being less reliable than a random number generator
Probably the only news site who isn't completely in Nvidias pocket though.
>>54544073
>Cant wait for month?
new cards probably wont come out for another month or two here and will cost twice as much
looking at a 390 for $460aud shipped which is CHEAP here
>>54544073
GCN IS the architecture. They might change the design to accommodate for 14nm and add new features but the architecture is NOT changed.
>>54544071
Yes? Maxwell is still fermi at a core level.
GCN 1.2 for example doesn't even have ACE units like 1.1 or 1.0 do - it has HWS (and less of them) that do async compute (among other things). These HWS are simply are more effecient design.
Consider a fury has in the region of 40% more cores than a 290x but only has a TDP of 25w more.
>>54543369
retarded comment tbqfh
>>54543295
>and it does jack shit for their financial.
Their shares got the biggest single day increase in 40 years after they dropped the console deals a few months back. Something like going from 1.5$ to 3.5$ in a day.
>>54544070
I got mine running stable at 1180 MHz but with +175 mV and it got super hot and drew a lot more power. All for a miniscule increase in fps.
I decided it wasn't worth it and left it at 1100 MHz and stock Sapphire voltage.
>>54543991
If they called it something else other than GCN would that convince you that it's a different architecture? Retard.
>>54541534
>390/390X performance
Fuck you AMD, I want 4K performance, not the same shit we had in 2013 but at half the power draw. I would hope that Polaris 10 is at leas Fury X levels, but it seems very unlikely.
Guess I'm giving up on FreeSync for the moment since I have to buy NVIDIA shit.
>>54544110
Educate yourself.
>Graphics Core Next (GCN) is the codename for both a series of microarchitectures as well as for an instruction set.
GCN is a principle. Polaris is new architecture which just follows it.
>>54543369
>390 performance for $299? Just get a fucking 390.
Polaris 10 uses 130W, 390 uses double that.
Less power means less heat, means that it can overclock way more and won't need a triple slot 30cm long liquid cooler.
It's gonna be a monster of a card for small mini box PCs, like the Nano was, except that Polaris10 will cost between 200-300$ - if they get a 8gb card at $250, that'll beat the 390 in every way.
>>54544136
You trend to see bigger (relative) gains as you increase resolution as cpu performance becomes less of a factor.
>>54543457
>You mean let apple buy them
Apple is a gimmick toy maker, and that market is drying up soon, their revenue and share price is tanking big time.
Bugger it waiting a month or two will be tourture
there is no pre ordering ability here either
gonna have to stab cunts to get a 490
>>54544167
>4K
go buy two 1080's in a couple of weeks then.
NO single card can reliably do 4k 60fps minimum at the moment
Maybe the 1080ti Pascal and 590x Vega based gpu's next year MAYBE
But most people are fine with 1080p
>>54543369
Bait or retard.
>>54543487
If Apple bought AMD, then Polaris 10 would cost $1000 and be Mac only.
>>54544198
>go buy two 1080's in a couple of weeks then.
That's the plan. But I have a FreeSync 4K monitor and I would've just loved to get 2 of AMD's cards and keep using FreeSync, but apparently they won't have anything worth my money.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvAW5UaRG_4
Light on content atm
only 4 more days /g/
>>54543724
>And when the lowest 10 series card outperforms the titan x that was faster than the fury, what's the point?
Polaris costs HALF of the lowest 10 series card.
>>54544214
Buy Two 490's next month and get 90% of the performance for half the price then
>Memesync
Lerl ok Fatal1ty
>>54544214
Except Vega may have been pushed towards October, but even if that rumor turns out to be true, you'd still be waiting 5 more months
>>54543766
>300 burgers
>1070
get cuck'd fagt
>>54544097
That doesnt make it any more reliable though :^(
The new Polaris cards have to be faster than whatever AMD are curently offering. If they're not AMD can go home.
Who's going to buy a Polaris card if last year's rebrands offer better performance for a couple of watts higher power consumption during load?
>>54544258
AMD Pro Duo
8gb HBM2
![arAUENy[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/hp1EqPk.jpg "arAUENy[1].jpg")
>>54544258
If i can get 390 performance with much lesser watt usage and much cheaper, than i will buy it.
>>54544258
AMD has no PR. This is what's killing them.
>AMD has stronger cards and nVidia has more power efficient cards
>NEWS: AMD IS OVER. NVIDIA HAS POWER EFFCIENCY. AMD IS HOUSEFIRE
>AMD has power efficiency and nVidia has stronger cards
>NEWS AMD IS OVER. NVIDIA HAS MOST POWERFUL CARD. AMD IS LITERALLY TODLER GPU.
>>54543909
Not with Gimpworks^tm :^)
>>54544092
It already can, it's just a matter of getting DX12 and A-sync in more games, and I wonder if even with their architecture limitation how high they can get their clocks on average due to being a bit smaller than nvidias 16nm
wait how good is the TSMC 16nm vs the Samsung 14nm?
>>54544301
This
Commoon Mid year!
>>54544270
>Only in DX12/Vulkan Apps that support it
>Otherwise its just 2x4gb mirrored because DX11 and OGL a shit
Watercooled 1080 models with 2500Mhz clocks incoming! Can you believe this??
Uh, sorry back to your AMD laptop gpu thread.
>>54544238
490s don't come out next month, though. That's the problem.
>>54544239
Yeah, best case scenario it's 5 months, realistically it will probably be longer than that and in the worst case the rumor is completely fake and they have nothing. I'm not going to make a purchase decision on something as flimsy as that.
Even if it's 5 months, they would probably release something at the 1080 level, I don't really want to bash my head against terrible CF support for another half a year. I swear both companies are shit. NVIDIA would rather fuck you up the ass in any way they can and AMD is fucking incompetent.
>>54544301
>AMDrones "last years performance but less power" yeah I'll upgrade for that!
>Nvidia releases card that performs better than current flagship overclocked and uses slightly more power. "OMFG NVIDIA IS BTFO AMD IS WINNING JUST WAIT AND SEE"
>>54544301
>much cheaper
I don't think that's going to happen.
Maybe the Fury cards will fall in price after Polaris has been released. I might just snag one of those then.
Or I'll get a 1070.
>>54544347
>USD700+
>Gets rekt by a GPU half its size and costs 1/2 as much
Lol oh ok
>>54544354
June-July is the launch window
Thats not even a month away anon
>>54544311
>AMD has stronger cards and nVidia has more power efficient cards
When has this happened recently, though?
>>54543986
Except most people aren't running performance level cards right now...
>>54544374
good let the poorfags burn.
im sick of midrange cards
>>54544364
June-July is Polaris. Polaris is by all indication going to be 390/390X performance level and will as such fill the 480/480X slot, not the 490s. 490s are probably going to be Vega 10 and their "1080 Ti" competitor is going to be Vega 11. The official word is that Vega is coming in 2017.
>>54544374
Most people are running 3.5GB top kek. How does this make AMDudes feel I wonder? Do they think they're going to sell better than 1070? Pretty sure history is going to repeat itself here.
>>54544396
Yikes.
Welp i might as well just get a 390x then
I dont have any good for a card that consumes less power atm
Ill just sell it for a profit because my country is dumb
Ebay as soon as vega comes out
>>54544401
Polaris may have a change if it's 1070 performance and cheaper, it looks like that will not happen, since 1070 is supposedly faster than a Titan X.
NVIDIA may have caught them off guard and fucked them yet again, much like they did with the 980Ti before Fury X.
>>54544365
All of last gen? Except for the 980 TI, AMD has the more powerful cards at every price point.
>>54542532
>http://wccftech.com/amd-r9-480x-470x-specs-allegedly-revealed/
Who gives a shit about console gaming.
If I wanted console graphics I'd play on a console
>>54544319
Chips on the 16nm process ran cooler in earlier iterations, the 14nm process has probably been refined by now, I don't have the info tbqh
>>54544360
Does it have A-sync?
Isn't it $700 at launch? Because if the 480X offers 70% of the performance under DX12 at less than half the price, then why would I buy a 1080? I don't even have a 4k display, only 1440p
>>54544396
>Polaris is by all indication going to be 390/390X performance level
But that's only for their mobile versions. We haven't heard anything about the desktop versions.
>>54544110
>>54543058
>If Polaris 10, delivers 1070's performance at $100 less
You idiots actualy believe this will happen?
Where will this much smaller die magically get all the extra performance from?
>>54544110
GCN is the brand.
GCN "1.0", "1.2", GCN4, no different than Kepler, Maxwell, Pascal.
>>54543720
>A 290x with the 2.3x perf/w AMD are citing would be monstrous. You'd have a 140ish watt card that can compete against a 980ti
In 1 percent of the games
>>54544462
>Where will this much smaller die magically get all the extra performance from?
more efficent GCN and newer tech
obviously its going to be not as good as the fury
>>54544455
Polaris is a small die, with TDP <150W. The desktop variants are going to be almost the same shit, you won't see a 200W+ Polaris card because those slots will be filled by Vega.
>>54544119
>>54544200
Nothing I said was wrong. Kill yourselves.
>>54542532
We hear it time and time again. They had Xbox one, ps4, miners, the budget buyers, and so on, yet they still manage to lose money.
>>54544486
>more efficent GCN and newer tech
Which is what Nvidia also have in Pascal, and they can't even bring performance like that on such small dies.
I think you guys need to lay off the grass and geat real here, polaris 10, being around 300 $ bucks will not match 1070
>>54544507
This is because they make pennies on every unit sold.
Note that it's revenue, not profit. 1.5 billion received, 1.49 billion spent to make and ship the processors.
>>54543654
Same here, new build and shit.
>>54544511
So what it doesnt have too
Only the very WORST most unoptimized games need gpu's like the GTX 1080, Fury or top of the line stuff
>>54544480
Versus the 1080 outperforming a titan x is all of the zero VR games currently released?
>>54543720
>290x performance can compete against a 980ti
The level of delusion in you people is staggering.
What, because you saw a few games made by AMD where the 290x competed with the 980ti you think this will be typical of your average gameperformance?
>>54544432
>1070 is supposedly faster than a Titan X
This is not possible. In what application?
>>54544542
Which is most modern games, because game developers are lazy, incompetent idiots
>>54544547
It will outperform the titan x in all games, dumbass.
It will only offer 100% more performance in VR though
>>54544553
>One card is $250usd
>another card is $500usd
Hmm i'd rather go with the cheaper card that performs 70% as good and even better in dx12 and vulkan thanks m8
>>54544559
Well thats hardly news is it
>>54544553
It was never claimed that this hypothetical 14nm 290x would always compete against a 980ti - only that it can.
>>54544565
>It will outperform the titan x in all games, dumbass.
Do you work for TPU?
>>54544559
>playing modern games
Reee
>>54544511
I think it will be 980 performance level for less than 300.
>>54544542
>Only the very WORST most unoptimized games need gpu's like the GTX 1080, Fury or top of the line stuff
Maybe if you game on 1080p with medium settings, if you game at any half decent resolution, 1440p minimum you will need a better performing card than a 390x to put out max settings
>>54544553
Website? I'd like to see some comparisons myself
>>54544573
>>One card is $250usd
>>another card is $500usd
>backpedaling this hard
Should I buy the 480x or wait until Vega?
How far are we from it?
>Can get this for 512aud shipped
Im doing it
http://www.newegg.com/global/au/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127872&ignorebbr=1
>>54544589
This
I have a 290x which is good for medium-high settings in new games at 60fps, but definitely not even close to maxing them
Gonna wait for the card which can do what my 290x does but at 4k
>>54544574
>It was never claimed that this hypothetical 14nm 290x would always compete against a 980ti - only that it can.
If it can, why won't it?
>>54544574
>Do you work for TPU?
If you think a 9,5 TFLOP card on a newer architecture won't outperform a 6,1 TFLOP card you are insane
>>54544587
>I think it will be 980 performance level for less than 300.
Quite possibly yes, but it won't touch 980ti levels, which is what the 1070 will be
>>54544593
Yes and ? Pretty good price to performance ratio if you ask me m8
>>54544604
what games?
>>54544542
That's an ignorant statement to make. Maybe it doesn't have to for your use case. Some people want 144FPS at 2560x1440, some want crazy AA and settings, some want 60FPS at 4K, some want 3440x1440, etc. Not everyone is going for 1080p at almost 60FPS with medium-high settings.
>>54544554
That's according to NVIDIA's claims, on average, which is to say in most/all applications. 1080 is 20-30% faster, going from a x80 to a x70 and losing 20-30% performance is perfectly plausible and in-line with previous gens. 1070 will probably hit right around a Titan X in performance, maybe faster by a very, very slight margin.
>>54544595
If you're going by AMD's official statements Vega is probably 1 year away, at least 8-10 months in any case.
>>54544642
Fuck, then 480x it is
>>54544624
And they can go buy two 390x's for $600usd or one 980ti/titan/1080 aftermarket oc 2600mhz card
Let them
im perfectly happy with 1920x1200x60hz with aa
>>54544656
>And they can go buy two 390x's for $600usd
And then they can slam their head against the wall when they realize CF support is almost nonexistent and has been in this state for 1.5-2 years.
It's very obvious you never actually tried a high-end AMD setup in recent memory.
>>54544695
>It's very obvious you never actually tried a high-end AMD setup in recent memory.
had a 290 4gb non oc back in 2013 and it was slower than most of the other cards at the time
tempted to try amd again since they are getting very cheap
>>54543295
>being stupid.
Have you seen amds debt? It is shrinking by 10% every quarter lol.
You idiots still don't know how finances work.
>>54544725
>Have you seen amds debt? It is shrinking by 10% every quarter lol.
Hyperinflation
>>54544713
Well, with 1 card you never had to worry about CF and that was so long ago that CF support wasn't utter shit yet anyway.
>>54543457
>samsung.
There I fixed it for you.
>>54543295
Yes, that's why nvidia desperately tries to highlight the console/pc disparity in performance in _every_ meeting and even launched their own flop of a console.
Getting all consoles must be a terrible deal!
>>54544618
With an 11% overclock, Witcher 3 1440p 60fps with medium foliage distance, high shadows, ssao, ultra everything else
Gta v high settings, no AA, soft shadows, 1440p with almost 60fps: my cpu is the bottleneck there.
The biggest Polaris chip will be on par with the 1070.
>>54544769
And you base this statement on what?
>>54544738
AMD doesn't control the printing press.
USD is not going through hyperinflation.
>>54544752
>apple buys amd
>turns macbooks into powerpc level devices again
>cpu and gpu development done in a way that combines with apples already successful business plans
Samsung buys amd
>it's amd 2.0
>>54544745
Yeah scales horribly and that was over a year ago
http://www.tweaktown.com/tweakipedia/91/amd-radeon-r9-390x-crossfire-4k/index.html
>>54544760
GTA 5 is a absolute bitch to run at any decent res.
even at 1080p
Gonna get a new cpu soon anyway
>>54544778
It was a joke bro, I thought that much was obvious
>>54544778
>USD is not going through hyperinflation.
Yet its almost worth 1.5x every other currency when adjusted for inflation
its fucking hyper as fuck
>>54544785
Its not obvious as /v/ really is that stupid.
>>54544793
We're on /g/ though
This launch of cards looks like it's in a weird state. I mean, there's hype that we can finally get rid of 28nm, but the current speculated cards just don't make sense to me if I have a 970/390 or above. 1080p is fine with these cards, so upgrading is retarded unless I get a new higher resolution monitor, but even then, I think it's a stupid buy. The 1080, like last generation, looks like a retarded buy when the 1070 brings similar performance for a much lower price point. The problem is that both of these cards won't do 1440 at 120Hz or get to the UHD 60Hz sweet spot. Polaris on the other hand is not a buy as well, since the 970/390 are pretty amazing cards for their price. If you have something shit like a 950 or 370, then yes, Polaris is probably the one you want to buy, but they really need to watch their pricing since the 1070 is at a spot of almost $400, beating every single GPU out there according to Nvidia. I don't know man, I have a 970 and am definitely going to wait for Vega since it'll hopefully it will deliver 120Hz on 1440p. Maybe a freesync monitor that isn't shit will come out as well.
>>54544811
I'm not so sure anymore.
>>54544553
From when is that benchmark. When the 290X came out is was meant to rival the 780ti. Today the 780ti is on par with the 380(X).
>>54544835
The 1080 is a retarded buy unless you game on 4k or want 144hz on 1440p.
Obviously the 1070 will be the better buy of both, and will be a huge upgrade from the 970, simmilar to a 980ti
>>54544835
You are right. People with such cards should wait for 1080Ti and Vega.
>>54544599
not worth it, 390 is just 10% slower but 25% cheaper
>>54544848
Those are 2015 benchmarks
>le keppler cripple meme
See
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvCsT_dk-1E
And never mention it again
>>54544781
CF doesn't scale horribly, it's only horribly supported. If a game has good CF support it runs great on my 2 290Xs at 4K with high-ultra settings. But that's the catch, there's no fucking support and when there is, it's often terrible.
It's purely a software issue because AMD don't give enough of a fuck to actually support CF properly.
>>54544775
My morning urine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvAW5UaRG_4
a pretty good technical view of the potential hardware design elements of polaris in compared to current gpus.
>5.5 TFLOPS
>mobility variant
GTX 980ti performance on laptops on the cheap, folks. That is big news.
>>54544835
>1070 is at a spot of almost $400,
If you really belive their marketing shit and REALLY think that it wont be gimped like the 970 770 and 670 then i have bad news for you bru
>>54544868
only $50 difference in my shit country
>>54544884
So like DX12 games scale better or?
DX11 games cant into xfire in general
Anyway its something for the future since my current Motherboard and cpu is complete shit budget built i did back in 2013-2014
>>54544835
Polaris is just for value buyers in 480/X and 470/X. The 460/X will either be a re-brand or a mobile GPU.
Later AMD comes out with Vega for the 490/X and Fury 2/X.
Nvidia is going to release the 1080 and then release the 1080 ti later on just to fuck with people who must have the best performance. 1070 should have been in the same $300 price bracket at the 970, but Nvidia raised prices by $79 because AMD won't come out with anything as a competitor until Q4.
>>54543740
Muh glorious GTX 750 Ti will be replaced by either divine 1050, hopefully no extra power required as before, perhaps this time with passive cooling. Or by Polaris equilevant.
>>54544916
the 290x is 5,5 tflops, yet it's 70% slower than the 980ti
>>54543980
You retard know that nvidia provided console parts in the past right? Same with intel.
I mean you cant be this stupid right?
This has nothing to do with also producing cpus, but console market being utter garbage no one wants to be in.
>>54544920
DX12 "games" (plural) don't scale at all. As far as I know there is 1 single game that supports DX12 mGPU and that's Ashes of the Singularity. It works pretty well but scaling isn't amazing.
There are DX11 games that work great with CF. GTA V is one of them (after some tweaks). I play at a locked 60FPS, 4K, High/Very High/Ultra settings and it looks amazing and runs very, very smoothly.
Good support comes seldom though, and even then it's probably going to be weeks or even months late after a game releases. Witcher 3 for instance came out 1 year ago and CF is still half-broken. 1 fucking year and the most celebrated RPG of 2015 still runs poorly in CF. AMD simply doesn't deserve a lot of my money if this is the level of support they give the customers who spend the most cash on their products.
>>54544920
still wait at least a month, I love 390 but damn that card draws power, temps are great though. You will save up about 5% on power bill - I am serious.
>>54544948
>70%
>2015+1
>pulling numbers out of your ass
>>54545008
considering the 390x launched here for over $650aud waiting wont really do much except drive prices up
>>54545003
>console market being utter garbage no one wants to be in.
Dumbass.
>>54544228
Polaris 10 = enthusiast
Polaris 11 = entry level
Who the hell gives the weaker cards the higher number? People are going to be fucking confused.
>>54545057
its now $500aud shipped which is pretty cheap
Also we're going to have to wait until july-august to get stock
>>54545088
>Implying normies know or care a shit about gpu codenames
Meh
>>54545088
Polaris 10 is mainstream, not enthusiast. The numbers are based on the time when the GPUs were designed, so Polaris 10 was designed before Polaris 11. It's not like these are the names the actual cards are going to have when they eventually hit the market though. They're going to be 480/470 or some shit.
>>54544892
very interesting watch
My prediction is that polaris 10 will be a $299 290X with +5% performance. But it can be easily overclocked to 980ti levels.
>>54544881
Oh shit you've got me. I guess the 780ti is a 280x competitor, not 290x.
>>54542855
>>54543062
... It takes a lot less than $200 to fab a chip USED in $200 buck card. AMD and nVidia can effectively afford to sell even their most expensive hardware for $100-200 in labor and fabrication costs, if not less. On top of that, these are semi-custom SoCs that will be completely AMD. AMD is in this market because there are profits to be reaped, despite not being as lucrative as OEM CPU sales (which Intel has completely been romping in). Also, it helps AMD's agenda of making games extremely easy to port between consoles and their PC hardware.
>>54545006
So which one is it now? AMD's fault or developers? Make up your mind.
>>54544835
I feel exactly the same
1080 is cool but it's not 4k 60fps cool. Going to keep waiting with my 290x
>>54544126
>daytrading based on speculation
>being any indication of how a company performs
I love, when people on /g/ try to do /biz/.
Almost as embarassing as /v/.
Meanwhile in reality
>Compared to Q3, revenue dropped 13%, and year-over-year the drop was 22%.
>Operating income dropped $393 million from Q3 (623% decrease) and is well down from the Q4 2013 value of $135 million with a posted operating loss this quarter of $330 million. Net income fell from $17 million last quarter and $89 million last year to a $364 million loss, which is a pretty substantial change.
>Net income equates to $2 million, down from $20 million last quarter and $45 million last year, and Non-GAAP earnings per share is $0.00, which can also be spelled as zero, which missed analyst’s expectations of $0.01 per share.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8913/amd-reports-q4-fy-2014-and-full-year-results
>FY 2014 traditional PC market made the biggest amount of money while other markets accounted loss
>Today AMD released their quarterly earnings for Q4 of Fiscal Year 2015. AMD continues to struggle financially, and for Q4 they had revenues of $958 million, down 10% from last quarter and down 23% since a year ago. For Q4, AMD had an operating loss of $49 million, and a net loss of $102 million, or $0.13 per share. For the full year, the operating loss was $481 million and the net loss was $660 million, or $0.84 per share.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9976/amd-reports-q4-2015-results-and-fy-2015-earnings
>FY 2015 traditional PC market was the largest contributor while all other deparments made loss
>The more they shift they target towards Semi Custom the higher the loss is
>They actually made more money when they only made traditional PC components
>There is a direct correlation between the investment in "growth market" and decreased income/increased loss
Woah so this is the power of the semi custom market.
>>54545053
Oh really?
See>>54544553
>>54544848
>>54545199
> Today the 780ti is on par with the 380(X).
Why do AMDrones always have to resort to lying? Or are they just blatently stupid
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1441?vs=1592
>>54545377
The newest game in that list is over a year old. The previously posted pictures of The Division and CoD are much newer titles.
The kepler gimping is a recent trend.
>>54545410
How is the 280x so ahead of the 7970? I forget, is it because of the GHz edition? I really should have waited until the AMD cards were back on stock, I had to settle for a 670.
>>54545410
You keep throwing in these cherry picked benchmarks in which AMD performs better like it proves anything.
Shadows of Mordor and GTA V are all much newer games than the Cripple keppler meme.
And I already showed you here that it was actualy put to the test and shown to be bullshit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvCsT_dk-1E
Anandtech is probably the most respectable benchmarker out there and they show the 780ti miles ahead in every single game, not a few outliers like you suggest.
>>54545444
Yes, those cards overclock like fucking madmen
They are still the king 1080p cards 4 years later
>>54545249
Don't be retarded. Only developers can do anything for DX12 mGPU. In DX11 and below the responsibility lies with both. If NVIDIA releases DX11 SLI profiles on time and AMD does not do the same for CF, I'm blaming AMD.
>>54545450
Gee I dunno. /g/ tells me AMD has no drivers so how does a 780ti lose to a 290 in far cry when - upon release - the 780ti was a good 10% faster than the 290x.
>>54545508
/g/ is full of shit
a 390x will walk over a 980ti for performance per $
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1559?vs=1496
>watts improvement
>less than $300
>already have a 390 from last Summer for $280
why should I care?
>>54545508
Cherry picked benchmarks don't mean shit m8, you can do it all day long, but in the end you're only kidding yourself
>>54545535
>mfw have to pay over $450aud for a fucking 390
kill me
>>54545523
>http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product
>performance doesn't scale linear with $
How is this any surprise you idiot, that's why if you want to look at performance per $ you compare cards in the same price bracket
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1559?vs=1442
>>54545576
Yes and?
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1513?vs=1496
>>54545550
If I cite another 3 or 4 games that is as many as there are in the anandtech chart, thus it would not be cherry picked as i'd have an equal sample size.
>>54542532
Besides the guaranteed cash, even better is that there are over 50 million GCN based consoles out there right now. If report is true, there will be near 100 million consoles by the end of next year, not counting desktops on GCN. Thanks to dx12 and vulkan, desktop gpus shares similar low level apis as consoles now. Game engine developers would be forced to optimise for GCN architecture by default without AMD even dealing with them.
>>54545557
How much are you making an hour?
Minimum american wage is around $7
Minimum aus wage is around $17
conversion from 17 aud to usd nets ~$12 usd
conversion from 7 usd to aud nets ~$9 aud
conversion from 450 aud to usd nets about $327 USD
conversion from $300 usd to aud nets about $413 AUD. Now if you take into account of GST (10%) tax, this $413 ($300 usd) becomes $454. This sounds right doesn't it?
On top of that, in the US, there's sales tax too. So $300+~10%, that comes $330 USD. Which is 454 AUD. So thats exactly same fucking price.
Learn your fucking currency, dumb ausnigger.
>>54545745
>How much are you making an hour?
Nothing because there is no work.
idk 10 an hour on the dole
thats why i want to make sure i get the right card but i cant stand my 770 anylonger
>>54545325
>tech illiterate retard has no idea whats going on with the company
AMD hasn't had a semi competitive server CPU for years now, enterprise marketshare is at 1% or less. High end desktop CPUs have dwindled down to nothing as well. The majority of AMD's processor sales are budget APUs, and semi-custom chips. Those two things along with their graphics division are what have been keeping them afloat. So yes, the semi-custom market is quite large. Hundreds of millions of dollars per yer straight to their bottom line.
