AMD CPU speculation... and expert conjecture

[gamerk316]

AMD graphics shipments grow... thanks to APUs like Kaveri

AMD has seen its graphics part shipments increase 11 per cent quarter-on-quarter, while Intel's shipments have grown 4 per cent. The loser for the quarter was Nvidia, with its graphics shipments dropping 8.3 per cent quarter-on-quarter.

The market for discrete graphics cards is down 17.5 per cent in favor of integrated graphics hardware.

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2014/08/19/amd-graphics-shipments/

I'm honestly scared for Nvidia the last thing i want to see is Amd only with intel trolling the GPU department. Nvidia makes great products even their Arm processors are nice but no one gets them.

nVidia needs a good shake down, so they humble themselves a bit.

They'll be fine. You are going to see pushback on the lower tier parts, but the mid range and top cards are where the margins are anyways. NVIDIA will be fine.

Also, stupid question: Is AMD treating its APUs as GPUs for the purposes of counting sales, or are they double dipping them when computing their CPU/GPU sales? Because I keep hearing "Sales of GPUs are up due to APUs". That would be like Intel saying "we sold more GPUs because we sold a ton of 4770k's".

 

[jdwii]

AMD graphics shipments grow... thanks to APUs like Kaveri

AMD has seen its graphics part shipments increase 11 per cent quarter-on-quarter, while Intel's shipments have grown 4 per cent. The loser for the quarter was Nvidia, with its graphics shipments dropping 8.3 per cent quarter-on-quarter.

The market for discrete graphics cards is down 17.5 per cent in favor of integrated graphics hardware.

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2014/08/19/amd-graphics-shipments/

I'm honestly scared for Nvidia the last thing i want to see is Amd only with intel trolling the GPU department. Nvidia makes great products even their Arm processors are nice but no one gets them.

nVidia needs a good shake down, so they humble themselves a bit.

They'll be fine. You are going to see pushback on the lower tier parts, but the mid range and top cards are where the margins are anyways. NVIDIA will be fine.

Also, stupid question: Is AMD treating its APUs as GPUs for the purposes of counting sales, or are they double dipping them when computing their CPU/GPU sales? Because I keep hearing "Sales of GPUs are up due to APUs". That would be like Intel saying "we sold more GPUs because we sold a ton of 4770k's".

That would be so lame

 

[jdwii]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20140820105340_AMD_to_Cut_Prices_on_FX_9000_Other_FX_Processors_New_Prices_Revealed.html

Nice price drops
100$ for a 6300
170$ for a 8350
Well worth it for those prices

 

[truegenius]

have anyone saw this
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20140820095939_AMD_Readies_FX_8370_FX_8370E_Microprocessors.html

FX-8370 and the FX-8370E. Both chips feature eight cores, 4.10GHz/4.30GHz clock-rates, 8MB L2 cache, 8MB L3 cache and dual-channel DDR3 memory controllers. The FX-8370 will have thermal design power of 125W, whereas the FX-8370E will feature TDP of 95W. Both microprocessors will be priced at $189 in mass quantities.

mother of power efficiency
how did they managed to increase the clock rates while decreasing power consumption significantly ( binning ? )

 

[szatkus]

have anyone saw this
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20140820095939_AMD_Readies_FX_8370_FX_8370E_Microprocessors.html

FX-8370 and the FX-8370E. Both chips feature eight cores, 4.10GHz/4.30GHz clock-rates, 8MB L2 cache, 8MB L3 cache and dual-channel DDR3 memory controllers. The FX-8370 will have thermal design power of 125W, whereas the FX-8370E will feature TDP of 95W. Both microprocessors will be priced at $189 in mass quantities.

mother of power efficiency
how did they managed to increase the clock rates while decreasing power consumption significantly ( binning ? )

Richland's improvements?

 

[de5_Roy]

i guess, perf/watt binning. power consumption might not necessarily be lower i.e. as long as you dissipate 95w heat properly, the cpu should run at 4.1 Ghz.

 

[juanrga]

have anyone saw this
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20140820095939_AMD_Readies_FX_8370_FX_8370E_Microprocessors.html

FX-8370 and the FX-8370E. Both chips feature eight cores, 4.10GHz/4.30GHz clock-rates, 8MB L2 cache, 8MB L3 cache and dual-channel DDR3 memory controllers. The FX-8370 will have thermal design power of 125W, whereas the FX-8370E will feature TDP of 95W. Both microprocessors will be priced at $189 in mass quantities.

mother of power efficiency
how did they managed to increase the clock rates while decreasing power consumption significantly ( binning ? )

The 8370 and 8370E are the same chip except by the TDP. This suggests binning. The E version will have better thermals ('golden sample') and will dissipate less.

The fact that 8370 is rated as the old 8350 also suggest improved yields due to a more mature process.

Richland's improvements?

Nope.

 

[juanrga]

AMD graphics shipments grow... thanks to APUs like Kaveri

AMD has seen its graphics part shipments increase 11 per cent quarter-on-quarter, while Intel's shipments have grown 4 per cent. The loser for the quarter was Nvidia, with its graphics shipments dropping 8.3 per cent quarter-on-quarter.

The market for discrete graphics cards is down 17.5 per cent in favor of integrated graphics hardware.

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2014/08/19/amd-graphics-shipments/

I'm honestly scared for Nvidia the last thing i want to see is Amd only with intel trolling the GPU department. Nvidia makes great products even their Arm processors are nice but no one gets them.

nVidia needs a good shake down, so they humble themselves a bit.

Humble and Nvidia are not compatible words. Pride is part of their corporate image.

The reason why AMD and Intel went up but Nvidia was down is because Nvidia doesn't still have competitive enough APUs and still relies heavily in a falling discrete graphics card market. Their Tegra division is starting to rise (it grows 110% per quarter or so), and Denver version of K1 will change the things without any doubt.

AMD and Intel are already in the highway towards integrated graphics, whereas Nvidia needs more time to transform itself (read my signature; Nvidia knows what do).

 

[palladin9479]

Spoiler

Guys play nice.

That being said, when did the A6-7600 start showing up in stores? I know AMD announced it but nobody had any and it kinda got forgotten. Now I see amazon offering it for $110 USD which is a stupidly good deal.

AMD A8-7600 at Amazon

A 45/65W single chip solution is ideal for quiet low profile casual gaming devices. There is all sorts of stuff you can build with something like this.

It competes more with the Pentium then a I3. The GPU on it is still only good for 720P low-medium settings in games. But for HTPC and 45 watts well i guess i still see no reason for it when products like the Athlon 5350 exist and its less money and 25 watts and can easily do HD video.

It competes with the i3 because the i3 is what has integrated video. And at $109 USD it crush's any combination of dCPU + dGPU because you can't get a GDDR5 dGPU cheap enough. Graphically its right on par with the 6800/7800 due to 128-bit DDR3 being the limiting factor of all of then. It can play all the media you want along with light gaming, the kinds I do while sitting on the couch in my shorts. If you really want to go crazy, install the A8-7600 in a M350 case with 8GB DDR3-2133 and a HDD and *poof* instant ultra compact light gaming PC.

And btw the "720p" is only for modern games, older games can easily be done at 1080p. I know this because I have a 6800K in a SFF build that runs all sorts of older stuff. I would even go as far as to say that I spend more time playing older games then anything made in the past 4~5 years. It just seems that every new game is made to look pretty but just isn't *fun* to play for very long. This is on a totally different topic and maybe I'm the crazy one here, but the older games really seem more engaging and entertaining to play then the ones made since ~2008.

Pentium has integrated video as well and is good enough for 1080P video as well. " right on par with the 6800/7800 due to 128-bit DDR3" No the A10 alone can barley compete with a 4870 Amd let alone a 6850-7850 you do know the 7770-250x has more GCN cores right? I don't get your point actually just because it runs on slow bandwidth it becomes as powerful as a 6800-7850?
Last paragraph i agree with however

WTF...

You realize the issue here is memory right? The SR iGPU's are currently maxing out the bandwidth on the DDR3 bus. All those cards you listed are GDDR5 cards and at the 90~100$ level. Under that is the "DDR3" variants of those which are the budget products and some are actually worse then the APU's. This was a huge issue I had with people trying to say "just buy a i3 and a X GPU". They use the price of the cheap DDR3 version but the performance of the GDDR5 version. Either way your still looking at a $109 USD price ceiling ($120 on newegg) which simply doesn't have enough room for GDD5 dGPU. Hell those cost 90~100 USD on their own, $80 USD if you get lucky and get one on sale. So your talking $0~30 USD for a CPU that's is better then the A8-7600.

And no you can't build a system with a dGPU that would look good in my living room. Things that look like computers stay in my office / mad scientist lab, I have a policy of keeping the rest of the apartment as geek-free as possible. The current SFF box is a bit too much and I'm looking to replace it soon with something that will be 100% hidden from view. I'm very very picky about looks and sounds in places outside my lab.

I see now you are talking about the APU series and not the GPU series i thought you where saying the A10 7850K is even with a 6800 GPU sorry that is my fault, and yes for the price that APU gives you the best option i just see no use for it myself as its not good enough for gaming except for 720P low-medium and its overkill for HTPC. Also if you are that picky about spaces in your living room why not just get a mini PC with a nice setup that runs on mobile parts, i'm guessing you have no receiver in your leaving room either or have some wimpy one like bose. You could easily without a doubt build a gaming rig that is the same size as a modern receiver such as the pioneer SC-87.

Oh that was so the wrong thing to say.

Yamaha RX-V3800

That is my receiver and it cost about $1800 when I first purchased it back in 08.



I'm currently in the process of redoing my setup and focusing on hiding all the damn wiring. Been looking for a nice glossy black stereo cabinet to clean up the environment.

The box on the right is my current living room PC, it's a nice low profile mini-itx case but it's still a bit too large and clunky to fit in with everyone else. I plan on going with something smaller that runs on a picopsu with an external power brick that I can hide, and at that level you absolutely can not run an dGPU as your looking at sub 100~120w total system power.

 

[palladin9479]

AMD graphics shipments grow... thanks to APUs like Kaveri

AMD has seen its graphics part shipments increase 11 per cent quarter-on-quarter, while Intel's shipments have grown 4 per cent. The loser for the quarter was Nvidia, with its graphics shipments dropping 8.3 per cent quarter-on-quarter.

The market for discrete graphics cards is down 17.5 per cent in favor of integrated graphics hardware.

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2014/08/19/amd-graphics-shipments/

I'm honestly scared for Nvidia the last thing i want to see is Amd only with intel trolling the GPU department. Nvidia makes great products even their Arm processors are nice but no one gets them.

nVidia needs a good shake down, so they humble themselves a bit.

They'll be fine. You are going to see pushback on the lower tier parts, but the mid range and top cards are where the margins are anyways. NVIDIA will be fine.

Also, stupid question: Is AMD treating its APUs as GPUs for the purposes of counting sales, or are they double dipping them when computing their CPU/GPU sales? Because I keep hearing "Sales of GPUs are up due to APUs". That would be like Intel saying "we sold more GPUs because we sold a ton of 4770k's".

Hmm this is a tricky question. It's only one sale but a APU can replace an entry level GPU and entry level CPU, the entire purpose of APU's is to get entry level processor and entry level graphics in one chip. They should probably just report APU sales separately. Intel can't really claim it's integrated graphics replace entry level GPU's, well not yet at least.

 

[gamerk316]

AMD graphics shipments grow... thanks to APUs like Kaveri

AMD has seen its graphics part shipments increase 11 per cent quarter-on-quarter, while Intel's shipments have grown 4 per cent. The loser for the quarter was Nvidia, with its graphics shipments dropping 8.3 per cent quarter-on-quarter.

The market for discrete graphics cards is down 17.5 per cent in favor of integrated graphics hardware.

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2014/08/19/amd-graphics-shipments/

I'm honestly scared for Nvidia the last thing i want to see is Amd only with intel trolling the GPU department. Nvidia makes great products even their Arm processors are nice but no one gets them.

nVidia needs a good shake down, so they humble themselves a bit.

Humble and Nvidia are not compatible words. Pride is part of their corporate image.

The reason why AMD and Intel went up but Nvidia was down is because Nvidia doesn't still have competitive enough APUs and still relies heavily in a falling discrete graphics card market. Their Tegra division is starting to rise (it grows 110% per quarter or so), and Denver version of K1 will change the things without any doubt.

AMD and Intel are already in the highway towards integrated graphics, whereas Nvidia needs more time to transform itself (read my signature; Nvidia knows what do).

Or maybe the lack of new parts the past few months is dragging them down? Until the 800 series hits, NVIDIA sales aren't really going to raise, or even remain stable, as those of us who upgrade GPUs for the most part already have.

 

[cdrkf]

AMD graphics shipments grow... thanks to APUs like Kaveri

AMD has seen its graphics part shipments increase 11 per cent quarter-on-quarter, while Intel's shipments have grown 4 per cent. The loser for the quarter was Nvidia, with its graphics shipments dropping 8.3 per cent quarter-on-quarter.

The market for discrete graphics cards is down 17.5 per cent in favor of integrated graphics hardware.

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2014/08/19/amd-graphics-shipments/

I'm honestly scared for Nvidia the last thing i want to see is Amd only with intel trolling the GPU department. Nvidia makes great products even their Arm processors are nice but no one gets them.

nVidia needs a good shake down, so they humble themselves a bit.

Humble and Nvidia are not compatible words. Pride is part of their corporate image.

The reason why AMD and Intel went up but Nvidia was down is because Nvidia doesn't still have competitive enough APUs and still relies heavily in a falling discrete graphics card market. Their Tegra division is starting to rise (it grows 110% per quarter or so), and Denver version of K1 will change the things without any doubt.

AMD and Intel are already in the highway towards integrated graphics, whereas Nvidia needs more time to transform itself (read my signature; Nvidia knows what do).

Or maybe the lack of new parts the past few months is dragging them down? Until the 800 series hits, NVIDIA sales aren't really going to raise, or even remain stable, as those of us who upgrade GPUs for the most part already have.

I'm not sure the release of the 800 series will really change that. The only reasons I ever upgrade are:

1: Hardware failure (which is pretty uncommon unless your OC the hell out of a card, I still have a HD2600 going strong in an old system).

2: I have games I want to play that I can't due to poor graphics performance.

3: I have games I want to play that I can't due to lack of driver support.

The key thing is that at the moment, anyone with a reasonably recent mid range or higher graphics card isn't going to run into these problems. Sure it's nice to get a new card and be able to turn on some extra AA or something, but that becomes a nice to have rather than a requirement which is much harder to justify the expense. I'm running a GTX 560 and I really haven’t played a game that taxes it much at 1080p high settings. Admittedly I tend to focus on RTS which is less graphics bound than other games but there really aren't many games that wont work, unlike 10 years ago when an upgraded graphics board made the difference between the game running or not. Heck you can run most modern games on low settings on Intels integrated graphics now.

Things that will probably change this: The new consoles, although not that powerful do have access to *allot* of memory for graphics work, more than most high end cards. So I can see that the older 1gb models (like I've got) are going to be a non starter for cross platform games in the next few years. Also newer API's will make a difference when they're released (i.e. DX12 and OGL-N) as it's unlikely older boards will get updated drivers (or if they have the prerequisite hardware support for the new features). One reason cards have been lasting so long is the length of time we've been sitting on DX11 class hardware (I mean the old HD5870, first released DX11 card is still perfectly viable for 1080p gaming on high settings and that card came out years ago).

Final thing that will spur need for graphics cards is the return of proper high resolution displays for PC's. The proliferation of 'Full HD' tellies has set computer displays back a decade- I had a Pentium 133 running on a 21" CRT at 1600 x 1200 resolution at 85hz back in the 90s. That works out about the same number of pixels as a 1080p display and frankly the 4:3 ratio was a more useful shape for most applications. Then HD tellies become the norm and PC displays got standardised with them. At least now 4k is becoming a thing and displays may in fact move forward again, so well finally be talking resolutions that can actually tax the modern graphics hardware fully /rant

 

[gamerk316]

AMD graphics shipments grow... thanks to APUs like Kaveri

AMD has seen its graphics part shipments increase 11 per cent quarter-on-quarter, while Intel's shipments have grown 4 per cent. The loser for the quarter was Nvidia, with its graphics shipments dropping 8.3 per cent quarter-on-quarter.

The market for discrete graphics cards is down 17.5 per cent in favor of integrated graphics hardware.

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2014/08/19/amd-graphics-shipments/

I'm honestly scared for Nvidia the last thing i want to see is Amd only with intel trolling the GPU department. Nvidia makes great products even their Arm processors are nice but no one gets them.

nVidia needs a good shake down, so they humble themselves a bit.

Humble and Nvidia are not compatible words. Pride is part of their corporate image.

The reason why AMD and Intel went up but Nvidia was down is because Nvidia doesn't still have competitive enough APUs and still relies heavily in a falling discrete graphics card market. Their Tegra division is starting to rise (it grows 110% per quarter or so), and Denver version of K1 will change the things without any doubt.

AMD and Intel are already in the highway towards integrated graphics, whereas Nvidia needs more time to transform itself (read my signature; Nvidia knows what do).

Or maybe the lack of new parts the past few months is dragging them down? Until the 800 series hits, NVIDIA sales aren't really going to raise, or even remain stable, as those of us who upgrade GPUs for the most part already have.

I'm not sure the release of the 800 series will really change that. The only reasons I ever upgrade are:

1: Hardware failure (which is pretty uncommon unless your OC the hell out of a card, I still have a HD2600 going strong in an old system).

2: I have games I want to play that I can't due to poor graphics performance.

3: I have games I want to play that I can't due to lack of driver support.

The key thing is that at the moment, anyone with a reasonably recent mid range or higher graphics card isn't going to run into these problems. Sure it's nice to get a new card and be able to turn on some extra AA or something, but that becomes a nice to have rather than a requirement which is much harder to justify the expense. I'm running a GTX 560 and I really haven’t played a game that taxes it much at 1080p high settings. Admittedly I tend to focus on RTS which is less graphics bound than other games but there really aren't many games that wont work, unlike 10 years ago when an upgraded graphics board made the difference between the game running or not. Heck you can run most modern games on low settings on Intels integrated graphics now.

Things that will probably change this: The new consoles, although not that powerful do have access to *allot* of memory for graphics work, more than most high end cards. So I can see that the older 1gb models (like I've got) are going to be a non starter for cross platform games in the next few years. Also newer API's will make a difference when they're released (i.e. DX12 and OGL-N) as it's unlikely older boards will get updated drivers (or if they have the prerequisite hardware support for the new features). One reason cards have been lasting so long is the length of time we've been sitting on DX11 class hardware (I mean the old HD5870, first released DX11 card is still perfectly viable for 1080p gaming on high settings and that card came out years ago).

Final thing that will spur need for graphics cards is the return of proper high resolution displays for PC's. The proliferation of 'Full HD' tellies has set computer displays back a decade- I had a Pentium 133 running on a 21" CRT at 1600 x 1200 resolution at 85hz back in the 90s. That works out about the same number of pixels as a 1080p display and frankly the 4:3 ratio was a more useful shape for most applications. Then HD tellies become the norm and PC displays got standardised with them. At least now 4k is becoming a thing and displays may in fact move forward again, so well finally be talking resolutions that can actually tax the modern graphics hardware fully /rant

Never doubt the enthusiasts will to spend $500 for minor performance upgrades. They'll be an uptick once the 800 series hits.

But yeah, I went from a 570 GTX to a 770 GTX, since newer titles were starting to stress the 570 a bit, and I suspected upcoming titles (Witcher 3) would kill it. I typically don't upgrade much; maybe every 2-3 generations or so. I'll likely have to retire my 2600k and do a system rebuild rather then upgrade the GPU again.

 

[gamerk316]

http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2014/08/20/green-and-mean-nvidia-powered-bmw-i8-hits-streets-6-million-cars-now-running-nvidia-processors/

 

[gamerk316]

RISC announces new Open ISA; hopes to battle ARM/X86.

http://www.extremetech.com/computing/188405-risc-rides-again-new-risc-v-architecture-hopes-to-battle-arm-and-x86-by-being-totally-open-source

 

[szatkus]

RISC announces new Open ISA; hopes to battle ARM/X86.

http://www.extremetech.com/computing/188405-risc-rides-again-new-risc-v-architecture-hopes-to-battle-arm-and-x86-by-being-totally-open-source

Related: http://www.lowrisc.org/

 

[whyso]

Oh that was so the wrong thing to say.

Yamaha RX-V3800

That is my receiver and it cost about $1800 when I first purchased it back in 08.



I'm currently in the process of redoing my setup and focusing on hiding all the damn wiring. Been looking for a nice glossy black stereo cabinet to clean up the environment.

The box on the right is my current living room PC, it's a nice low profile mini-itx case but it's still a bit too large and clunky to fit in with everyone else. I plan on going with something smaller that runs on a picopsu with an external power brick that I can hide, and at that level you absolutely can not run an dGPU as your looking at sub 100~120w total system power.

You easily can, just not at that price. Laptops with a 45W quad + 860m will draw about 120W under full load including screen. Its just going to cost more.

 

[de5_Roy]

Are processors pushing up against the limits of physics?
http://arstechnica.com/science/2014/08/are-processors-pushing-up-against-the-limits-of-physics/

Linux Founder Linus Torvalds 'Still Wants the Desktop'
http://www.eweek.com/enterprise-apps/linux-founder-linus-torvalds-still-wants-the-desktop.html

Analyst reckons Intel could buy MediaTek
http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/35554-analyst-reckons-intel-could-buy-mediatek
i hope this never happens, as mediatek is one of the important members of hsa foundation.

AMD Radeon R9 285 arrives September 2nd, preliminary information in 2 days
http://videocardz.com/51251/amd-radeon-r9-285-arrives-september-2nd-preliminary-information-2-days

PS4 GPU has an Effective Bandwidth of 120 to 140 GB/s, Not 176 GB/s As Previously Reported
http://wccftech.com/sony-ps4-effective-bandwidth-140-gbs-disproportionate-cpu-gpu-scaling/
i assumed this type of throttling won't happen until amd or arm put 8x arm a57 or carrizo/high clocked jag/puma cores in an apu/soc like that. then again it's wcantcomprehendyetpublishanalysisontech..... sony needs to put in a stronger cooling system in the ps4, if this is true.

RISC announces new Open ISA; hopes to battle ARM/X86.

http://www.extremetech.com/computing/188405-risc-rides-again-new-risc-v-architecture-hopes-to-battle-arm-and-x86-by-being-totally-open-source

the article makes a good point imo:

While the two ISAs are absolutely different, research has repeatedly shown that power consumption, clock speed, performance per watt, and instructions executed per clock cycle (a measure of efficiency) are all dependent on the CPU’s physical architecture — not its actual ISA.

 

[blackkstar]

Nvidia and AMD's current dGPU line up is archaic by GPU standards. We got 7970 release in early January of 2012. It got rebranded 280x and is still available for sale as the primary chip in a market segment. Looking at the release of Tonga to replace Tahiti, we're looking at nearly two years of the same GPU being sold. Nvidia is not in much better shape at all with GK104.

Software is not keeping up with GPU hardware either. The CPU bottleneck of not being able to feed the GPU fast enough by being limited to a single thread or two is holding back game developers from throwing more objects on the screen. Look at the last few architectures and geometry ability has not improved much at all on higher end models.

Once Tonga and Fiji come out and they are geometry monsters, and they have Mantle, OGLNG, and DX12 feeding them tons of geometry, sales (at least for AMD) are going to pick up. At least they should, it looks like it's AMD's plan. GPUs scaling shader power has reached an end and the models are old. All those early adopters who spend big money on new GPUs already have Tahiti/GK110/GK104/Hawaii and they have no reason to upgrade, for two whole years almost.

Consider AMD GPU history before.

2006 was 3000 series for two years, AMD sales were bad and 3000 wasn't so good
2008, 4000 series released, great sales
2009, 5000 series update
2010, 6000 sereis update
2012, 7000 series update
late 2014, new GCN CPUs

Do not act so surprised that sales are decreasing when we are sitting on old products and new ones are around the corner. Specially considering that we're getting new mobile parts while dGPU has been inactive for some time. I expect that once we get high end Maxwell along with Fiji and Tonga that GPU sales will increase massively.

On another topic, my big question is which new PD is going to overclock better, the 95w one or the 125w one. I'd be happy if I could get mid 5ghz range stable, but I have a feeling I'm dreaming.

 

[szatkus]

Nvidia and AMD's current dGPU line up is archaic by GPU standards. We got 7970 release in early January of 2012. It got rebranded 280x and is still available for sale as the primary chip in a market segment. Looking at the release of Tonga to replace Tahiti, we're looking at nearly two years of the same GPU being sold. Nvidia is not in much better shape at all with GK104.

Who said that Tonga is the old arch?

 

[truegenius]

PS4 GPU has an Effective Bandwidth of 120 to 140 GB/s, Not 176 GB/s As Previously Reported
http://wccftech.com/sony-ps4-effective-bandwidth-140-gbs-disproportionate-cpu-gpu-scaling/
i assumed this type of throttling won't happen until amd or arm put 8x arm a57 or carrizo/high clocked jag/puma cores in an apu/soc like that. then again it's wcantcomprehendyetpublishanalysisontech..... sony needs to put in a stronger cooling system in the ps4, if this is true.

any overclocker and bench'er will say that its so pure "dumb"

many months ago, i posted some benches of real world memory transfer speed obtained, which showed that my hd6770 was 80% efficient, and i was complaining that phenom's is very less efficient ( 60% )

theoretical bandwidth does not mean that you will get that much bandwidth in real world, the bandwidth you will get will depend upon efficiency of the components that is accessing memory and and are controlling memory

 

[jdwii]

Spoiler

Spoiler

Guys play nice.

That being said, when did the A6-7600 start showing up in stores? I know AMD announced it but nobody had any and it kinda got forgotten. Now I see amazon offering it for $110 USD which is a stupidly good deal.

AMD A8-7600 at Amazon

A 45/65W single chip solution is ideal for quiet low profile casual gaming devices. There is all sorts of stuff you can build with something like this.

It competes more with the Pentium then a I3. The GPU on it is still only good for 720P low-medium settings in games. But for HTPC and 45 watts well i guess i still see no reason for it when products like the Athlon 5350 exist and its less money and 25 watts and can easily do HD video.

It competes with the i3 because the i3 is what has integrated video. And at $109 USD it crush's any combination of dCPU + dGPU because you can't get a GDDR5 dGPU cheap enough. Graphically its right on par with the 6800/7800 due to 128-bit DDR3 being the limiting factor of all of then. It can play all the media you want along with light gaming, the kinds I do while sitting on the couch in my shorts. If you really want to go crazy, install the A8-7600 in a M350 case with 8GB DDR3-2133 and a HDD and *poof* instant ultra compact light gaming PC.

And btw the "720p" is only for modern games, older games can easily be done at 1080p. I know this because I have a 6800K in a SFF build that runs all sorts of older stuff. I would even go as far as to say that I spend more time playing older games then anything made in the past 4~5 years. It just seems that every new game is made to look pretty but just isn't *fun* to play for very long. This is on a totally different topic and maybe I'm the crazy one here, but the older games really seem more engaging and entertaining to play then the ones made since ~2008.

Pentium has integrated video as well and is good enough for 1080P video as well. " right on par with the 6800/7800 due to 128-bit DDR3" No the A10 alone can barley compete with a 4870 Amd let alone a 6850-7850 you do know the 7770-250x has more GCN cores right? I don't get your point actually just because it runs on slow bandwidth it becomes as powerful as a 6800-7850?
Last paragraph i agree with however

WTF...

You realize the issue here is memory right? The SR iGPU's are currently maxing out the bandwidth on the DDR3 bus. All those cards you listed are GDDR5 cards and at the 90~100$ level. Under that is the "DDR3" variants of those which are the budget products and some are actually worse then the APU's. This was a huge issue I had with people trying to say "just buy a i3 and a X GPU". They use the price of the cheap DDR3 version but the performance of the GDDR5 version. Either way your still looking at a $109 USD price ceiling ($120 on newegg) which simply doesn't have enough room for GDD5 dGPU. Hell those cost 90~100 USD on their own, $80 USD if you get lucky and get one on sale. So your talking $0~30 USD for a CPU that's is better then the A8-7600.

And no you can't build a system with a dGPU that would look good in my living room. Things that look like computers stay in my office / mad scientist lab, I have a policy of keeping the rest of the apartment as geek-free as possible. The current SFF box is a bit too much and I'm looking to replace it soon with something that will be 100% hidden from view. I'm very very picky about looks and sounds in places outside my lab.

I see now you are talking about the APU series and not the GPU series i thought you where saying the A10 7850K is even with a 6800 GPU sorry that is my fault, and yes for the price that APU gives you the best option i just see no use for it myself as its not good enough for gaming except for 720P low-medium and its overkill for HTPC. Also if you are that picky about spaces in your living room why not just get a mini PC with a nice setup that runs on mobile parts, i'm guessing you have no receiver in your leaving room either or have some wimpy one like bose. You could easily without a doubt build a gaming rig that is the same size as a modern receiver such as the pioneer SC-87.

Oh that was so the wrong thing to say.

Yamaha RX-V3800

That is my receiver and it cost about $1800 when I first purchased it back in 08.



I'm currently in the process of redoing my setup and focusing on hiding all the damn wiring. Been looking for a nice glossy black stereo cabinet to clean up the environment.

The box on the right is my current living room PC, it's a nice low profile mini-itx case but it's still a bit too large and clunky to fit in with everyone else. I plan on going with something smaller that runs on a picopsu with an external power brick that I can hide, and at that level you absolutely can not run an dGPU as your looking at sub 100~120w total system power.

Not bad sorry i claimed you owned a bose ,actually looks pretty good i guess the receiver does look like its hanging off the entertainment center a bit. I see the solution get rid of all those consoles except the wii and make a build with this case its your receiver is about the same size and you can fit a ATX psu in it and a SSD and a I5+what ever video card you want.

 

[jdwii]

Spoiler

AMD graphics shipments grow... thanks to APUs like Kaveri

AMD has seen its graphics part shipments increase 11 per cent quarter-on-quarter, while Intel's shipments have grown 4 per cent. The loser for the quarter was Nvidia, with its graphics shipments dropping 8.3 per cent quarter-on-quarter.

The market for discrete graphics cards is down 17.5 per cent in favor of integrated graphics hardware.

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2014/08/19/amd-graphics-shipments/

I'm honestly scared for Nvidia the last thing i want to see is Amd only with intel trolling the GPU department. Nvidia makes great products even their Arm processors are nice but no one gets them.

nVidia needs a good shake down, so they humble themselves a bit.

Humble and Nvidia are not compatible words. Pride is part of their corporate image.

The reason why AMD and Intel went up but Nvidia was down is because Nvidia doesn't still have competitive enough APUs and still relies heavily in a falling discrete graphics card market. Their Tegra division is starting to rise (it grows 110% per quarter or so), and Denver version of K1 will change the things without any doubt.

AMD and Intel are already in the highway towards integrated graphics, whereas Nvidia needs more time to transform itself (read my signature; Nvidia knows what do).

Or maybe the lack of new parts the past few months is dragging them down? Until the 800 series hits, NVIDIA sales aren't really going to raise, or even remain stable, as those of us who upgrade GPUs for the most part already have.

I'm not sure the release of the 800 series will really change that. The only reasons I ever upgrade are:

1: Hardware failure (which is pretty uncommon unless your OC the hell out of a card, I still have a HD2600 going strong in an old system).

2: I have games I want to play that I can't due to poor graphics performance.

3: I have games I want to play that I can't due to lack of driver support.

The key thing is that at the moment, anyone with a reasonably recent mid range or higher graphics card isn't going to run into these problems. Sure it's nice to get a new card and be able to turn on some extra AA or something, but that becomes a nice to have rather than a requirement which is much harder to justify the expense. I'm running a GTX 560 and I really haven’t played a game that taxes it much at 1080p high settings. Admittedly I tend to focus on RTS which is less graphics bound than other games but there really aren't many games that wont work, unlike 10 years ago when an upgraded graphics board made the difference between the game running or not. Heck you can run most modern games on low settings on Intels integrated graphics now.

Things that will probably change this: The new consoles, although not that powerful do have access to *allot* of memory for graphics work, more than most high end cards. So I can see that the older 1gb models (like I've got) are going to be a non starter for cross platform games in the next few years. Also newer API's will make a difference when they're released (i.e. DX12 and OGL-N) as it's unlikely older boards will get updated drivers (or if they have the prerequisite hardware support for the new features). One reason cards have been lasting so long is the length of time we've been sitting on DX11 class hardware (I mean the old HD5870, first released DX11 card is still perfectly viable for 1080p gaming on high settings and that card came out years ago).

Final thing that will spur need for graphics cards is the return of proper high resolution displays for PC's. The proliferation of 'Full HD' tellies has set computer displays back a decade- I had a Pentium 133 running on a 21" CRT at 1600 x 1200 resolution at 85hz back in the 90s. That works out about the same number of pixels as a 1080p display and frankly the 4:3 ratio was a more useful shape for most applications. Then HD tellies become the norm and PC displays got standardised with them. At least now 4k is becoming a thing and displays may in fact move forward again, so well finally be talking resolutions that can actually tax the modern graphics hardware fully /rant

Oh that was so the wrong thing to say.

Yamaha RX-V3800

That is my receiver and it cost about $1800 when I first purchased it back in 08.



I'm currently in the process of redoing my setup and focusing on hiding all the damn wiring. Been looking for a nice glossy black stereo cabinet to clean up the environment.

The box on the right is my current living room PC, it's a nice low profile mini-itx case but it's still a bit too large and clunky to fit in with everyone else. I plan on going with something smaller that runs on a picopsu with an external power brick that I can hide, and at that level you absolutely can not run an dGPU as your looking at sub 100~120w total system power.

You easily can, just not at that price. Laptops with a 45W quad + 860m will draw about 120W under full load including screen. Its just going to cost more.

He probably doesn't use the rig for gaming much i see now reason to treat a PC as second class almost degrading lol. For 120 watts a Pentium and a 750Ti would be about that limit with a SSD. For 45 watts Amd has a solution that works and would be good enough for his use. If it was me i would use that Coolermaster case and go crazy ha ha would fit in their just fine.

 

[jdwii]

PS4 GPU has an Effective Bandwidth of 120 to 140 GB/s, Not 176 GB/s As Previously Reported
http://wccftech.com/sony-ps4-effective-bandwidth-140-gbs-disproportionate-cpu-gpu-scaling/
i assumed this type of throttling won't happen until amd or arm put 8x arm a57 or carrizo/high clocked jag/puma cores in an apu/soc like that. then again it's wcantcomprehendyetpublishanalysisontech..... sony needs to put in a stronger cooling system in the ps4, if this is true.

any overclocker and bench'er will say that its so pure "dumb"

many months ago, i posted some benches of real world memory transfer speed obtained, which showed that my hd6770 was 80% efficient, and i was complaining that phenom's is very less efficient ( 60% )

theoretical bandwidth does not mean that you will get that much bandwidth in real world, the bandwidth you will get will depend upon efficiency of the components that is accessing memory and and are controlling memory

So perhaps a weak memory controller? On my 8350fx with 1866mhz ram i get this although for the theoretical limit should be 32Gb i think. Man running that i can tell Amd needs to redo their L3 cache big time.

 

[juanrga]

AMD graphics shipments grow... thanks to APUs like Kaveri

AMD has seen its graphics part shipments increase 11 per cent quarter-on-quarter, while Intel's shipments have grown 4 per cent. The loser for the quarter was Nvidia, with its graphics shipments dropping 8.3 per cent quarter-on-quarter.

The market for discrete graphics cards is down 17.5 per cent in favor of integrated graphics hardware.

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2014/08/19/amd-graphics-shipments/

I'm honestly scared for Nvidia the last thing i want to see is Amd only with intel trolling the GPU department. Nvidia makes great products even their Arm processors are nice but no one gets them.

nVidia needs a good shake down, so they humble themselves a bit.

Humble and Nvidia are not compatible words. Pride is part of their corporate image.

The reason why AMD and Intel went up but Nvidia was down is because Nvidia doesn't still have competitive enough APUs and still relies heavily in a falling discrete graphics card market. Their Tegra division is starting to rise (it grows 110% per quarter or so), and Denver version of K1 will change the things without any doubt.

AMD and Intel are already in the highway towards integrated graphics, whereas Nvidia needs more time to transform itself (read my signature; Nvidia knows what do).

Or maybe the lack of new parts the past few months is dragging them down? Until the 800 series hits, NVIDIA sales aren't really going to raise, or even remain stable, as those of us who upgrade GPUs for the most part already have.

I'm not sure the release of the 800 series will really change that. The only reasons I ever upgrade are:

1: Hardware failure (which is pretty uncommon unless your OC the hell out of a card, I still have a HD2600 going strong in an old system).

2: I have games I want to play that I can't due to poor graphics performance.

3: I have games I want to play that I can't due to lack of driver support.

The key thing is that at the moment, anyone with a reasonably recent mid range or higher graphics card isn't going to run into these problems. Sure it's nice to get a new card and be able to turn on some extra AA or something, but that becomes a nice to have rather than a requirement which is much harder to justify the expense. I'm running a GTX 560 and I really haven’t played a game that taxes it much at 1080p high settings. Admittedly I tend to focus on RTS which is less graphics bound than other games but there really aren't many games that wont work, unlike 10 years ago when an upgraded graphics board made the difference between the game running or not. Heck you can run most modern games on low settings on Intels integrated graphics now.

Things that will probably change this: The new consoles, although not that powerful do have access to *allot* of memory for graphics work, more than most high end cards. So I can see that the older 1gb models (like I've got) are going to be a non starter for cross platform games in the next few years. Also newer API's will make a difference when they're released (i.e. DX12 and OGL-N) as it's unlikely older boards will get updated drivers (or if they have the prerequisite hardware support for the new features). One reason cards have been lasting so long is the length of time we've been sitting on DX11 class hardware (I mean the old HD5870, first released DX11 card is still perfectly viable for 1080p gaming on high settings and that card came out years ago).

Final thing that will spur need for graphics cards is the return of proper high resolution displays for PC's. The proliferation of 'Full HD' tellies has set computer displays back a decade- I had a Pentium 133 running on a 21" CRT at 1600 x 1200 resolution at 85hz back in the 90s. That works out about the same number of pixels as a 1080p display and frankly the 4:3 ratio was a more useful shape for most applications. Then HD tellies become the norm and PC displays got standardised with them. At least now 4k is becoming a thing and displays may in fact move forward again, so well finally be talking resolutions that can actually tax the modern graphics hardware fully /rant

Never doubt the enthusiasts will to spend $500 for minor performance upgrades. They'll be an uptick once the 800 series hits.

The 90% of zero is zero. Nvidia cannot live of "enthusiasts", because that is a small niche market. This is why the company is pivoting heavily towards mobile/embedded.