AMD Radeon R9 300 Series MegaThread: FAQ and Resources

Page 57 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar


I can't take an article (or a site for that matter) that says this: "AMD hasn't launched a new performance-segment GPU since 2012". The Fury X sitting next to the 980ti must be a fluke in our time space continuum then. Or maybe Fiji is the same Tahiti GPU, but somehow AMD made it faster without changing anything!

In any case, that reeks of cheap sensationalism.

Cheers!
 


I think they are talking about segments not top end. The Fury X is considered an enthusiast part not a performance part. And in reality they have not launched an entirely new lineup in a while. Hell the 380X is based on the HD7970s Tahiti XT core with a change to the memory controller and some updates to the core in terms of power savings and such.

There is still a lot of information that points to AMD having nothing to compete with nVidia in anything but the low and mid range.

As I said, there are a lot of people who are planning on buying a 1070 or 1080 now instead of waiting to see what Polaris has to offer.
 


I would classify the term "performance-segment" as a synonym of "top end": 970/380X/390 is mid, 980/390X is upper end, 980ti/FuryX top end. Would you classify it differently? Because AMD released 4 versions of Fiji: Nano, Fury, Fury X and Duo, keeping Hawaii as the 390X.



But I keep saying, that is where the money is. And I really don't think people will flock over the 1080. At least, not reasonable buyers; no. Raging fanbois maybe, along with people that loves the top of the top no matter the price (and this will depend on benchmarks). Also, the 1070, which is the card I do believe everyone is *really* waiting to get, will launch in June. AMD still has some time to put Polaris out there.

In any case, I will love to see sales numbers for the 1080. Specially the "FE" edition. I won't say what I *really* think the acronym means, but I'll just say it would get modded, haha.

Cheers!
 


most likely not talking about the flagship. but more on the mainstream part (which some classified as "performance" segment). 290X is the flagship. what they got below that? 280X (rebrand 7970). when they come out with Fury X what gpu they got below that? 390X (290X rebrand).
 


Again what you see it as is not what it is. The top end is considered the enthusiast class while below that is the performance class then middle then low end.

And again AMD has not had a full refresh of their GPUs in a while, since 2012, which is what the article was stating. And they are not wrong. Short of the Fury lineup everything else is a rebrand of older cores that have already been out.

I currently do not include the Radeon Pro Duo as it is priced way too high to compete with nVidia or even just dual Fury Xs in CFX. Just so you don't think I am being biased, I also do not consider the Titan X or Titan Z because both are priced way too high.



That just seems impossible. That is lower than even Samsungs own mobile CPU and the 14nm that AMD is using from GloFlo is based on Samsungs 14nm process.

It is probably just a rumor started by a hardcore fanboy due to the launch of Pascal.
 


now we are hearing conflicting rumor. the other rumor point that Polaris will not going toe to toe with nvidia GTX1080/1070 so AMD end up speeding up the launch of their Vega to october this year instead of next year.

http://videocardz.com/59808/amd-vega-gpu-allegedly-pushed-forward-to-october

the report is a bit conflicting. but what remain the same was the notion about polaris will not going to compete head to head with nvidia GP104 (both GTX1080 and 1070). there is a lot of speculation. for example the recent statement from Roy Taylor. he said that Pascal is most likely high end offering and their aim with polaris was to tackle mainstream and expand VR affordability to more PC. people have two speculation about this one. the first one is quite "wishful" to me. to some they expect Polaris will compete head to head with nvidia GP104. since GP104 are expected to be faster than 980Ti so they expect polaris to be at least as fast 980Ti. Roy mention they were were going to tackle the mainstream segment with Polaris. so i believe this is what lead to the talk about Polaris being as fast as 980Ti while only costing $300. the second one is much more simple. Roy mention that pascal is high end. and amd will target mainstream segment. so it might a hint that polaris will not going to compete on the same performance level as Pascal.

in any case i heard AMD will going to host PC on 27th (the day 1080 hard launch?). so there might be more info in that event.
 


Depending on where the 1070/1080 sit if Polaris is able to give 980Ti performance I doubt it will be $300 dollars. If AMD has a card that good in performance they will price it much higher. That is the norm.

Still depends on where everything lands performance wise.
 
@jimmysmitty - Re: Chain with @Yuka, @17seconds, and @Mousemonkey

The Tech Power Up article that Mousemonkey posted was not accurate. It's not an issue of technicality or bias about NV vs AMD. The following statement from that article is simply false:

"AMD hasn't launched a new performance-segment GPU since 2012."

AMD's Fury lineup, however, definitely counts as a new performance GPU. The cards have been right on par with Nvidia up until the the recent announcement, and technically they still are because the 1070 and 1080 haven't become available yet.

Fury cards count. I realize you've mentioned discounting them because you discount the Titan X and Z. But those Titan card have the same chip as the corresponding Nvidia flagship cards. Fury cards don't. That is, no one would have counted Titan X or Z as new tech that is substantially different from the 980 ti or the 780 ti, respectively. The Fury cards, as you know, are entirely different from the 290- and 390-series of cards. Everything from the GPU chip to the on-chip memory is brand new. So it's disingenuous to claim that the Fury cards don't count.

Also, the article's following line makes no sense given the timing:

"[AMD's] partners have reportedly expressed frustration at the company's lack of competition for NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 and GTX 1070 graphics cards . . . ."

How could AMD possibly have anything to compete with Nvidia cards announced so recently that Nvidia hasn't even released the cards? This is also before AMD's anticipated press release. Take this kind of criticism to its logical end and apply it to the Wright Brothers and Ford Motor Company:

"Ford's Model A distributors have reportedly expressed frustration at the company's lack of competition for the Wright Brother's recently developed flying machine."

Of course there's no competition for a first-to-market product. By definition that must be true: It's the FIRST to market.

[Not attributing that last bit about the second quote to anyone here, just ranting about Tech Power Up]
 
Well Jimmy, we'll have to disagree on TPU's take on things then.

In any case, there is a clarification to be made. It's confusing me as well with the information flying around:

There are 2 Polaris GPUs: 10 and 11. AMD demo'ed the smaller die, mainstream GPU recently and that one is coming out first (as I understand it). When discussing about "having something to compete against the 1080" I am referring to the Polaris that is meant to refresh/replace Fiji. I don't really know the numbering and code-names for them yet, but let's make it clear that there are 2 of them. Same with Vega in the current plans, again, as I understand it.

Anyone would like to challenge that understanding of mine? 😛

Also, this is kind of "old" news, but will work as a reminder of all the rumors flying around (on the positive side): http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/amd-polaris-10-gpu-to-offer-near-980-ti-performance-for-299-usd.html

Cheers!
 
There's really no controversy. The segment names are not opinions, but formal classification schemes. FuryX, etc. is in the Enthusiast segment, while the 390x - 380 are in the Performance (or High-End) segment, and so on.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Radeon_Rx_300_series

Polaris at best has always been a Performance segment product, or even mid-range, while Vega is the Enthusiast segment product intended to replace the FuryX and compete against Nvidia's top offering.

Polaris is not intended to be a competitor to the GTX 1080, hence the rumors of AIB unrest and the possible advancement of the Vega release date.
 


I didn't say the Fury, I don't count the Radeon Pro Duo because it is $1500 dollars and no one in their right mind would spend $1500 bucks on a GPU instead of $1K for two 980Tis or Fury Xs/Nanos.

And again, the Fury line is Enthusiast class not performance, that is 380-390 range now.



The current information has two Polaris GPUs, neither are set to be the Fury replacement but just replacements in the 300 series lineup.

Vega 11 is supposed to be, per current information, the new Fury replacement.

In short, we wont get a new Fury GPU until 2017 much like I doubt we will get a 1080Ti until 2017 when HBM2 should be more widely and easily available.

And I am not talking about what TPU is calling it. That is just industry standard classification.
 
One last bit for the TPU discussion: Hawaii was announced in Sept 2013 and released by the end of 2013. Whatever you wanna call the segments, that statement is wrong and it's very "populist". I will stand by my impressions of it.

And I haven't seen any new, somewhat reliable, information around Polaris. The things being said are all over the place, so the only thing we *know* for sure, is that the first incarnation of it will be the small die Polaris. I will also concede that "big" Polaris is not a replacement for Fiji (sad), but a replacement for the Hawaii GPUs. At least, there is information around that statement being true. Everything else, I will bet is just wild speculation.

Cheers!
 


Hawaii was enthusiast and then became delegated to performance class when Fury came out. Compare it to nVidia which had a top to mid range refresh with Maxwell V2 (950 to 980Ti) and anything under remaining on Maxwell V1.

Is what it is. I still worry that AMD is not going to compete in a timely manner but that is just what I am seeing. They may very well come out pretty fast.
 


That is a very interesting point you make there. AMD did not have to get anything to replace Tahiti and then Hawaii in their segments, because their performance levels were the appropriate for the next GCN versions. The only exception being Tonga sitting just a tad below Tahiti, but getting better perf/watt.

On the other hand, nVidia is pushing 2 line ups: consumer oriented and compute. AMD is just watering down GCN parts, since they work well enough for both. Rephrasing, AMD does not need to refresh the lower tiers, because GCN is not changing the underlying tech and what they currently have can cope well enough to stay in the market (debatable, but you get the point).

I would imagine, now that AMD decided to give their GPU division total control on what they do now, they will try something similar (if not the same) as nVidia: consumer and compute-grade. It makes the most sense to do that segmentation. Intel is also doing it, if you think about it.

Cheers!

EDIT: Typos.
 


Ha, nice!

 


Man the comments in that are just bad. While it sometimes gets stupid here I am so glad we never see it as bad as those other sites like that or WCCFTech.



I am not sure AMD is the best source for AiB partners feelings. I doubt AMD is going to verify any rumor or information that would put them in a bad light.

Just think of a company as the President. "everything is great" as the building crumbles behind them.

Not saying the rumors are true just that you can't quite trust the rumors or the companies.
 


AMD would definitely confirm if it were true eventually, since they'll either announce at Computex or not. But at this stage, the company would most likely just not address the rumor if it were true. But by saying something affirmative to debunk the rumor, they'd be in a heap of trouble if it were a flat out lie. Things are much stricter for public companies than many people realize when it comes to this kind of thing. I'm not saying it's impossible for AMD to publicly make false statements, just that it's highly reckless and could lead to law suits and government enforcement actions. I don't see them risking that over a silly rumor.
 


Some people is saying those are the specs for the Mobile parts... Uhm... If that is the case, then those are very beefed up mobile parts. And they are long over due as well. Even more than mid-range in Desktop 😛

Cheers!
 
I'm wondering if they actually did plan to delay the Polaris release. But after the storm of comments, decided to release lesser parts with disabled ROP's on the original schedule. That would tie together and explain the conflicting rumors along with AMDs denial of any delays.

I doubt the theory myself, but it may be possible that the reduced specs in the recent article are actually the same chips that couldn't validate 850 MHz at full spec. By disabling compute units, maybe that allows them to validate at 850 MHz and maintain the release schedule.

Again I don't believe it, mostly due to the short timeframe and my natural optimism, but it's an interesting thought.
 


AMD plans to bring compute grade APU. In such a case, is compute grade gpu worth the effort/investment?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom