News Chinese MTT S80 PCIe 5.0 GPU Closes in on GTX 1650

[Admin]

Expreview reviews the MTT S80 with the latest driver and compares it to the four-year-old GeForce GTX 1650.

Chinese MTT S80 PCIe 5.0 GPU Closes in on GTX 1650 : Read more

 

[TCA_ChinChin]

When you start from basically nothing, anything is a decent improve. That's the feeling I get from these drivers. They're still sorely lacking compared to any modern AMD or NVIDIA arch in terms of raw silicon and hardware to software performance.

They are using a more advanced TSMC node, with far more cores (even if they're not one to one), significantly higher memory performance in all metrics, higher theoretical FLOPS, while using more than 3 times the power. How can it not surpass the 1650? Are driver's really the main culprit or is some part of the hardware design really inefficient? I'm kind of confused here. They're based roughly off of the PowerVR architecture so they're not even starting from scratch. Is it because it's built from a PowerVR arch?

Indigenous Chinese CPUs/memory seem to be doing a lot better than what they're GPUs are capable of. Huawei's and YTMC's latest chips are certainly more competitive with their global counterparts than this GPU. Whats different in this case?

 

[cheesecake1116]

So, Moore's Thread does use IMG IP.
Their drivers reports as the IMG proprietary driver in Linux.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1593583734850215936

View: https://twitter.com/never_released/status/1593583734850215936


VkPhysicalDeviceDriverProperties:
---------------------------------
driverID = DRIVER_ID_IMAGINATION_PROPRIETARY
driverName = PowerVR GEN1 Vulkan Driver
driverInfo = 1.0@0
conformanceVersion = 1.3.1.0


So that is where that is from because if it was their own IP then there would be no reason to use IMG Drivers.
I suspect that it uses IMG B Series IP, specifically the BXT-32-1024 MC4 configuration.
And before you ask, yes I do own one of these cards and it has been nothing but a pain to get working so that we can look at the microarchitecture and compare it to Intel, AMD, and Nvidia.

 

[bit_user]

They are using a more advanced TSMC node, with far more cores (even if they're not one to one), significantly higher memory performance in all metrics, higher theoretical FLOPS, while using more than 3 times the power. How can it not surpass the 1650? Are driver's really the main culprit or is some part of the hardware design really inefficient? I'm kind of confused here.

I suspect the limiting factor might be less the drivers than the hardware, at this point. You really shouldn't take the hardware's raw specs at face value, because there can be chip bugs which tank performance to successfully circumvent.

Indigenous Chinese CPUs/memory seem to be doing a lot better than what they're GPUs are capable of. Huawei's and YTMC's latest chips are certainly more competitive with their global counterparts than this GPU. Whats different in this case?

It's their first real generation of gaming GPUs, right? If you look at those other examples, none of them are 1st gen. I'll bet the next Moore Threads GPUs will be improved by leaps and bounds from this learning experience. Their biggest failing was probably overconfidence. Experienced engineers will know that it takes time to learn important lessons and iteratively refine designs & architectures.

 

[ManDaddio]

Yes, but does it support mesh shaders? Can it run Alan Wake 2? That's the real question. 🤠😎🤓🧐🤔😊

 

[bit_user]

Yes, but does it support mesh shaders?

Maybe the hardware can. If anyone really cared, you'd wan to look into whether/when Imagination's PowerVR GPUs added such support. Then, try to figure out how that generation of IP aligns with what's used in these GPUs.

 

[notmrdude1]

It is a Linux workstation card. So all the about gaming performance are totally meaningless.

 

[TJ Hooker]

It is a Linux workstation card. So all the about gaming performance are totally meaningless.

They explicitly advertise it as a gaming card with Windows support. Some snippets from the product page (via Google translate):

"enjoy a smooth e-sports experience"
"The MTT S80 gaming graphics card [...]. MTT S80 not only provides gamers with powerful 3D rendering capabilities [...]"
"Play games smoothly in Windows DirectX games, bringing a smooth operating experience at 4K resolution"
etc.

https://www.mthreads.com/product/S80

 

[notmrdude1]

They explicitly advertise it as a gaming card with Windows support. Some snippets from the product page (via Google translate):

"enjoy a smooth e-sports experience"
"The MTT S80 gaming graphics card [...]. MTT S80 not only provides gamers with powerful 3D rendering capabilities [...]"
"Play games smoothly in Windows DirectX games, bringing a smooth operating experience at 4K resolution"
etc.

https://www.mthreads.com/product/S80

The current price is $650 (not $164). It is competing with workstation cards such as the $1400 Nvidia A4000. which has very similar specifications. It is not competing with low or mid range gaming cards.

If you understand the hardware you will see is specifically optimised for Linux, video processing and ML rather than Windows gaming.

- compatible with Hygon or Kunmeng ARM server motherboards (Linux only)
- Custom Linux distro
- 3x Display Port outputs
- 128 tensor cores
- 256 bit data bus
- CUDA compatibility.
- PCIE 5
- 8K video
- 16GB of VRAM
- High FP32 and INT8 performance

The fact they claim it is a gaming GPU is totally irrelevant.

 

[bit_user]

The current price is $650 (not $164). It is competing with workstation cards such as the $1400 Nvidia A4000. which has very similar specifications. It is not competing with low or mid range gaming cards.

If you understand the hardware you will see is specifically optimised for Linux, video processing and ML rather than Windows gaming.

Then show us some benchmarks of it performing those sorts of tasks.