• Now's your chance win big! Join our community and get entered to win a RTX 2060 GPU, plus more! Join here.

    Meet Stan Dmitriev of SurrogateTV on the Pi Cast TODAY! The show is live August 11th at 2:30 pm ET (7:30 PM BST). Watch live right here!

    Professional PC modder Mike Petereyns joins Scharon on the Tom's Hardware Show live on Thursday, August 13th at 3:00 pm ET (8:00 PM BST). Click here!

Pictured: AMD's new Radeon R9 285

Status
Not open for further replies.

Treynolds416

Honorable
Jul 5, 2013
30
0
10,530
0
Glad they're not going to name it the same as the current 280. As for tonga, I wonder what its purpose is? Is it a more power efficient gpu to try to compete with maxwell, or is it closer to a more scalable hawaii architecture.
 

RedJaron

Splendid
Moderator

Depends on the memory interface and use. The 280 had 3GB VRAM because it had a 384-bit memory bus. That put 1GB on each 128-bit controller. By similar rights, the 512-bit 290 had 4GB. If this is a 256-bit card, then it makes sense to be a 2GB card.
 

childofthekorn

Honorable
Jan 31, 2013
359
0
10,780
0
Glad they're not going to name it the same as the current 280. As for tonga, I wonder what its purpose is? Is it a more power efficient gpu to try to compete with maxwell, or is it closer to a more scalable hawaii architecture.
From the rumor mill its apparently focused on being more energy efficient than performance.
 

childofthekorn

Honorable
Jan 31, 2013
359
0
10,780
0
Not interested because it seems like there still not trying for 4k gaming at affordable prices for most.
Affordable pricing including displays and cabling. 4k gaming still has awhile before its the standard/mainstream and will be much more resource intensive.
 

BleedingEdgeTek

Reputable
May 29, 2014
709
0
5,360
144


That makes sense, but my problem is why is not the 275 then? The 265 is faster than the 260x, so why would the 285 be slower than the 280x? Just makes no sense how they would name it lol
 

RedJaron

Splendid
Moderator

We don't know if it will be faster or slower than the 280 yet. Remember most of the Rx 200 cards right now are just rebranded 7000 cards with some slight clock tweaks. Aside from Hawai'i on the 290 cards, we haven't seen new Radeon architecture for two years now. It's quite possible the Tonga can operate faster on a 256-bit bus than the 7970 does on its 384-bit bus. Or it might simply be a matter of getting nearly the same performance but on significantly less power ( this only shows two 6-pin cables, not the usual 6/8 pairing on 280 cards. )

Now if the 285 performs notably worse than the 280, then I agree the name will be very confusing.
 
That makes sense, but my problem is why is not the 275 then? The 265 is faster than the 260x, so why would the 285 be slower than the 280x? Just makes no sense how they would name it lol
Because you have no way of presuming that it's a slower card in any way, shape, or form.

It could very well be quite a bit faster - the amount of VRAM has little to no effect unless it becomes a bottleneck. (And in fact, cards with larger quantities of VRAM are slower when compared to the exact same card with less VRAM, again as long as it's not so low as to be a bottleneck.)
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator

Considering how 4k is giving even a crossfire/SLI pair of high-end current GPUs a hard time, I would not expect mainstream-priced single-GPU solutions for 4k until 16nm GPUs come around, which puts them at about two years out from now, maybe three.
 

alextheblue

Distinguished
Apr 3, 2001
3,074
102
20,970
2
These are RUMORED specs. We don't know where it will fall in terms of performance or final memory bandwidth, or even what flavor of GCN it's built around. So let's not freak about the name or what it's "purpose" is yet :D
Aside from Hawai'i on the 290 cards, we haven't seen new Radeon architecture for two years now.
GCN 1.1 was first introduced 1.5 years ago with the 7790 (the R7 260 series inherits this design as well). Is that what you mean? That may be true, but that doesn't mean they can't release a new product based on GCN 1.1 with other adjustments such as tweaking the layout. As such there's room for power/efficiency and clock improvements even with the same exact architecture.

As an example: Compare Kabini/Temash to Beema/Mullins. Same architecture CPU cores, same GCN 1.1, same process. Yet they've power optimized the chips (reduced leakage) which not only reduced power consumption but gave them the room to boost clocks at the same time. Both CPU and GPU clocks are higher at the same TDP, sometimes drastically over the "previous gen" equivalent.

So until we see a review there's no telling what improvements 285 will bring, and whether or not it will be the harbinger of what's to come. :)
 

tomfreak

Distinguished
May 18, 2011
1,334
0
19,280
0
really.... how would they actually sell a 256bit +2GB vs their own 3Gb 384bit?

if this card is 4GB by default, it would be easier. but "2GB in common casual/layman's" eyes seems 'weak'.
 

RedJaron

Splendid
Moderator

That's what I was saying ( well, part of it. )

My whole point was that we haven't seen anything new or substantially different ( apart from Hawai'i, ) in some time now. I wasn't saying that to mean Radeons are worthless, I was meaning that AMD could very well have something brand new and awesome cooked up in the lab. From the 280X down, we're looking at older tech. Slight clock changes, but no serious revisions. Who knows what performance improvements can be made with modified first-gen GCN or with a whole new GCN 2.0?

It was directed to anyone who was basing their entire expectation of this card's performance solely on ( rumored ) VRAM amount and memory bus width.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator

If AMD was going GCN 2.0, they would/should have branded it R9-380... if they change general architecture while sticking to old model number ranges, that would be a horrible waste of an opportunity to make model numbers mean something for a change instead of being the messy mix of old and new they are now.
 

lp231

Splendid


My old 2900XT was 512bit with 1GB. The retail ones was 512bit with 512MB ram at GDDR3, the 1GB was OEM and came with GDDR4.
 

alextheblue

Distinguished
Apr 3, 2001
3,074
102
20,970
2
My whole point was that we haven't seen anything new or substantially different ( apart from Hawai'i, ) in some time now. I wasn't saying that to mean Radeons are worthless, I was meaning that AMD could very well have something brand new and awesome cooked up in the lab. From the 280X down, we're looking at older tech. Slight clock changes, but no serious revisions. Who knows what performance improvements can be made with modified first-gen GCN or with a whole new GCN 2.0?

It was directed to anyone who was basing their entire expectation of this card's performance solely on ( rumored ) VRAM amount and memory bus width.
Ah. Personally I doubt it's going to be GCN 2.0. It will probably be GCN 1.x, but with an optimized layout to reduce leakage. Anyway, the 7790 and 260/260X are also GCN 1.1 so it's not just Hawaii that's newer. That's why the 260 cards also have TrueAudio. Technically the 7790 has it too, it was disabled IIRC.

I'm looking forward to seeing what GCN 2.0 is capable of, though I don't expect to see it before the 3xx series.

R9 285... version of AMD "GTX 750 Ti"?
Might be kind of like that, but much higher up the ladder.
 

RedJaron

Splendid
Moderator
Good point there too. I hadn't thought of the going from 200 to 300, but I probably should have considering how long it's been since a card came out.


Right, but the VRAM is still evenly divided out over 32-, 64-, or 128-bit controllers ( the GTX was an anomaly with its 192-bit controller + 2GB RAM. ) Those are aggregated together into the total ( 256, 384, 512, whatever. ) Older cards had less VRAM, so smaller chunks would have been divided out. No different in 2007 than in 2014. If these rumors are true and it's a 256/2GB stock card, there's no reason vendors can't offer a 4GB version.


Right about the 7790/260 ( slipped my mind. ) That one just never felt "new" to me when it came out, at least it never wowed me in any sense ( either in sheer performance, low wattage, or mid-range performance/price punch. ) And yes, I recall the 7790's audio was present but disabled too ) though I believe later drivers have since enabled it. Not sure. )
 

IQ11110002

Distinguished
Jul 28, 2009
152
0
18,690
3

Considering how 4k is giving even a crossfire/SLI pair of high-end current GPUs a hard time, I would not expect mainstream-priced single-GPU solutions for 4k until 16nm GPUs come around, which puts them at about two years out from now, maybe three.
Maybe earlier than you think! Rumour is they are skipping 20nm and are going straight to 16nm finFET so most likely next year.
 
Jul 24, 2014
5
0
4,510
0
I have been hoping AMD would do promotions to sell the R9 290 at $250-$300 from time to time to reclaim lost market share when ATI dominated the GPU market many years ago. I had the original Geforce 256 and I had the 9700pro and 9800pro. I currently have the 7950. Sony is the tip of the spear for Japan in the video game marketplace and TSMC would benefit from selling more cards, memory and GPU's. If AMD did an R9 290X promotion where it was $300 a card if you buy two for crossfire, they would reclaim lost market share.

People do not realize those who build their computers are price conscious and want the most bang for the buck. They often upgrade components and need incentive to purchase new CPU's or GPU's. Intel has been far too predictable and boring. Both XBOX ONE and Sony PS4 use AMD guts throughout.

Newegg and other online retailers could have sales once every 3 months. Screw this low end graphics card stuff. Fuji Film used to dump film at below cost simply to own the market. Look at where Kodak is today? Gone. Volkswagen wants to be the biggest car brand in the world. Sometimes companies have to pay by lowering their prices to gain market share which is far less expensive than advertising.

I am tired of people being Nvida fans acting as if AMD doesn't make good graphics cards. This isn't an Intel vs. AMD CPU battle.

I have tried to revive the gaming PC industry for 6 months. You have to give people reason to build new computers or upgrade their graphics cards. I always pull for the underdog and AMD should strike when the iron is hot.

I am honest, the new consoles are very good and only $400. What is the excuse for these $400-$700 GPU's when an i5 K series is $220 and the I7 K series is $340?

It's like I have to tell those in Taiwan how to run the computer industry. They make money at TSMC regardless of price. They make more money when more cards are sold. I have tired of Intel getting away with selling CPU's at huge discounts to companies like Dell when kids can build their own computers today.

I am from generation X where kids built their own RC cars with kits. They built their own rockets with kits.

Remember when the 9800pro was $200-$250? That was the top of the line card from ATI.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS