This is simple logic. Go to Apple's website right now and try to buy one. See how many clicks it takes you and how much money it costs. Basics of supply and demand and marketing show that m295X in the iMac is not a mainstream product.
I live in Silicon Valley where people are most crazy about...
I thought of this too, but then again - Apple knows how to make money. Especially their retail operation. The fact that they don't even attempt to stock the Tonga iMac in the stores tells me that it is not a popular option.
This can't possibly be true. The m295X in the iMac 5k is an extremely niche BTO product that costs $2500. It isn't even carried in stock at Apple stores (all the models they can sell you at an Apple Store are Pitcairn based). Volumes of m295X in the 5k iMac must be very, very niche.
I just bought one two weeks ago, so I experienced this first hand. Go to Apple's website and try to find an iMac with Tonga XT. You have to jump through lots of BTO hoops and pay $2500 to get it.
Tonga XT in the iMac is a niche of a niche.
Apple can't possibly be using all the Tonga XT parts. The only product with Tonga XT is a $2500 BTO iMac. You can't even buy one in an Apple Store, they only carry Pitcairn models in store.
This is not accurate. HBM is much more efficient than GDDR5, but the memory power budget is much smaller than the shader array. It's possible that the AIO cooler improves overall Perf/Watt more than HBM - the cooler temps reduce leakage over the whole chip, while HBM saves maximum 20-30 W.
Perf/Watt is hugely important, and the efficiency gains AMD appears to have made are more important IMO than HBM for Fury's success.
At this point, we're just waiting for independent confirmation of their claims.
I wonder how many Fury cards AMD can produce per month. The stacked memory may make quantities somewhat limited. Which might explain the 390 cards...
Or maybe not, I really don't know.
AMD would be foolish to base a strategy on one customer's plans a year after product release. I sure hope Apple uses Tonga more - it's a much better GPU than Pitcairn. But I can't imagine this potential design win is the reason for Tonga's existence.
Apple does not care about this Tonga part. They don't even carry it in their stores (the ones they actually sell are all Pitcairn based). Very very low volume - there's no way AMD could recoup the costs of designing Tonga if they are relying on such a niche product. I can't believe the iMac had...
I keep hearing this, but I can't imagine Apple sales make any difference to AMD. The cheapest iMac with Tonga is $2549.00. Volumes must be a round-off error.
I just bought a Retina iMac for my wife - at the store, they didn't even carry the Tonga version. Only Pitcairn.
The other important thing when looking at system power consumption is that it's measuring other things besides the GPU. When frame rates go up, the CPU works much harder as well. Difficult to isolate GPU power increases from system power measurements.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.