Would be nice if I got a free Starfield code for the 7900 XTX I bought in January.
I like AMD's experimentation. Hopefully they have learned a heap from this 'failure'.You can only wonder what would have happened if they had ported N21 to N5...
Ask your retailer for the coupon code.Would be nice if I got a free Starfield code for the 7900 XTX I bought in January.
Ask your retailer for the coupon code.
If not, he should directly contact AMD. Would let us know how much AMD values their customers.-Yep, usually just a stack of them sitting on the manager's desk.
Why would AMD give out a code? They had a different promotion going on earlier in the year that likely paired with that purchase (depending on the timing, either the Last of Us Part 1, or Dead Island 2 + Callisto Protocol).If not, he should directly contact AMD. Would let us know how much AMD values their customers.
Are you sucking the nitrous oxide out of the whip cream can? Why would a company with shareholders give a $100 game code to previous customers? GTFO.If not, he should directly contact AMD. Would let us know how much AMD values their customers.
Zero confidence in either vendor. I expect they are Ferengi too.tried nerdgearz.com, or aaawave.com ?
Nvidia outselling AMD is a foregone conclusion, not only because mindshare but also because they simply put out way more cards into the channel and in markets AMD is basically absent from.
If the 4070 only outsells the 7800XT by 2-3x though, that would be a massive failure on the part of NV.
It will outsell by a factor of 5-6x to meet standard NV volumes over AMD.
Let him try. If it fails, we get some people here very happy who will expose their Green team allegiance even more while boobooing AMDAre you sucking the nitrous oxide out of the whip cream can? Why would a company with shareholders give a $100 game code to previous customers? GTFO.
This is a direct quote from TSMC.
Compared to N5, N4P will also deliver a 22% improvement in power efficiency as well as a 6% improvement in transistor density. In addition, N4P lowers process complexity and improves wafer cycle time by reducing the number of masks.
Why do you refuse to read the posts you are replying to, and instead keep arguing against things that are not said in them?I will add a wikipedia link showing all the enhanced variants of 5nm TSMC that you insist do not exist. Or that all TSMC 5nm silicon is the same throughout the product cycle.
You do understand that architectural differences can account for the difference in power draw?The Nvidia silicon is at least 22% more power efficient than the N5 that AMD uses. How Nvidia manages that efficiency gain shows in the reviews of power draw.
yet managed to be similar if not better in power efficiency. Now NV has the same process, of course they are more efficient.
I do read the posts before I reply.4N is not N4P. nVidia is not using N4P. They are using "4N", which is their minor tweaks on top of N5. Not in any way meaningfully different from the minor tweaks AMD has also applied to N5.
Why do you refuse to read the posts you are replying to, and instead keep arguing against things that are not said in them?
You do understand that architectural differences can account for the difference in power draw?
This is almost certainly where the difference is coming from. Ampere unquestionably used a much inferior process when compared to RDNA2, yet managed to be similar if not better in power efficiency. Now NV has the same process, of course they are more efficient.
It is not. It is very similar to the original N5.The Nvidia silicon 4N is the most advanced process on the 5nm node.
There are not, because the 4N predates the N4P.There are probably more power efficiency gains in 4N over N4P.
I will add a wikipedia link showing all the enhanced variants of 5nm TSMC that you insist do not exist. Or that all TSMC 5nm silicon is the same throughout the product cycle.
You lie Tuna fish. you said all 5nm variants were the same. Even worse, you wrongly assumed customized processes were named for the companies who used them. They were created by TSMC and customers could choose which process they wanted to purchase on the 5nm silicon node. As the 5nm matured, they release newer more efficient processes on the node.It is not. It is very similar to the original N5.
There are not, because the 4N predates the N4P.
I am very aware that there are many variants of the TSMC N5. My point from the beginning has been that 4N is a very mild, almost indistinguishable variant. It is absolutely not the most advanced 5nm process, and I do not understand why you keep claiming it is.
You lie Tuna fish. you said all 5nm variants were the same. Even worse, you wrongly assumed customized processes were named for the companies who used them. They were created by TSMC and customers could choose which process they wanted to purchase on the 5nm silicon node. As the 5nm matured, they release newer more efficient processes on the node.
Nvidia GPU's are ultra efficient because of the 5nm process they are on. If AMD had RDNA3 on 4N, you would see power consumption numbers dramatically drop and probably increased performance as well. It's the cost for 4N that keeps AMD on the standard N5.
Your only basis for that claim is a wiki article specifying "4N" characteristics as "Unspecified" and only citation a Nvidia marketing announcement.If AMD had RDNA3 on 4N, you would see power consumption numbers dramatically drop and probably increased performance as well
Ok, Heartbreaker. Riddle me this. Why were the TSMC 7nm processes all named N7, N7P ,N7+ and N6? Were those all featuring an "N" when Nvidia was not a customer? Or the 5N process on the 5nm silicon? Is that for Nvidia? What about N4, is that named for Nvidia as well?AMD couldn't be on 4N, because that N literally stands for NVidia.
It's just like Turing on 12FFN.
Pascal was on TSMC 16FF.
For Turing NVidia named it 12FFN, with the N for NVidia. It's really just a slightly tweaked TSMC 16FF. The same kind of tweak any big company would have had working with TSMC, but only NVidia seems arrogant enough to name their tweaks and pretend it's an all new node.
If you check the transistor density. Both 16FF and 12FFN are about 25MT/mm2, and no one else got 12FFN - N being for NVidia.
Ok, Heartbreaker. Riddle me this. Why were the TSMC 7nm processes all named N7, N7P ,N7+ and N6? Were those all featuring an "N" when Nvidia was not a customer? Or the 5N process on the 5nm silicon? Is that for Nvidia? What about N4, is that named for Nvidia as well?
"4N" is not N4... maybe some source of the weird argument here.Ok, Heartbreaker. Riddle me this. Why were the TSMC 7nm processes all named N7, N7P ,N7+ and N6? Were those all featuring an "N" when Nvidia was not a customer? Or the 5N process on the 5nm silicon? Is that for Nvidia? What about N4, is that named for Nvidia as well?