Inteluser is discussing performance per TLFOP. All of these are wishy washy based on speculation and rumours, but if that leaked 2304SP 480 is running at 1266Hz and is barely faster than the 2816SP 1050MHz 390X, then AMD has not improved at all there. Complete stagnation.
TFLOPS are definitely not best indication of potential performance - in that case 8.6 TFLOPS Fury X should easily kill Titan X/980 Ti (6.2/5.6 TFLOPS) and compete as almost equal with GTX 1080 (9 TFLOPS).
Btw, what if base clock of RX 480 is circa 1100 MHz and could be OC to 1.4-1.5 GHz?
Here's DF's analysis. Mostly agree with my predictions.
Spec Analysis: Xbox Project Scorpio
www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-xbox-one-project-scorpio-spec-analysis
Well I posted many months ago, this fabled full Polaris 10... is likely taken by Apple in a repeat of the Tonga situation.
Note the 285 came out, cut Tonga. Later refreshed into the 380, still cut Tonga. Then much later, the 380X reared it's head, finally full Tonga, once Apple's volume demands was met.
We know there's 3 Polaris 10 variants, C4, C7 and C10. This came from the same shipping manifest leak and it was spot on accurate for C4 and C7, including the SP counts so far.
If AMD is not releasing C10, it means the chips are going elsewhere. I can't think of another OEM that demands both the best SKU/binning as well as having high volume to take them all, besides Apple.
For those not understanding, the reason Apple wants the full chips is going more shaders at lower clocks achieves the best perf/w.
So indeed, this higher tier Polaris exist and may well be $299, but it will come later.
67E0, 67FF - Polaris 11. 67C0, 67DF - Polaris 10.0x67E01002, 0x67FF1002, 0x67C01002, and 0x67DF1002
TFLOPS are definitely not best indication of potential performance - in that case 8.6 TFLOPS Fury X should easily kill Titan X/980 Ti (6.2/5.6 TFLOPS) and compete as almost equal with GTX 1080 (9 TFLOPS).
Btw, what if base clock of RX 480 is circa 1100 MHz and could be OC to 1.4-1.5 GHz?
VR does not have to be done through headset. It is only for display. VR is also AI, physics, ray tracing, thousands of things and features that combined add up to the experience.
VR is not only gaming. It is EVERY THING. Education, entertainment, films, books, games, cars, houses, absolutely everything.
Even if Nvidia advertises their hardware as being VR capable it is not really capable in what people are currently thinking about VR. If you want to game on your hardware, than yes Nvidia may be good option. But for everything else? When you add Deep Learning, graphics, compute, huge data analysis at the same time?
I have said many times, that DirectX12 and Vulkan have came to life just for gaming purposes in VR. And we perfectly well know which hardware currently benefits the most from DX12.
One thing more. You know what is most important thing for VR? Compute performance of your GPUs. That is the factor that will determine the performance in your VR experience. If you want to judge a GPU don't look anywhere else, but for compute performance.
Yeah, FLOPs is just theoretical performance. If the chip has some design flaws you won't reach that maximum. Fury is typically incapable of keeping all of its shaders busy which is why it underperforms and why it also has much better DX12 performance where it's easier to utilize more of the hardware.
There are cases where Fury does beat the Titan/980Ti by closer to the expected result, but it's not in gaming workloads.
I find rather amazing your capacity for writing seemly confident remarks about stuff you clearly know nothing about.
Deep learning in another field where AMD doesn't even show up on the map but you make it sound like NVIDIA is bad at it. AMD has close to zero SW support and pretty much zero HW support for fast network training or inference.
What you have described is gaming scenario, not General purpose of VR. VR is much bigger, I do not believe anyone of you get actually what I am talking about. Think about that AI can be your direct assistant and be virtualized as person in real time by your headset while you are walking down the street. Augmented reality combined with Virtual Relity. Internet of Things. Possibilities are absolutely endless and borderless.I find rather amazing your capacity for writing seemly confident remarks about stuff you clearly know nothing about. VR is all about compute?! Most of VR renderers are forward renderers (even oculus recently released their custom forward VR renderer for UE4!) that by definition remove a huge opportunity for compute since all the shading has to be done in a pixel shader, unlike with deferred renderers (with the exception of post processing).
Deep learning in another field where AMD doesn't even show up on the map but you make it sound like NVIDIA is bad at it. AMD has close to zero SW support and pretty much zero HW support for fast network training or inference.
Darn. Chinese benches were fake. Still a good part for the price, but nothing mindblowing.
Have been waiting to pair one of these with my Vive. No way in hell I'm ever paying 450 USD for a gpu.
These benches make it especially unfortunate that they didn't release a 490 at e3. Had the Chinese benches been real it wouldn't have mattered at all.
First you say this:
Then, after some stuff, you say this
Irony.
I remember when obvious industry-sponsored shill accounts were banned from AT. Alas...
I made a factual statement that you are free to debate but you have nothing to say about it so all your are left with is attacking my credibility. Please ignore me.
I always suspected I was stupid, but destiny is more cruel than imagination.I do not believe anyone of you get actually what I am talking about.
I always suspected I was stupid, but destiny is more cruel than imagination.
We've been working for decades on this (computation, learning, simulation), yet somehow true revelation only comes on a rather obscure forum thread as an offtopic from a $200 GPU launch. Maybe you're a bit tired or maybe you're just a bit too excited by the subject, but stop assuming the implications of VR are only for the top 1% to understand.
What you have described is gaming scenario, not General purpose of VR. VR is much bigger, I do not believe anyone of you get actually what I am talking about. Think about that AI can be your direct assistant and be virtualized as person in real time by your headset while you are walking down the street. Augmented reality combined with Virtual Relity. Internet of Things. Possibilities are absolutely endless and borderless.
Compute is absolutely important for future workloads. This exact reason why AMD designed their GPUs so heavily compute oriented in the first place. And this is exact reason what differs their hardware capabilities from Nvidia...
We are talking about future that is 2-3 years from now. For now VR will focus only on simple games like the Bird flying over the Paris, from Ubisoft.
But that is absolutely primitive approach to VR. It has really nothing to do with VR of the future. And I can assure you - everybody that is in this industry is working on this future right now. Because this is the market that will give highest money return in history.
Virtualizing the things of the real world in VR in real time - that is the purpose of high compute focus in the hardware and software.
I made a factual statement that you are free to debate but you have nothing to say about it so all your are left with is attacking my credibility. Please ignore me.
Deep Learning on AMD is done through OpenCL or PythonCL. Only Nvidia requires proprietary software to lock you in their ecosystem. Just with everything they do.
I always suspected I was stupid, but destiny is more cruel than imagination.
We've been working for decades on this (computation, learning, simulation), yet somehow true revelation only comes on a rather obscure forum thread as an offtopic from a $200 GPU launch. Maybe you're a bit tired or maybe you're just a bit too excited by the subject, but stop assuming the implications of VR are only for the top 1% to understand.
First OpenCL if a walking dead, MS doesn't care about it, Apple doesn't care about it abs NVIDIA doesn't care about it. Not sure ably Google. Also pretty much no one uses AMD HW for DL. It's pretty much all running on NVIDIA that has been investing early in DL and has a full SDK which is the de facto standard in the industry.
He wasn't saying that. Glo was explaining that VR is far, far more than simply "games." It has applications in the world far beyond games, and most of those applications are far less demanding than high-end gaming.
In the end, we will see that gaming VR really is just a small niche within VR. Just like ultra high end GPUs that represent something like 3% or less of the actual GPU market.
Glo was simply saying that you guys aren't seeing is argument that VR isn't simply about games.