link
and the complete lack of any hardware scheduler design i might add
i asked for a link for your claims not another hit and run answerNvidia GDC 2016 live stream. I'm sure you can find a video.
i asked for a link for your claims not another hit and run answer
Throw in the fact Pascal still can not do Async compute and other console synergies and I believe you will be shown to be correct once both chips are out.I think what people are missing here is what perf/mm2 might nv be getting from uarch changes. They already had their perf/mm2 jump with maxwell and most people are arguing what big architectural changes will be introduced with pascal, if any. They also misjudge that amd's best perf/mm2 isnt fiji but rather hawaii and that is including a juicy big 512b gddr5 PHY.
Honestly I wouldnt dismiss an scenario where amd's 232mm2 die is 5% within of nvidia's 310mm die, factoring in 14LPP slight density advantage over 16FF+, that AMD this round is doing the maxwell and nvidia is doing the GCN type of changes, which have totally diferent impacts on perf/mm2.
It is out of question. A reference GTX980 uses 165W. A 390X - similar performance - is around >300W.
you miss the point but ok not the first time ()You can't type "nvidia GTC stream" into google and find it yourself?
im sorry did amd at any point said they need async drivers and i didnt saw it?Sure. That must be the reason why AMD needs additional software support for their hardware scheduler.
They appear to have the same amount of cores (2560) and a similar core design. Why Polaris 10 is so much smaller is still a mystery at this point. I suppose it could have a smaller memory controller which would limit performance if they cranked up the clock speeds without GDDR5X.
im sorry did amd at any point said they need async drivers and i didnt saw it?
oh wait it was nvidia! :sneaky:
I think what people are missing here is what perf/mm2 might nv be getting from uarch changes. They already had their perf/mm2 jump with maxwell and most people are arguing what big architectural changes will be introduced with pascal, if any. They also misjudge that amd's best perf/mm2 isnt fiji but rather hawaii and that is including a juicy big 512b gddr5 PHY.
Honestly I wouldnt dismiss an scenario where amd's 232mm2 die is 5% within of nvidia's 310mm die, factoring in 14LPP slight density advantage over 16FF+, that AMD this round is doing the maxwell and nvidia is doing the GCN type of changes, which have totally diferent impacts on perf/mm2.
Sent from my XT1040 using Tapatalk
There are some situation where Polaris is incredibly fast. Faster than anything in the market. The secret is probably that special culling mechanism in the hardware, which helps the GPU to effectively cull those false positive primitives that aren't visible in the screen. Today's hardwares can't do this.
Single wavefront perfomance is also incredibly good. 10-100 times faster than anything in the market. This is good for VR.
This is what I wrote.I highly suggest that you re-read the post I quoted, which implied that one must be an idiot for wanting to spend USD 500 or more on ANY PC component. That is the post that ridicules others. My post, stating that people are free to spend what they want, does not ridicule anyone - it's a defense of people who want to pay for the best of the best.
You and other posters that came far after this post of yours who refer to e-peen, etc., are the ones attempting to shame those willing to pay more in order to prevent them from 'manipulating the market' which apparently makes the products you want to buy more expensive for you.
So the belittling here is only happening in one direction - especially when implying things are for the sake of epeen or that one must be an idiot for wanting to buy something. You don't like the price of something? Don't buy it.
And don't presume to ridicule others for their purchasing choices except in specific performance cases like:
X is twice as fast, more quiet, uses less power, than Y. But Y costs twice as much as X. Buying Y is silly because there's no discernible benefit in doing so, even if it is to support the team. But that's not what we are talking about here.
If you believe AMD can bring Hawaii performance with 125W then there doesnt exist any reason to believe that nVidia would be unable to do the same with GTX980TI performance.
First look at the fully enabled GP104-400 that should power GDDR5X-based Geforce GTX 1080 / X80.
Now we only need someone to plug that in and post some numbers.
I wonder if GP104 will be a Maxwell like version of GP100, stripped out of FP64 hardware, or if it will be just a scaled down GP100.
GDDR5X 256-bit interface 12 Gb/s 384 GB/s
So that's the Micron GDDR5x chips? How do we know they won't make it past the 1080 into lower skus :\
you are right because you see they builted their cards to suit dx11 when in reality dx12 was built to suit gcn not the other way around 780/ti is the living proof of that in aots it smokes 980 till 1440p..We dont know what GP104 will be. With more than 300mm^2 it will be much faster than a GTX980Ti.
If you believe AMD can bring Hawaii performance with 125W then there doesnt exist any reason to believe that nVidia would be unable to do the same with GTX980TI performance.
At least nVidia doesnt need a whole new API to use their software scheduler.
So that's the Micron GDDR5x chips? How do we know they won't make it past the 1080 into lower skus :\
If it's really 320 mm2 then the $499 1070 rumors are probably true.
It looks like Pascal's efficiency has gotten "worse" though... enough that AMD has caught up with Polaris. The 1070 and 1080 should be faster because of the higher clock speeds but at higher TDP.