R9 300 cards listed in new driver - R9 370 is a rebrand

[tolis626]

Interesting perspective. GTX980 only beats R9 290 by 20-25% or so and R9 290 has been on sale for $399 10 months before 980 came out for $550. 980 sold like hot cakes with these metrics but you suggest that a 20% faster R9 390 at say $500-550 against a 980 is a failure? What if AMD brings out a card with 980's performance for $399, that's a failure too?

I am personally far far more excited now for 14nm given the pricing of 980/Titan X and the delays of R9 390 cards, but people seem to overinflated how great 970/980 were when they dropped. After-market R9 290 like the Sapphire Tri-X were selling for $350-370 before 970/980 came out. Just because most reviewers/gamers didn't pay attention to those prices, doesn't mean it wasn't the reality.

I don't know if it's poor choice of words on my part or if you read what I wrote wrong, but that's not what I meant. 980 and 970, from a performance satndpoint, not perf/W, are nothing special in themselves. Managing a 20% lead over the 980 9 months after its release is underwhelming. And it's not just that. It will be a year and a half after Hawaii launched. I'd expect better after so long. 7970->290x was a nice jump. I expect at least as good a jump with 290x->390x.

Also, it's not like I don't care about perf/$. I don't have that much money, and I will most likely be going with a 390 non-X when it comes out.

Other than that... Yeah, 14nm GPUs can't come quickly enough. I just hope AMD is going to have something ready in time to counter whatever NVidia puts out. Otherwise we're going to see a potentially huge performance gap between the two companies and we can be sure NVidia is going to milk the hell out of us for the added performance.

 

[boxleitnerb]

that bench compares the throttling R9 290X and not the uber which runs at 1 Ghz. I find it appalling that 18 months after the R9 290X launch and with all AIBs having their own custom cooled cards (both stock and OC versions) which don't throttle and the reference version barely being available anandtech found it necessary to update the R9 290X scores with the throttling non uber scores in the GPU bench.

Nonsense, it is perfectly fine. Most reviews on the web are biased towards AMD in that particular point. They use non-default values for AMD (uber mode) but don't extend the same courtesy to NV (raising power target or at least the temp target).
THAT is what I find appalling.

 

[Kenmitch]

Then what other games was released in last 2 months?
I see only:
attila total warr
BF hardline
Dying light
evolve
All are in that chart

Next games are witcher3 and GTA5
And yeah thats the problem with AMD you need wait for patches/drivers just like in dying light.
I can play it in day1 on NV, but need wait months for patches on AMD thats the problem.

These days most new releases come out buggy and require a couple of patches to take care of it.

If your happy supporting the above practices by paying full price for games at launch then it's your choice.

Waiting for the game patches that correct the issues also most of the time means paying a whole lot less for the games.

As for Gameworks....Seems like it does more harm than good from what I've read.

 

[raghu78]

Nonsense, it is perfectly fine. Most reviews on the web are biased towards AMD in that particular point. They use non-default values for AMD (uber mode) but don't extend the same courtesy to NV (raising power target or at least the temp target). THAT is what I find appalling.

rubbish. the uber has only a higher fan speed limit to avoid throttling due to temps hitting 94c. btw power limit and temp limit on ref R9 290X are same at uber as non-uber. Anyway none of this matters on custom R9 290X cooler cards like Sapphire Tri-X, PCS+, XFX DD, ASUS Direct Cu II which do not throttle at stock fan speeds.

 

[boxleitnerb]

rubbish. the uber has only a higher fan speed limit to avoid throttling due to temps hitting 94c. btw power limit and temp limit on ref R9 290X are same at uber as non-uber. Anyway none of this matters on custom R9 290X cooler cards like Sapphire Tri-X, PCS+, XFX DD, ASUS Direct Cu II which do not throttle at stock fan speeds.

If you increase fan speed or allow higher temps than 80-83°C (NV) doesn't matter, the end result is the same -> more thermal head room for higher clocks since both IHVs nowadays have temp dependent clock speeds.
Using uber and benching it vs NV stock settings is biased, that is a fact whether you want to see it or not.

 

[AtenRa]

Next games are witcher3 and GTA5
And yeah thats the problem with AMD you need wait for patches/drivers just like in dying light.
I can play it in day1 on NV, but need wait months for patches on AMD thats the problem.

I will have to remind you that latest Gameworks games like Assassins Creed Unity and FarCry 4 were total mess even with NVIDIAs hardware at release and you had to wait for drivers and patches even for the nvidia hardware.

 

[Cloudfire777]

I`m not sure why people compare specs and think GPUs scale linear.
You don`t have to go further back than look at GTX 980 and GTX Titan X. On paper, GTX Titan X should have been 44% faster than GTX 980, but in reality it was 33% faster.

Likewise, R9 390X looks to be 45% faster than R9 390X but may end up around 35% faster. Which will put it 24% above GTX 980, which is in line with the VR-Zone rumor

 

[Gloomy]

I`m not sure why people compare specs and think GPUs scale linear.
You don`t have to go further back than look at GTX 980 and GTX Titan X. On paper, GTX Titan X should have been 44% faster than GTX 980, but in reality it was 33% faster.

Likewise, R9 390X looks to be 45% faster than R9 390X but may end up around 35% faster. Which will put it 24% above GTX 980, which is in line with the VR-Zone rumor

The difference being that the reason why the Titan X doesn't meet expectations is that it doesn't clock (rather, it can't) as high under normal circumstances. At the same clockspeed, TX scales nearly linearly.

All leaks point to the 390X having the same clockspeed as the 290X. And unlike the Titan, it's not going to be the exact same architecture as the card it supersedes. So same clockspeed, beefier specs, and architectural improvements = all bets are off.

 

[xthetenth]

I`m not sure why people compare specs and think GPUs scale linear.
You don`t have to go further back than look at GTX 980 and GTX Titan X. On paper, GTX Titan X should have been 44% faster than GTX 980, but in reality it was 33% faster.

Likewise, R9 390X looks to be 45% faster than R9 390X but may end up around 35% faster. Which will put it 24% above GTX 980, which is in line with the VR-Zone rumor

Personally I'd be more ready to trust inferences drawn from examples of how the GCN architecture scales than the Maxwell one and clock speed must be constant for these comparisons to work.

 

[ShintaiDK]

AMDs march presentation:
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9MjU3MzM4fENoaWxkSUQ9LTF8VHlwZT0z&t=1

Carrizo is listed as Q2 2015. New(390X?) GPUs are just listed as 2015. Doesnt seem like a release is near besides for the rebrands.

 

[exar333]

The difference being that the reason why the Titan X doesn't meet expectations is that it doesn't clock (rather, it can't) as high under normal circumstances. At the same clockspeed, TX scales nearly linearly.

All leaks point to the 390X having the same clockspeed as the 290X. And unlike the Titan, it's not going to be the exact same architecture as the card it supersedes. So same clockspeed, beefier specs, and architectural improvements = all bets are off.

This.

50% more processing, 50% more memory bandwidth and 3x the memory. If anything, the only reason it wouldn't scale linearly would be on the software side or if there was an inherent design-flaw within the GPU. I don't think we have seen a design/arch flaw.

It all comes down to clocks and how it can/cannot sustain a specific speed. Enhanced cooling will help fix this issue. Better cooling cannot increase ROPs or memory size, for example. So it's a good 'problem' to have.

 

[Cloudfire777]

The difference being that the reason why the Titan X doesn't meet expectations is that it doesn't clock (rather, it can't) as high under normal circumstances. At the same clockspeed, TX scales nearly linearly.

All leaks point to the 390X having the same clockspeed as the 290X. And unlike the Titan, it's not going to be the exact same architecture as the card it supersedes. So same clockspeed, beefier specs, and architectural improvements = all bets are off.

I was using the average clock speeds both Anandtech and TechpowerUp reported the Titan X running at (they log them), and comparing that with the average clock speeds the GTX 980 runs at.
Its as easy as doing a (clock * core) / (clock * core)

 

[Kenmitch]

AMDs march presentation:
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9MjU3MzM4fENoaWxkSUQ9LTF8VHlwZT0z&t=1

Carrizo is listed as Q2 2015. New(390X?) GPUs are just listed as 2015. Doesnt seem like a release is near besides for the rebrands.

Doom and gloom again?

It did state GPU's in 2015 along with professional graphics in late 2015.

Not sure how that translates to no release within the next month or two for the gaming crowd....Guess time will tell.

Anybody have an idea what the following is in reference to?

Secured two new wins of ~$1 billion combined lifetime revenue over ~3 years, one ARM based starting in 2016

[FONT=Calibri,Calibri]


[/FONT]

 

[DearLord]

AMDs march presentation:
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9MjU3MzM4fENoaWxkSUQ9LTF8VHlwZT0z&t=1

Carrizo is listed as Q2 2015. New(390X?) GPUs are just listed as 2015. Doesnt seem like a release is near besides for the rebrands.

Going to have to take a look at this...

 

[ShintaiDK]

Doom and gloom again?

It did state GPU's in 2015 along with professional graphics in late 2015.

Not sure how that translates to no release within the next month or two for the gaming crowd....Guess time will tell.

Anybody have an idea what the following is in reference to?

Why not write Q2 then as Carrizo.

 

[Cloudfire777]

AMDs march presentation:
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9MjU3MzM4fENoaWxkSUQ9LTF8VHlwZT0z&t=1

Carrizo is listed as Q2 2015. New(390X?) GPUs are just listed as 2015. Doesnt seem like a release is near besides for the rebrands.

AMD Radeon™ R9 295X2 GPU is the world’s
fastest graphics card*

I mean, while its true, is it really something to brag about?
"Hey we have a 500W GPU beating the 250W GTX Titan by 20%"

 

[Silverforce11]

Doom and gloom again?

It did state GPU's in 2015 along with professional graphics in late 2015.

Not sure how that translates to no release within the next month or two for the gaming crowd....Guess time will tell.

Anybody have an idea what the following is in reference to?

[FONT=Calibri,Calibri]


[/FONT]

MediaTek which is fast becoming a marketshare leader in mobile SOCs want to use AMD GPU tech instead of the generic ARM MALI GPUs (which is quite horrid & has compatibility issues that make developers weep at night). This was announced awhile back. It's a huge win for them and the big boys (Qualcomm/Samsung) need to be worried.

 

[ShintaiDK]

MediaTek which is fast becoming a marketshare leader in mobile SOCs want to use AMD GPU tech instead of the generic ARM MALI GPUs (which is quite horrid & has compatibility issues that make developers weep at night). This was announced awhile back. It's a huge win for them and the big boys (Qualcomm/Samsung) need to be worried.

How is AMDs Android support?

 

[ShintaiDK]

I mean, while its true, is it really something to brag about?
"Hey we have a 500W GPU beating the 250W GTX Titan by 20%"

Calling the 295X2 for a GPU isnt exactly correct either.

 

[Silverforce11]

How is AMDs Android support?

Given AMD GPU tech has been and is fine with OpenGL (Android is reliant on OpenGLES for hardware acceleration), it'll be no problems.

Also Vulkan.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Given AMD GPU tech has been and is fine with OpenGL (Android is reliant on OpenGLES for hardware acceleration), it'll be no problems.

Also Vulkan.

You missed the point, drivers.

 

[Erenhardt]

You missed the point, drivers.

you missed the point - low level api

 

[Silverforce11]

You missed the point, drivers.

That's not how Android coding works. There's no driver layer for Mali, Adreno or any other variants of GPUs used in Android. You call directly to OpenGLES and if the hardware is compatible it will respond accordingly.

But if you have doubts whether AMD GPU tech is any good for Android or mobiles, you only need to forward your concerns to MediaTek. They seem more than happy to spend a lot of cash on some AMD graphics IP.

Edit: @Kenmitch
"Secured two new wins of ~$1 billion combined lifetime revenue over ~3 years, one ARM based starting in 2016"
The other one is likely to be Nintendo on their next-gen refresh. AMD APU/SOC.

 

[AtenRa]

I mean, while its true, is it really something to brag about?
"Hey we have a 500W GPU beating the 250W GTX Titan by 20%"

Hawaii release = October 2013
R9 295 release = April 2014

GM200 Titan X release = March 2015

So a dual GPU single card with two years old technology (2013) is still 20% faster and 33% cheaper than current top of the line single GPU card. That doesnt look that horrible to me like you tried to make it

 

[JDG1980]

Sorry to revivify an old thread, but while looking up something else I found information that might be relevant.

Most people have forgotten it by now, but back in early 2012, AMD rebranded a bunch of old VLIW-based GPUs for the OEM market. The only interesting aspect of this sordid move is the model numbering: they were all assigned numbers in the 7000 series. No one really cared at the time since these were OEM-only parts, and speculation was dampened down by the fact that real GCN parts (Tahiti, Pitcairn, and Cape Verde) had already been released. But this demonstrates that AMD has, in the past, been a lot more willing to engage in rebrands for the OEM market (including deceptively using model numbers that hint at newer feature sets), and that just because the drivers list a bunch of rebranded stuff, that doesn't mean that new retail products will definitively be MIA. Of course it's still possible that they might all be rebrands on the retail level, but I think people are reading more into this than they should. I'm particularly skeptical that Pitcairn is going to be brought back yet again.