[Sweclockers] AMD Tonga will have the power consumption of 270X but replace the 280X

[parvadomus]

It's not putting pressure if there is a price premium. Economics 101.

Im sure a lot of people at AMD knows tons more about economics than you

 

[RussianSensation]

I'd gladly pay $50 extra if I were looking for a new card at that performance level.

That's not logical. At nearly every performance tier, $50 extra gets one an AMD card far superior to NV's offering:

$50 extra over $125 750Ti gets one an R9 270X which is 39% faster than 750Ti.

$50 extra over $150 easily gets one an R9 280. NV has nothing to compete with that since most GTX760s which are not even faster are $230-250.

$50 extra over ~$210 gets one a 1.05Ghz R9 280X, a card that will beat a 760 by 27%. And you get 3GB of VRAM too.

$50 extra over $320 is after-market R9 290 territory - a card that blitzes the 770 2GB.

There are people who will buy an NV card in each of my presented cases but that just means they don't care about performance as their #1 priority.

If NV launches Tonga with 2048 SPs at 1Ghz clocks with 180W power consumption and prices it at $249, it will make both the 760 and 770 2GB even more overpriced. Of course we should expect NV to respond with price cuts or launch a Maxwell card that succeeds the 760/770. Competition is a good thing.

If the chip/card is ready to go then AMD is absolutely stupid for not releasing it.

Was NV stupid for not launching GTX660/660Ti on time because they had 120,000 of GTX570s to clear?

Sometimes these firms make a miscalculation on existing inventory. You can already see R9 280 cards at $180 and R9 280X cards drop to $260-280. It's very possible AMD is trying to get rid of these cards. Heck, GTX770 4GB sells for $360-400; pretty shocking to be honest that AMD hasn't sold out faster of the R9 280X cards at these prices.

 

[NostaSeronx]

FirePro W8100: 2048 ALUs @ 824 MHz / 8 GB of GDDR5
Radeon R9 M295X: 2048 ALUs @ 800 MHz / 4 GB of GDDR5

Hopefully;
Radeon R9 285X: 2048 ALUs @ 824 MHz / 4 GB of GDDR5

If this is converted to to the 300 series, Tonga XT would most likely be the R7 360X.

 

[OCGuy]

A 290X does not consume 325 watts. That is insane.

It has the ability to hit 300+...

Ultimately 300W single-GPU cards have been a rarity, and seemingly for good reason. That much heat is not easy to dissipate coming off of a single heat source (GPU), and the only other 300W cards we’ve seen are not cards with impressive acoustics. Given where AMD was with Tahiti we’re in no way surprised that power consumption has gone up with the larger GPU, but there are consequences to be had for having this much power going through a single card. Not the least of which is the fact that AMD’s reference cooler can’t actually move 300W of heat at reasonable noise levels, hence the use of quiet and uber modes.

http://anandtech.com/show/7457/the-radeon-r9-290x-review/19

 

[Flapdrol1337]

That's not logical. At nearly every performance tier, $50 extra gets one an AMD card far superior to NV's offering:

$50 extra over $125 750Ti gets one an R9 270X which is 39% faster than 750Ti.

$50 extra over $150 easily gets one an R9 280. NV has nothing to compete with that since most GTX760s which are not even faster are $230-250.

$50 extra over ~$210 gets one a 1.05Ghz R9 280X, a card that will beat a 760 by 27%. And you get 3GB of VRAM too.

$50 extra over $320 is after-market R9 290 territory - a card that blitzes the 770 2GB.

There are people who will buy an NV card in each of my presented cases but that just means they don't care about performance as their #1 priority.

If NV launches Tonga with 2048 SPs at 1Ghz clocks with 180W power consumption and prices it at $249, it will make both the 760 and 770 2GB even more overpriced. Of course we should expect NV to respond with price cuts or launch a Maxwell card that succeeds the 760/770. Competition is a good thing.



Was NV stupid for not launching GTX660/660Ti on time because they had 120,000 of GTX570s to clear?

Sometimes these firms make a miscalculation on existing inventory. You can already see R9 280 cards at $180 and R9 280X cards drop to $260-280. It's very possible AMD is trying to get rid of these cards. Heck, GTX770 4GB sells for $360-400; pretty shocking to be honest that AMD hasn't sold out faster of the R9 280X cards at these prices.

I wasn't comparing amd vs nvidia, I was saying a much more efficient 280x replacement with the eventual freesync support would be worth $50 over a 280x to me.

If they were to launch the more efficient card at a higher pricepoint the old stock could still clear due to superior price/performance. nvidia could've done the same with the 570's imo.

 

[Cloudfire777]

FirePro W8100: 2048 ALUs @ 824 MHz / 8 GB of GDDR5
Radeon R9 M295X: 2048 ALUs @ 800 MHz / 4 GB of GDDR5

Hopefully;
Radeon R9 285X: 2048 ALUs @ 824 MHz / 4 GB of GDDR5

If this is converted to to the 300 series, Tonga XT would most likely be the R7 360X.

Question is if Tonga is a new chip that only have 32CUs (Full Tonga chip) or if it is based on existing Hawaii but have 12CUs disabled (and 256bit removed).

That W8100 should be based on Tahiti (7970, 280x) sounds weird, because why would they remove 128bit bus (Tahiti have 384bit) but crank up the memory clocks to compensate? Better with a big bus and low clocks, regarding temperatures, stability and power. Not to mention overclock potential is better with bigger bus.

The only reason why I see them go this route is to make room for R9 M295X based on the same chip, because MXM modules have restrictions on 256bit.

R9 M290X (1280 shaders - 20CUs) are touching the 100W TDP limitation within notebooks.
Now R9 M295X comes out with 12 more CUs and 60% more shaders. Where have they gotten this thermal room from out of a sudden? Why is Tonga so much more efficient? Is it because its a new chip or have TSMC/GloFo greatly improved 28nm process?

 

[NostaSeronx]

I think that Tonga XT and Amethyst XT improvements come from two things;
- GlobalFoundries
- Volcanic Island Tiles

* ~40% lower TDP would put the desktop SKUs at 150 watts.

How is this lower TDP achieved? By reducing the nominal voltage and implementing more smarter boosts.

For example Temash versus Mullins:
A6-1450 CPU; Max Boost - 1.4 GHz / Base - 1.0 GHz => 7 watts -14 watts @ 1.125 volts
A10 Micro-6700T CPU; Max Boost - 2.2 GHz / Base - 1.2 GHz => 4.5 watts @ 0.925 volts

A6-1450 GPU; Max Clock: 300MHz - 400 MHz => 7 watts -14 watts
A10 Micro-6700T GPU; Max Clock: 500 MHz => 4.5 watts
--
From what I can find the nominal voltage for most Tahitis are around 1.075 and 1.175 volts.

If Tahiti to Tonga has the same improvement from Temash to Mullins;
1.075 volts to 0.875 volts
1.175 volts to 0.975 volts

Any performance loss would hopefully be mitigated with more efficient units.

 

[SlickR12345]

How much is it going to cost and will it be faster than the 280x? I mean if its at the same price with lower power consumption and faster then its a great product, but if it offers the same performance at a price premium and just has the lower power draw its going to be a bad card.

I hope they have other parts as well, maybe replace the R7 265 and 270 as well?

 

[NostaSeronx]

The range I think Tonga will be aimed at is in between $250 and $350. For the Radeon series while aiming around $2000 for the FirePro W8100.

Once AMD gets to the R(x) 300 series, I think Tonga will be around Bonaire's price at that point.

 

[Gloomy]

It has the ability to hit 300+...

Any GPU has the "ability to hit 300+".

Stop spreading fud.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-290-and-290x,3728-4.html

 

[OCGuy]

Any GPU has the "ability to hit 300+".

Stop spreading fud.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-290-and-290x,3728-4.html

Did you read those? Spikes to 360w+ with a small OC during gaming. Holy.....

 

[tviceman]

Sometimes these firms make a miscalculation on existing inventory. You can already see R9 280 cards at $180 and R9 280X cards drop to $260-280. It's very possible AMD is trying to get rid of these cards. Heck, GTX770 4GB sells for $360-400; pretty shocking to be honest that AMD hasn't sold out faster of the R9 280X cards at these prices.

With the wave of new notebooks being introduced at computex, AMD is absolutely retarded for not intro'ing this chip, at least at the mobile level, especially given the thread about tonga just a few days ago said it would be the new high end mobile discrete graphics for AMD.

The difference between AMD and Nvidia with mistakes like these are that Nvidia suffers much less. It's not because Nvidia products are superior in every regard, it's simply that the market punishes AMD much more. AMD cannot swallow these mistake as easily as Nvidia. Imagine if Nvidia intro's Maxwell parts this fall with decent prices (I know, I know - it won't happen but I'm just extrapolating) and no response from AMD for 6+ months in the way of new products (like when AMD came out with Cayman and Fermi was delayed). Nvidia lost some serious market share back when this happend to them, but AMD would pretty much be on life support if the roles were reversed.

 

[Gloomy]

Did you read those? Spikes to 360w+ with a small OC during gaming. Holy.....

Yeah those are soooo terrible.

http://www.tomshardware.de/gigabyte-gtx-titan-black-review,testberichte-241550-6.html

http://www.tomshardware.de/gigabyte-windforce-gtx-780-ti-ghz-edition,testberichte-241428-4.html

 

[TreVader]

Did you read those? Spikes to 360w+ with a small OC during gaming. Holy.....

Why don't you just make one post about the FUD around power usage and copypasta it all over instead of writing individual posts? Save you time.




It's already been shown many times that a 780ti can hit 300W+ with a mild OC too. In crossfire and OC'd, they use almost the same power.

 

[tviceman]

In crossfire and OC'd, they use almost the same power.

UhhhhhhhhHHHHHHhhHHHHhhhhhhh NO. Not. Even. Close.

http://hardocp.com/article/2014/01/...tion_edition_crossfire_review/10#.U4_ZafnxrLE

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7492/the-geforce-gtx-780-ti-review/15

 

[TreVader]

UhhhhhhhhHHHHHHhhHHHHhhhhhhh NO. Not. Even. Close.

Too bad anandtech power consumption benchmarks are the one area where they could use some work.


http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-290-and-290x,3728-4.html


All I had to do was scroll up to prove you wrong.

 

[tviceman]

Too bad anandtech power consumption benchmarks are the one area where they could use some work.


http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-290-and-290x,3728-4.html


All I had to do was scroll up to prove you wrong.

Denial much?

 

[TreVader]

Denial. I get it.

FUD. I don't get it.

 

[f1sherman]

Too bad anandtech power consumption benchmarks are the one area where they could use some work.


http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-290-and-290x,3728-4.html


All I had to do was scroll up to prove you wrong.

Toms has been garbage since 2005, prob long before that but that's when I started building computers.

really...

3dcenter is my favorite when quoting numbers, fps, tdp etc...
because they give average across several reviewers

 

[TreVader]

really...

3dcenter is my favorite when quoting numbers, fps, tdp etc...
because they give average across several reviewers

Good find haha,


In this specific area, Toms is doing a better job than anandtech. Power consumption doesn't happen uniformly across a long period of time and can't be accurately measured by a bar and a number.

 

[tviceman]

Good find haha,


In this specific area, Toms is doing a better job than anandtech. Power consumption doesn't happen uniformly across a long period of time and can't be accurately measured by a bar and a number.

The average power consumption over time of a pair of 290x's are way higher than a pair of 780 TI's. Anandtech, HardOCP, and anyone else who has tested CFX 290x's and SLI 80 TI's show that. Instantaneous power consumption is a worthless metric when playing for hours on end and measuring power.

 

[tviceman]

really...

Add that to this:

That said, AMD isn't going anywhere [...]
dGPU they are already poised to take the market in 2015.

 

[TreVader]

The average power consumption over time of a pair of 290x's are way higher than a pair of 780 TI's. Anandtech, HardOCP, and anyone else who has tested CFX 290x's and SLI 80 TI's show that. Instantaneous power consumption is a worthless metric when playing for hours on end and measuring power.

Average what over what? How are they measuring this average? Likely they take measurements at different points in time and they average them, but how many?


Instantaneously is the only way power can accurately be measured anyway. It appears you don't understand much about how measurement power works.

 

[f1sherman]

Good find haha,

it took me 1 sec via google search
too many of AMD fans are unhappy about too many reviewers, and I generally let it slide,
but this time I had a hunch and decided to consult google

In this specific area, Toms is doing a better job than anandtech. Power consumption doesn't happen uniformly across a long period of time and can't be accurately measured by a bar and a number.

sure it can, average gaming consumption is the number we are looking for

First of all 290/x draw more then 780/ti. Lets not fight over just how much.
Then there's the issue of somewhat better CF scaling, and larger Nvidia die which should result with better thermal characteristics,
which again mirrors itself in even lower power draw.

So yes, 290X CF should draw more then 780 Ti SLI (was that the issue we are trying to address?)
And this gap will only become larger when OC-ing. Pure physics...

 

[TreVader]

FUD R US up in this thread with you two nvidia fanboys.


Toms is accurate here, anandtech isn't. Pretty. simple.

Infraction issued for personal attack.
-- stahlhart