Those "specs" leaked in the driver have been known for awhile now, nothing new. For those who don't want to bother even watching that snippet:36:07 if this is not posted yet.
36:07 if this is not posted yet.
36:07 if this is not posted yet.
Isn't that not new info? Plus no clock speeds.
Even clock speed won't tell us everything. The new process means Vega can have up to 50% more transistors than fury for the exact same layoutYep, nothing matters until we get clock speeds. If all AMD can hit is 1200-1300MHz then it will be a 1070/1080 competitor. If they can hit 1600MHz then it's within striking distance of 1080 Ti.
Clock speeds matter, but not in the way you think. They can be running it at 1000MHz and be at 1080ti level, it all depends how the core is build.Yep, nothing matters until we get clock speeds. If all AMD can hit is 1200-1300MHz then it will be a 1070/1080 competitor. If they can hit 1600MHz then it's within striking distance of 1080 Ti.
silly question maybe, but is 4096sp cuda cores ?Even clock speed won't tell us everything. The new process means Vega can have up to 50% more transistors than fury for the exact same layout
That should mean clock for clock Vega is faster than Fury and clocks higher.
- 4096sp
- 256TMU
- 64ROP
Those are the ALUs - NVIDIA calls them CUDA cores, AMD calls them Stream Processors.silly question maybe, but is 4096sp cuda cores ?
AMD needs some massive profits to be able to keep up with the crazy profits Nvidia has been enjoying, but I don't see them as a company who likes taking in tons of money, but would rather sell you a great product for very competitive price.
Finally someone. Thank you for sparring me the energy.Woah woah woah, lets look at the actual FPS and we can tell these settings are not playable at all.
Yes and the 1080 doesn't even break 30 fps, heck even the 1080 Ti has 36 fps!
Ooooo this one is excellent, even the 1080 Ti can't hit over 32 FPS! Those look like playable settings to me
Mmmm yeah, that sweet 27.7 fps on a 1070 and 19.6 fps on a 980 Ti. Definite playable settings there too
Mmmmmm yet another one where a 1080 Ti isn't over 32 fps!
In actual playable settings it is fine. None of the cards, not even 1080 Ti were playable in those settings tested
You'll be turning down settings on a 1080 Ti to play those same games, unless you think $700+ GPU should only do 30 fps.
Those "specs" leaked in the driver have been known for awhile now, nothing new. For those who don't want to bother even watching that snippet:
- 12.5tflops
- 4096 steam processors
- 2048 bit memory interface
- 64 rops
- 256 tmus
- 8 ace
Why do you see both possibilities as mutually exclusive?Problem they have on both fronts (CPU,GPU) is lack of market share. Once you are near irrelevant no one will optimize for your hardware. Ryzen isn't here to increase their margins, especially not in the consumer space but to get market share. While market share in GPU sector isn't great it for sure isn't as bad as it is on the CPU sector. I don't think big vega will be cheap and perform else AMD would have to lower price of RX 580 because if it delivers 1080 TI performance for say $550, Vega will have better perfromance/dollar than Polaris. Doesn't make much sense. So if it is within 1080 Ti reach, it will have to be $650. Also there supposedly is a small vega. So 2 chips and 4 skus that must fit between RX 580 and the top vega sku. That would not work if big vega were already as low as $499.
Why do you see both possibilities as mutually exclusive?
I know computing is binary, but do we have to be so blinkered?
Again, binary.I don't see how the can get Intel margins by selling Ryzen at the price they are selling it.
I don't see how the can get Intel margins by selling Ryzen at the price they are selling it.
But AMD have said over the longer term they are targeting 40-45% overall margin.
It was just the number I remember, I'm normally very good at remembering things, I'll go see if I can find it.36-40%, long term, not sure where you got 40-45% from.
It was just the number I remember, I'm normally very good at remembering things, I'll go see if I can find it.
2017 Financial Analyst Day
Date: May 16, 2017
Time: 1:00 PM PT (4:00 PM ET)
Webcast: Webcast will be available prior to the event
Executive Presentations
Presenters Titles
Lisa Su President and Chief Executive Officer
Mark Papermaster Senior Vice President and Chief Technology Officer
Jim Anderson Senior Vice President and General Manager, Computing and Graphics Business Group
Raja Koduri Senior Vice President and Chief Architect, Radeon Technologies Group
Forrest Norrod Senior Vice President and General Manager Enterprise, Embedded, and Semi-Custom Business Group
Devinder Kumar Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
Why do you think that is the case? Because they straddle both the CPU and GPU market while not being a dominant force in either. Intel and NVIDIA stood no chance in mobile, what do you think will happen if they introduce high margin products all of a sudden? The ecosystem in entrenched, AMD has a big obstacle to overcome if they are to have the same levels of profitability as Intel or NVIDIA.The biggest issue with AMD is that they forego the lucrative and expensive markets like servers and professional graphics and compute, which allowed Intel and Nvidia to swoop in and uncontested get all that money.
They can't gain any sort of significant profits with low and mid range cpu's and gpu's, which is what they've been doing for the past 4-5 years with garbage APU's for ultra low end, ultra low cost potato mashers.
I mean even though the Fury and Nano series weren't the best in terms of performance, it still gave them big profit boosts because of how expensive they were. The Nano for the niche market, Fury X with water cooling from start, it was something that enthusiasts and niche markets took to.