The reason no one takes this line of reasoning seriously is this was the second year of titan and ti releases. Everyone knew a 980ti product was coming just like last time when a 780ti was released.This is what I was trying to say in my post. The Fury X was going up against the Titan X (hey even similar name) for much cheaper.
Nvidia's counter was to release the 980 Ti which was faster than the Titan X and thus undercut themselves, just to steal the thunder from AMD.
Regarding the VRAM, I haven't had any issues @ 3440x1440 with mine. Sure more would be welcome but I haven't found it limiting, and at this resolution Nvidia's offerings aren't fairing any better.
At release 980 Ti was only ~10% faster @ 1080p and only 2% @ 4k
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X/31.html
Also that MSI you linked used 20w more power on avg than the Fury X which people complain about, and 25% more than a stock 980 Ti. OCing has its downsides.
Reddit thread OP said:I did ask if this was a typo, and the Samsung rep said it is NOT a typo. Didn't get any additional details on it.
UPDATE: The card IS an OEM version of the 470. I asked an AMD rep at their booth about it. The 500 series is an OEM rebadge of the 400 series, like how the 8000 series was to the 7000 series.
OH WELL, BACK TO WAITING.
The Polaris series is being rebranded to 500 series.
So, you're claiming that now AMD is going to start calling all of their Polaris cards 5xx?
OK.
Yeah, never since the R9 300 series two years ago.
Of course there will be Polaris in the RX 500 series.
For the desktop series I would expect something like this:
RX Fury 2 X (or RX Rage X) - Vega 10 XT
RX Fury 2 (or RX Rage) - Vega 10 Pro
RX 590 - Vega 11 XT
RX 580 - Vega 11 Pro
RX 570 - Polaris 10 XT
RX 560 - Polaris 10 Pro
RX 550 - Polaris 11 XT
RX 540 - Polaris 11 Pro
RX 530 - Polaris 12
Or something along that. Maybe this will be a new, optimized, revision of Polaris, which clocks higher/uses less power.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AMD_graphics_processing_units#Radeon_RX_M400_Series
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AMD_graphics_processing_units#Arctic_Islands_.284xx.29_Series
Polaris 12 seems to be the new name for Polaris 11. Same with the XT2 for Polaris 10.
It's not news to say amd will rebrand an old chip for the new gen. It's standard amd practice at this point and of no big deal since Nvidia and amd release chips differently.....Yeah, never since the R9 300 series two years ago.
Of course there will be Polaris in the RX 500 series.
For the desktop series I would expect something like this:
RX Fury 2 X (or RX Rage X) - Vega 10 XT
RX Fury 2 (or RX Rage) - Vega 10 Pro
RX 590 - Vega 11 XT
RX 580 - Vega 11 Pro
RX 570 - Polaris 10 XT
RX 560 - Polaris 10 Pro
RX 550 - Polaris 11 XT
RX 540 - Polaris 11 Pro
RX 530 - Polaris 12
Or something along that. Maybe this will be a new, optimized, revision of Polaris, which clocks higher/uses less power.
I don't understand why people post YouTube links without an explanation of why it's being posted, or any comment on the content.
Like I'm just going to click on a random link
Thought the forum usually auto expands out youtube links. Glad to see you took the time to complain about it though.
This better?
So that is the key to the new Infinity Fabric, the granularity, especially in mesh topologies it should allow bandwidth to scale with nodes. Topology is not protocol defined or restricted and the coherent links will work across sockets, CPUs, GPUs, and more. If the level of granularity is as fine as was intoned, it allows a CPU core to pass info to a shader ‘directly’ regardless of the two being on the same silicon or across a system. The separate control and data fabrics bring AMD up to modern SoC structures too, and in some ways beyond. Infinity Fabric is a really big deal, and at the risk of sounding like a broken record, it is going to be really interesting to see the details when AMD reveals them.
Yes, see how easy that was? Maybe in the future you'll preview your posts so you know what other people are seeing.
Oh, and BTW, cross-posting is against the forum rules. You should decide which thread you want this post in. Link spamming is generally frowned upon.
Think about it this way. All of graphics improvements, all of hardware features, all of coherency between Vega and Ryzen, plus HBM2 on die, can result in, for example:This bit on Charlie's article...
If AMD has achieved this kind of integration between CPU and GPU with this new interconnect be it on die or or across a system.. Remember this back when Llano launched in 2011?
It certainly sounds like this could enable the third step in the APU roadmap. Ryzen + Vega could also have this capabilty...
Exciting times ahead!
cross posting is starting the same thread in multiple boards. here it is in the guidelines:Yes, see how easy that was? Maybe in the future you'll preview your posts so you know what other people are seeing.
Oh, and BTW, cross-posting is against the forum rules. You should decide which thread you want this post in. Link spamming is generally frowned upon.
10) Post in the right forum. Topics posted where they don't belong will be moved. If the subject matter of a topic is broad or vague enough to fit into more than one category, please only pick the one that seems to be the best fit. Threads on the same topic are not allowed to be cross-posted in multiple forums unless members in one forum suggest taking it elsewhere after addressing the issue.
VideoCardz said:So as you can see even Hynix plans can change quite often. The current plan is to release 1.6 GHz HBM2 stack with 4GB memory, and since we already know Vega has two stacks, this gives us 8GB and 409,6 GB/s bandwidth. That’s obviously lower than Fiji, in fact, it’s even lower than Pascal GP102 (480 GB/s), so it’s unclear if AMD is really going to use Hynix memory, or like NVIDIA use Samsung instead.
In the end, it will depend on one thing: how many modules can Vega really have. The chip showcased earlier this month by AMD only had two modules, but nothing should stop AMD from making a 4-module chip, even if it was for professional market only. The only difference would be a bigger interposer.
However, it seems unlikely that Vega would have 8-stack modules, as it was already discovered that the chip showcased by AMD had 8GB ‘memory cache’. If that chip was running 8-stack HBM2, it would be shown as 16GB instead. In fact, even Hynix databook has no information about such modules, so unless Micron or Samsung suddenly announce 8-Hi HBM2 availability, the educated guess for Vega would be 8GB HBM2 1.6 GHz with 410 GB/s bandwidth in total.