Possible Radeon 390X / 390 and 380X Spec / Benchmark (do not hotlink images!!!!!!)

[pete910]

But isn't this type of scenario what AMD already does? The 290X is every bit as capable as a 970 performance wise, it's cheaper. What's selling better? It's not the 290X.

This is also true unfortunately , not because of the actual hardware/card but to their after market support(drivers)

 

[ginjaninja]

Maybe because its an older part,which does not have the selling point of DX12??

Shrugs.

yup if the 290x dx12 performance is looking equal to 970s (as per current relative performance) in early access, AMD would do well to share this..current perception is that the 970 has better dx12 support.

 

[Mtom]

But isn't this type of scenario what AMD already does? The 290X is every bit as capable as a 970 performance wise, it's cheaper. What's selling better? It's not the 290X.

Its because the power consumption is an issue, but only since nv introduced maxwell....

Anyways, i think the Fiji will beat/match titan at a bit lower price, but not that low they used to.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

This x100

Everybody has their own opinion on AMD/ATi's "best GPU series", mine is the Radeon 9x00 series. The 9700 beat the Ti4600 and cost 25% less, the 9500 did the same to the ti4200, the vicious undercutting turned what would have been a bitter defeat for Nvidia into a massacre, especially as their FX series that arrived to battle the 9700 sounded like a vacuum cleaner and then got beat by the cheaper 9800.

That generation didn't just hand ATi their first win over Nvidia in years, it improved their stock tenfold in customers eyes and they shifted so many units (for the time) they were still living off the success two generations later.

This is exactly what they need to do today.

Well TBF both the HD4000 and HD5000 series were using price/performance too and AMD still had decent marketshare too.

 

[humbug]

This x100

Everybody has their own opinion on AMD/ATi's "best GPU series", mine is the Radeon 9x00 series. The 9700 beat the Ti4600 and cost 25% less, the 9500 did the same to the ti4200, the vicious undercutting turned what would have been a bitter defeat for Nvidia into a massacre, especially as their FX series that arrived to battle the 9700 sounded like a vacuum cleaner and then got beat by the cheaper 9800.

That generation didn't just hand ATi their first win over Nvidia in years, it improved their stock tenfold in customers eyes and they shifted so many units (for the time) they were still living off the success two generations later.

This is exactly what they need to do today.

That was then, this is now, the 7970 was a better card than the GTX 680 and yet Nvidia sold 3x as many at a higher price.

 

[Mtom]

yup if the 290x dx12 performance is looking equal to 970s (as per current relative performance) in early access, AMD would do well to share this..current perception is that the 970 has better dx12 support.

...and its the opposite...the 290x has better dx12 support, and more grunt for new dx12 techs.

 

[Martini1991]

I think AMD should match Nvidia on Price per performance for a while, forget about market share, see what that does to their income, thats what really matters.

They have tried everything but that ^^^^

How would this work?

AMD cards would just become more expensive.

 

[MrMD]

But isn't this type of scenario what AMD already does? The 290X is every bit as capable as a 970 performance wise, it's cheaper. What's selling better? It's not the 290X.

AMD's main issue in the GPU market is a PR problem.


People just assume Nvidia carda at the same price points are massivly faster.In reality this isnt really the case.

Heat and pwr consumption,its the same situation.Comparing the R9/7 series to its direct competator of keplar,on a like for like basis its negligible in difference.

Almost everyone i know and play games with own Nvidia cards,they are legit shocked to hear that the compatible AMD cards to theirs for the most part are the same for equal/lower cost.They just assume nvidia carda are significantly faster


For single GPU configs AMD cards absolutley hold hold their own,The masses just need to get this message.


Im hoping for a a good improvement with the 3xx/4xx series.The 290x was a monster at release,they have had over 18months since then,they should have made significant across the board,if not wtf they been doing?

If the 390x is a rebrand 290x with updated GCN and the HBM card is a 'different tier',that would be massivley dissapointing.

 

[Mtom]

That was then, this is now, the 7970 was a better card than the GTX 680 and yet Nvidia sold 3x as many at a higher price.

It is because many people has the "only nvidia for gaming" mantra burned in their brains....many even thinks that intel cpus only work with nv cards because amd cards only work with amd cpus

 

[humbug]

How would this work?

AMD cards would just become more expensive.

Like this

Going so cheap that your margins are squeezed is just bad business, if you sell 5 items @ £100 with £10 Profit each and only 3 Items @ £120 but with a £20 Profit each then its better to sell less.

Undercutting Nvidia by significant margins doesn't work anyway.

AMD need to find their market value, that doesn't necessarily mean undercutting Nvidia.

 

[Martini1991]

That was then, this is now, the 7970 was a better card than the GTX 680 and yet Nvidia sold 3x as many at a higher price.

The 680 came out at a lower price point than the 7970 and was a better performing card.
The 7970 didn't become "better" (And then even, I'd just say the cards were basically equal, all things considered, wins for either side, very game dependant) until about a year after its launch.

So what you compared to Ubers post aren't even close to the same thing.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Even in the days of the 9700 PRO and the FX,in terms of sales Nvidia still held its own,even with disasters like HL2,where Valve had to downgrade the game for FX users.

Edit!!

Even with 6 to 9 months of not having any DX11 parts,Nvidia marketshare was still not lower than AMD.

They were using the GTX285 to compete with the HD5870 FFS for six months.

 

[Martini1991]

Like this

That doesn't exactly explain how it'll work.

And besides, when the 680 launched, and the 7970 price lowered, they had the same price/performance, and you've just said how the 680 sold 3 times more, so it doesn't work?

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I remember a lot of people complaining how bad it was that AMD was charging aftermarket GTX580 level prices for the HD7970 and they were price gouging. Fast forward a year,Titan was the most expensive single GPU card we had for a few generations and suddenly it went all quiet.

Even,when AMD/ATI has been ahead in hardware and software,Nvidia marketshare might have gone down,but it never collapsed even in the 9700 Pro days.

So,ultimately AMD needs to more on the marketing side. Its worked wonders for Apple,even if a number of their products are not necessarily better than what the competitors have.

FFS,Nvidia still managed to get over the $200 million G80 series bumps problems and dicking round for ages about what to do about it. They still got over that.

If it had been AMD they would have gone bankrupt,and Nvidia marketing would make sure they had a field day. They are just more proactive in their approach - look at what they did at the R9 290 launch.

 

[mmj_uk]

Maybe because its an older part,which does not have the selling point of DX12??

Shrugs.

Lower TDP, better stock cooler (blower that doesn't heat up other components - remember heat is electronics worst enemy), less capable PSU required, those might not be important factors to computer nerds but OEM's like Dell who buy in bulk love it.

It all comes down to R&D in the end, AMD might still be able to compete on performance alone but both Intel & NVidia who have been criticised for holding back performance have been working tirelessly on reducing manufacturing costs (ie. making products smaller and more efficient) and are now reaping the rewards.

GTX780Ti = 7.1bn transistors/561 mm².
GTX970/980 = 5.2bn transistors/398 mm².

Yet GTX970/980 are clearly superior and have only a 256bit memory bus (cheaper PCB also).

AMD 290X = 6.2bn transistors/438 mm²

...so bigger than GTX980 and selling for less than GTX970 and with a complex 512bit memory bus and much higher power requirements meaning higher PCB/component costs.

Same thing with Intel and CPU's......

2600K = 1.16bn transistors/216 mm²
4770K = 1.4bn transistors/177 mm²

Whereas you have AMD....

FX8320/FX8350 = 1.2bn transistors/315mm2

...so that's twice the size and selling for less than half of the 4770K (plus it doesn't have GPU functionality at all).

It's easy to see why AMD are in a financial mess, like Sir Alan Sugar says: "any idiot can sell something cheap but you arent going to be in business for very long".

 

[humbug]

It is because many people has the "only nvidia for gaming" mantra burned in their brains....many even thinks that intel cpus only work with nv cards because amd cards only work with amd cpus

Exactly

Apples iPhone is a pile of junk compared with a lot of the higher end yet still cheaper Android Phones.

Facts and Reality, all those things are irrelevant, the only thing that matters is what people think, all marketing people are del boys, they will flog you a dead horse if they could, and a lot of them think they can.

That doesn't exactly explain how it'll work.

And besides, when the 680 launched, and the 7970 price lowered, they had the same price/performance, and you've just said how the 680 sold 3 times more, so it doesn't work?

Whatever you think the reality of AMD vs Nvidia is the facts are the same, Nvidia vastly outsell AMD.

Be it because Nvidia have more brand power or that AMD are just utter junk, take your pick.....

AMD cannot compete properly with Nvidia by undercutting them, so the other option is don't, then at least they are making a profit on what they sell.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Lower TDP, better stock cooler (blower that doesn't heat up other components - remember heat is electronics worst enemy), less capable PSU required, those might not be important factors to computer nerds but OEM's like Dell who buy in bulk love it.

It all comes to R&D in the end, AMD might still be able to compete on performance alone but both Intel & NVidia who have been criticised for holding back performance have been working tirelessly on reducing manufacturing costs (ie. making products smaller and more efficient) and are now reaping the rewards.

GTX780Ti = 7.1bn transistors/561 mm².
GTX970/980 = 5.2bn transistors/398 mm².

Yet GTX970/980 are clearly superior and have only a 256bit memory bus (cheaper PCB also).

The GK110 has a lot of transistors dedicated towards compute and even the wide memory controller is there for GPGPU workloads.

Its why Nvidia has just slightly rejigged the GK110 as the GK210 and kept it as their top tier GPU.

The Maxwell GPUs have a lot of this functionality removed which helps towards making them smaller and more efficient.

The AMD GPUs are not that much bigger than the Nvidia ones,considering their dual uses. However,the main issue is that top end AMD cards have wide memory controllers,which means added costs,but like the GK110 they were made to serve dual uses.

The GK110 after all was a 565MM2 GPU competing with a 438MM2,but Hawaii is now old,so its competing with tech which is much newer,and against GPUs not made for mixed workloads.

If you even look at the workstation versions of Hawaii they fit into lower TDPs but are clocked lower. I suspect the desktop gaming versions are clocked a higher than they should for optimal performance/watt.

The only realistic way AMD needs to address this is to just expand their midrange chips,and strip out more of the unneeded functionality.

However,looking at Tonga,in some ways despite the reduction in DP compute,its unusually fast for OpenCL stuff,which indicates Apple might have had some involvement in drawing up the specification IMHO.

But they really need to do something especially for mobile - that is probably a massive issue too,and even more than desktop.

 

[flopper]

We don't know the performance yet??

.

educated guess fits it at TitanX ish performance.
The core is almost 600mm2 and amd has had a good die/performance ratio and that close size to what the Titanx is it seems to go a bit beyond it with performance. I dont expect miracles on 28nm.
The early slides if accurate was old but pointed to 50-60% from 290x and since that card still goes as good as the 980 at higher resolutions and even beat it we can say with an educated guess,
if the game does 60 fps today with a 290x then its at around 80-90fps with Fiji (ZEUS Edition).

 

[Bonjour]

Unfortunately, AMD have to be at the very top of their game to even compete.

Nvidia, by comparison, can have some complete shockers (e.g FX) and still retain market share.

 

[humbug]

educated guess fits it at TitanX ish performance.
The core is almost 600mm2 and amd has had a good die/performance ratio and that close size to what the Titanx is it seems to go a bit beyond it with performance. I dont expect miracles on 28nm.
The early slides if accurate was old but pointed to 50-60% from 290x and since that card still goes as good as the 980 at higher resolutions and even beat it we can say with an educated guess,
if the game does 60 fps today with a 290x then its at around 80-90fps with Fiji (ZEUS Edition).

ZEUS Edition

Hey, i called it