AMD readies three new GPUs: Greenland, Baffin and Ellesmere

Gregster · 22 Aug 2015 at 11:44

Mei said:
is greg pretending hes not a nvidia fan again ^^;
hehe

lol

Boomstick777 · 22 Aug 2015 at 11:47

Lokken86 said:
Yes it's impressive to see ye old 290x doing so well there but why haven't they included the Fury results.

Yeah is odd that, Fury X would have been great to see. Especially considering the old 290X is taking on and winning some against the Nvidia 980 Ti.

It's almost as if DX11 has been artificially hobbling AMD cards?

Anyone noticed how similar the spec of 980 Ti is to the old 290X?

Same GLFOPS...

JediFragger · 22 Aug 2015 at 11:49

Boomstick777 said:
Yeah is odd that, Fury X would have been great to see. Especially considering the old 290X is taking on and winning some against the Nvidia 980 Ti.

It's almost as if DX11 has been artificially hobbling AMD cards?

Anyone noticed how similar the spec of 980 Ti is to the old 290X?

Same GLFOPS...

Really gets me how the AMD cards are always 'technically' faster than the nVidia ones but they can never seem to translate it into real world performance!!!

Here's hoping DX12 remedies that particular flaw...

fs123 · 22 Aug 2015 at 12:11

Martini1991 said:
His last strike (I'm on mine too, although mine are more for destroying Humbug on a daily basis) means he'll lose access to the Graphics card section, mainly for arguing with fanboys such as yourself.

I'm not really a fanboy, just someone who likes to support the underdog. If Nvidia was in AMD's position I'd support them too, as long as they supported open standards though. I'm also a cheapskate who likes to promote competition so I can get cheaper gpu's

Martini1991 · 22 Aug 2015 at 12:12

fs123 said:
I'm not really a fanboy, just someone who likes to support the underdog. If Nvidia was in AMD's position I'd support them too, as long as they supported open standards though. I'm also a cheapskate who likes to promote competition so I can get cheaper gpu's

Given everything I've ever seen you post, you're a cut and dry AMD fanboy.

Gregster · 22 Aug 2015 at 12:14

What is classed as a fanboy? As in how do they get that tag?

fs123 · 22 Aug 2015 at 12:18

Martini1991 said:
Given everything I've ever seen you post, you're a cut and dry AMD fanboy.

I see AMD as the underdog at the moment. Also have you seen me go into Nvidia threads to troll which is what all the Nvidia fanboys do regularly?

I will point out stuff which Nvidia fanboys don't like and I absolutely hate Nvidia practices such as the closed libraries, refusal to take returns during the gtx970 debacle, etc which may make me look like a fanboy.

I actually did buy a gtx970 last year (returned after memory debacle thanks to OCUK) which any fanboy wouldn't even consider.

Gregster · 22 Aug 2015 at 12:20

fs123 said:
I actually did buy a gtx970 last year (returned after memory debacle thanks to OCUK) which any fanboy wouldn't even consider.

So that makes me not a fanboy then in your book :cool:

fs123 · 22 Aug 2015 at 12:25

Gregster said:
So that makes me not a fanboy then in your book

Maybe you are not a hardcore fanboy like mmj_uk, Lambchop, but I still think you are more towards Nvidia, especially with the one side jokes.

Martini1991 · 22 Aug 2015 at 12:26

fs123 said:
I see AMD as the underdog at the moment. Also have you seen me go into Nvidia threads to troll which is what all the Nvidia fanboys do regularly?

I will point out stuff which Nvidia fanboys don't like and I absolutely hate Nvidia practices such as the closed libraries, refusal to take returns during the gtx970 debacle, etc which may make me look like a fanboy.

I actually did buy a gtx970 last year (returned after memory debacle thanks to OCUK) which any fanboy wouldn't even consider.

I see you do a lot of trolling.
A lot of talking about a subject you know nothing about go give praise to AMD etc.

I have an AMD 290X, it doesn't make me think any lesser of AMD as a company. But I don't think anything of Nvidia either.

Funnily enough you consider MMJ a hardcore fanboy, he's done something I wouldn't even entertain ; Purchase an own an FX83.

TheRealDeal · 22 Aug 2015 at 12:32

Martini1991 said:
Funnily enough you consider MMJ a hardcore fanboy, he's done something I wouldn't even entertain ; Purchase an own an FX83.

Then it's no wonder he hates AMD

DarrenM343 · 22 Aug 2015 at 12:32

I wouldn't mind having fun with the names Greenland, Baffin and Ellesmere but fear I'll be told off

.
Anyway here's hoping for some healthy competition moving forward between the two companies and more good options for the consumer.

fs123 · 22 Aug 2015 at 12:35

Martini1991 said:
I see you do a lot of trolling.
A lot of talking about a subject you know nothing about go give praise to AMD etc.

I have an AMD 290X, it doesn't make me think any lesser of AMD as a company. But I don't think anything of Nvidia either.

Funnily enough you consider MMJ a hardcore fanboy, he's done something I wouldn't even entertain ; Purchase an own an FX83.

Don't start that again mate. If you 'think' you know so much about what Freesync in the other thread, then explain rather than accuse others of knowing nothing.

Last time I checked an FX83xx is not a gpu and is a perfectly fine 8 core processor if you don't want to pay i7 level prices. A better choice at the i5 level price range.
Nvidia don't compete AMD in that side of things.

Edit: also I thought said you weren't going to reply to my posts.

Gregster · 22 Aug 2015 at 12:36

DarrenM343 said:
I wouldn't mind having fun with the names Greenland, Baffin and Ellesmere but fear I'll be told off .
Anyway here's hoping for some healthy competition moving forward between the two companies and more good options for the consumer.

Yer, I think we need to get back on topic and enough about fanboys accusing others of being fanboys, so well done Darren.

Personally I hope AMD release with the AIO cooler again, as I feel it is a real plus on the FX. HDMI 2.0 would also be nice, as I intend on getting a 4K TV sometime soonish. An 8000+ core would be a real beast but not sure if that will be ready for the tick and probably end up on the tock.

Either way, I am really looking forward to Greenland. too much unknown about the others but time will reveal.

Martini1991 · 22 Aug 2015 at 12:38

fs123 said:
Don't start that again mate. If you 'think' you know so much about what Freesync in the other thread, then explain rather than accuse others of knowing nothing.

Edit: also I thought said you weren't going to reply to my posts.

How can one argue with this.

And I don't pretend to know more than I do. It's very clear that adaptive sync isn't freesync, they're each an ingredient. Adaptive sync is what allows freesync to work, it's that simple.

Stanners · 22 Aug 2015 at 12:43

Martini1991 said:
How can one argue with this.

And I don't pretend to know more than I do. It's very clear that adaptive sync isn't freesync, they're each an ingredient. Adaptive sync is what allows freesync to work, it's that simple.

Don't waste your time I gave up with his sigh comment pages ago.

fs123 · 22 Aug 2015 at 12:47

Martini1991 said:
How can one argue with this.

And I don't pretend to know more than I do. It's very clear that adaptive sync isn't freesync, they're each an ingredient. Adaptive sync is what allows freesync to work, it's that simple.

I keep trying to make the point..Freesync is just the branding name for AMD's implementation of Adaptive sync.
At the end of the day a Freesync monitor is essentially an Adaptive sync monitor (due to VESA standard) so Intel will be able to use it with their software/hardware without paying AMD. They can also use the Freesync name without licensing or royalty fees if they decide to.

Do you agree on that point?

Martini1991 · 22 Aug 2015 at 12:48

fs123 said:
At the end of the day a Freesync monitor is essentially an Adaptive sync monitor so Intel will be able to use it with their software/hardware without paying AMD. They can also use the Freesync name without licensing or royalty fees if they decide to.

Do you agree on that point?

Intel can produce their own proprietary software to use sync tech on the current adaptive sync displays (Regardless of their "freesync" branding on those monitors, because it's a fairly frugal brand name, although it changes little, that freesync is still an exclusive proprietary AMD tech, because Freesync ISN'T adaptivesync.)

Those are the actual facts.

Intel can't just decide to use the Freesync name though. They may very well create a proprietary software solution, and AMD may very well allow them to call it Freesync, but it won't be the same as AMD's (Not that it matters).

You've also got it the wrong way round. They're NOT freesync monitors. They're monitors with adaptive sync (The optional part of the VESA DP 1.2A spec), which can work with Freesync.

Gregster · 22 Aug 2015 at 12:54

fs123 said:
I keep trying to make the point..Freesync is just the branding name for AMD's implementation of Adaptive sync.
At the end of the day a Freesync monitor is essentially an Adaptive sync monitor (due to VESA standard) so Intel will be able to use it with their software/hardware without paying AMD. They can also use the Freesync name without licensing or royalty fees if they decide to.

Do you agree on that point?

Intel can't use the Freesync name unless they have permission from AMD. Freesync is AMD and G-Sync is Nvidia and Intel would probably use I-Sync or something like that.

You are confusing things.

fs123 · 22 Aug 2015 at 12:55

Gregster said:
Intel can't use the Freesync name unless they have permission from AMD. Freesync is AMD and G-Sync is Nvidia and Intel would probably use I-Sync or something like that.

You are confusing things.

They will obviously need permission from AMD but from AMD press releases I don't think AMD will charge for the privilege.

Another possibility is as you say Intel calling it Isync so monitor makers may just add a sticker with Isync capability alongside Freesync on their monitors.