• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

AMD Polaris architecture – GCN 4.0

Is it just me or has everything from this thread between the 1st April to the 7th just mysteriously disappeared? I don't seem to recall any significant info discussion, perhaps it was removed due to folks arguing about something? Oh well. The funny thing is that folks here are arguing about which month Polaris will release this year, where over at Nvidia, we don't even know if Pascal will release at all in 2016 XD

Man, I can't wait for June to come around then, Computex at the start and then E3 with AMD in the middle. I bet we'll get at least something new about Polaris, perhaps even solid release dates. Especially if one considers last year with R9 300 series.
 
If it was not using an AMD driver then of course its performance would be subpar, you get the same results of subpar performance on any gpu when using the default windows driver since it is made to run a basic set of display functions till you can install the dedicated driver.
 
Polaris performance will be just fine. What worries me is time to market, aka where the **** is it.

All swearing to be fully starred out.
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Also,the OS is different in both cases - one is Windows and the other is OS X.

They say it might not be fully enabled - would that mean the full chip might have 1280 shaders like the one in the PS4 and the R9 270X??
Click to expand...


Why on earth have they done that, it is not as if it is hard to find a NVidia 950 on compubench desktop

https://compubench.com/result.jsp?benchmark=compu15d


As for performance, A: it isn't proper drivers and B: it is Polaris 11, so that is the little one, so not really up against the 950 anyway.

It just goes to show the marketing behind the power usage demo.
 
bru said:
As for performance, A: it isn't proper drivers and B: it is Polaris 11, so that is the little one, so not really up against the 950 anyway.

It just goes to show the marketing behind the power usage demo.
Click to expand...

If Polaris 11 xt is a fully revised Pitcairn, then it will beat the 950 anyway. The 7870 still ties and beats the 950 in new games.
 
bru said:
Why on earth have they done that, it is not as if it is hard to find a NVidia 950 on compubench desktop

https://compubench.com/result.jsp?benchmark=compu15d


As for performance, A: it isn't proper drivers and B: it is Polaris 11, so that is the little one, so not really up against the 950 anyway.

It just goes to show the marketing behind the power usage demo.
Click to expand...

The R9 270X uses a 212mm2 Pitcairn GPU with a 256 bit memory controller and is similar in speed to the GTX950 in a mix of older and newer games:

http://tpucdn.com/reviews/Gigabyte/GTX_980_Ti_XtremeGaming/images/perfrel_1920_1080.png

http://tpucdn.com/reviews/Gigabyte/GTX_980_Ti_XtremeGaming/images/perfrel_1920_1080.pn

[B][COLOR="SandyBrown"]**No Hotlnking **[/COLOR][/B]

Polaris 11 is meant to be 100mm2 to 120mm2 and has a 128 bit memory controller but has colour compression,better tessellation and will have enhanced compute.

Even if AMD directly just shrunk Pitcairn down it would be like 100mm2 on 14nm and have similar performance to a GTX950.
 
Surely there's no way this is the ghost of Pitcairn risen once again. Surely. Why are you all mentioning Pitcairn anyway?

These Polaris GPUs are all-new, built from the ground up, no? Everything AMD said was about new this, new that. And they spoke of an all-new lineup after the 300 series had far too many re-brands (refreshes!).

Polaris 11 can't be Pitcairn (again).
 
FoxEye said:
Surely there's no way this is the ghost of Pitcairn risen once again. Surely. Why are you all mentioning Pitcairn anyway?

These Polaris GPUs are all-new, built from the ground up, no? Everything AMD said was about new this, new that. And they spoke of an all-new lineup after the 300 series had far too many re-brands (refreshes!).

Polaris 11 can't be Pitcairn (again).
Click to expand...

No idea but its nothing like Pitcairn.
 
FoxEye said:
Surely there's no way this is the ghost of Pitcairn risen once again. Surely. Why are you all mentioning Pitcairn anyway?

These Polaris GPUs are all-new, built from the ground up, no? Everything AMD said was about new this, new that. And they spoke of an all-new lineup after the 300 series had far too many re-brands (refreshes!).

Polaris 11 can't be Pitcairn (again).
Click to expand...

The injoke is that it will be 'Son of Pitcairn' since it has the same number of shaders. Although it will still exceed Pitcairn in performance by a good margin no doubt. If anything it might match or exceed stock Tahiti in performance, considering a 1.2ghz clock on Pitcairn let it match Tahiti.

These Baffin parts may clock all the way near 2ghz. Meaning that without any architectural improvements we could see double the performance of pitcairn.
 
That compubench link actually tells us a lot more than we realise.


Polaris 11, the info tab

CL_DEVICE_MAX_CLOCK_FREQUENCY 1000MHz
CL_DEVICE_MAX_COMPUTE_UNITS 16
CL_DEVICE_NAME Goose :p

Just three that stood out to me.

For comparison

Here is a 270x just for those who keep banging on about Pitcarn

Pitcarn just for comparison


Of course all this info might be rubbish and it might not even bee Polaris 11
 
From the looks of things, the current info is pointing ever closer to GCN 4 versions of Pitcairn, hawaii and fiji. Being Baffin/P11, Ellesmere/P10 and Greenland/V10 respectively. With their die sizes being ~120mm^2, ~232mm^2 and ~300-350mm^2 respectively.

although the last is my own estimate based on a slightly larger fiji die on 28nm. As a 4096 shader hawaii would be around 630-50mm^2 with full 1/2 DP, just making a rough estimate based on die area per shader.

Although it will more than likely change around the Ratio of Shaders, TMU's and ROP's again per CU.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom