• 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

Oh noes! A Fury/Fury X might do well in some games against a GTX980TI - lets burn it with fire due to threatened E-PEEN. One of those games the crap Fury and R9 390x (not Fury X) are doing reasonably well in is The Division which is Nvidia sponsored.

I bet the same lot due to purchase justification will be berating the new AMD and Nvidia cards as being meh if they deliver GTX980TI competitive performance at £300 as being meh! my GTX980TI can be overclocked 35.98899% so the new generation is fail,blah! blah!

I like how some of you are strangely quiet when the fastest sub £200 Nvidia cards are now being beaten by the much berated R9 285/R9 380 and the R9 380X consistently. But! But! GTX980TI! But! But! Gameworks valued added advantage!!

An old rebranded AMD GPU from from 2013 should also in no way have held off the GTX780,GTX780TI,GTX970 and GTX980,let alone come close to a GTX980TI or a Fury X in anyway. Its getting onto two and a half years old now.

The last time I remembered a highish end GPU having that level of longevity was the 8800GTX,and before that the 9700PRO.

No amount of bickering will change that.
 
Last edited:
Jono8 said:
What!? I know! That was my whole point!:confused:

You rather misleadingly claimed it was starting to catch up to the 980ti in some cases just because of hitman's dx12 bench. I then made a point of cherry picking a few benchmarks where i could just as easily claim that the 970 is catching up with the Fury cards.
Click to expand...

You know why the GTX 970 can get close to the Fury-X in some things, or at least you should.
Its down to AMD's DX11 overheads, the only time the 970 can catchup with the Fury-X is when it is not able to run at more than 60% being strangled by the CPU overhead.

That is a very very different thing from a measure of what the GPU can actually do, this is what i'm talking about.

The 980TI suffers from a lack of A-Sync ability vs the the Fury-X. this is where its peak performance cannot match the Fury-X, even the 390X has better A-Sync capability which is why its catching the 980TI.

When i say the 390X is catching the 980TI in some things i'm talking about what the hardware can do.
When you talk about the 970 catching the Fury-X you're talking about the software limits in being able to feed that hardware.
I'm talking about the hardware its self. The two are entirely different.

@ CAT-THE-FIFTH, exactly..... as soon as someone mentions the 3+ year old Hawaii's potential the GTX 980TI for E-PEEN crowed lose their heads.
The fact is that ancient CGN 1.1 / 1.2 architecture is better suited for modern API's than Maxwell.

Software has never been AMD's strong point, we all know that, but i would argue they consistently make better hardware, they just can't get the software right for that hardware, at least not in good time.... it usually takes them a year or until game development catches up to bring the Hardware more to its potential.

IMO where nvidia can't influence development these old GCN 1.x GPU's will have far better performance and tech longevity than Maxwell.

Its the Constant "Nvidia can do no wrong, Nvidia are GPU gods" and fear of criticism.... that their users end up with GPU's that become all but obsolete 8 minutes after launch.
 
Last edited:
The first benchmark from one of the new generation chips, as long as they actually show us the numbers that is.
The new stuff is getting closer.
 
Nice little video and nice looking headset, not really sure they should have plugged the 'being first' aspect quite so much though.

http://www.visusvr.com/

http://www.auravisor.com/

This probably another IPhone moment, where they take different ideas from what has come before and mold it into a nice single unit. But having said that it doesn't make the IPhone the first smartphone, just a rather nice idea.
 
More info on the Sulon.

According to the announcement, that "wear and play" untethered design makes the Sulon Q quite different from competition like the Oculus Rift or SteamVR-powered HTC Vive, which both need a relatively high-end PC to actually generate the images on the headset. With the Sulon Q, the Windows 10 PC hardware is built into the unit, including an expected four-core AMD FX-8800P processor with a Radeon R7 graphics card.

Add in a built-in 256GB SSD, 8GB of RAM, and a 2560×1440 OLED display with a 110° field of view, and it's a bit like wearing a lower-end (but still apparently VR-capable) PC on your head.
Click to expand...

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/03/amd-powered-sulon-q-is-like-wearing-a-vr-capable-windows-pc-on-your-head/

It is actually sounding quite good. Lets just hope they don't decide to charge the earth for it.
 
bru said:
Nice little video and nice looking headset, not really sure they should have plugged the 'being first' aspect quite so much though.

http://www.visusvr.com/

http://www.auravisor.com/

This probably another IPhone moment, where they take different ideas from what has come before and mold it into a nice single unit. But having said that it doesn't make the IPhone the first smartphone, just a rather nice idea.
Click to expand...

I think they added it, because this is not a wireless headset but a standalone unit, with an SSD+CPU+GPU
 
bru said:
More info on the Sulon.



http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/03/amd-powered-sulon-q-is-like-wearing-a-vr-capable-windows-pc-on-your-head/

It is actually sounding quite good. Lets just hope they don't decide to charge the earth for it.
Click to expand...

if moving around i think its the only way to go
moving around with wires attached is a bit nuts

i dont think it will be cheap to begin with nope, thats not my concern tho, its battery life! batteries havent moved on much that ive seen, how long will the battery last???
with AMD releasing 14nm cpu's aswell as gpu's this year that should help a lot on battery life but right now...a few hours at best!? and then charge for how long? guess we have to wait and see but thats my only concern

maybe a battery in your pocket wouldnt be so bad
 
FoxEye said:
Surely they won't release more 4GB mid/high cards.
Click to expand...
High-end, no. But 4GB is still fine for the mid-range, which is what Polaris is intended to cover. The high-end part won't come until HBM2 is available in quantity.

I'm thinking the best Polaris card will be around 970/290/390 performance but with dramatically lower power consumption. Something that has more in common, in terms of size and power use, with the R9 Nano than any of the Hawaiii cards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom