• 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

Unlikely as the TX packs 12gb of VRAM and will remain the best high resolution mGPU solution.

Having said that hardly anyone buys the TX, the real target for AMD is the GTX 980 Ti.

AMD need to do well with their next range of cards for everyones benefit or NVidia will turn into the intel of GPUs.:eek:

They don't need to, they are already the Apple of GPUs.
Intel: real advantage over AMD cpus
NV: No clear advantage, its just the cool thing to own and spit on AMD.
 
They don't need to, they are already the Apple of GPUs.
Intel: real advantage over AMD cpus
NV: No clear advantage, its just the cool thing to own and spit on AMD.

you got to wander... do people who buy nvidia buy apple phones and ipods? because tbh thats how i see nvidia.
 
you got to wander... do people who buy nvidia buy apple phones and ipods? because tbh thats how i see nvidia.

I have a Samsung s4 and an iphone 5s, I would choose the iphone everytime as I like it better.

I currently use NVidia as I like it better, what you have to ask yourself is why do people like yourself with an amd gpu compare NVidia to Apple like its a bad thing?
 
you got to wander... do people who buy nvidia buy apple phones and ipods? because tbh thats how i see nvidia.

cant tell an idiot that he is an idiot due to he wont understand what just happen?

Polaris seems great, a FuryX performance+ at a new power and price point, greatest card the new king of the hill upgrade from the 390.

AMD shines so brightly :cool: got to wear shades :D
 
It is going to be very interesting for both AMD and NVidia with these first 14/16nm releases, as they are both aiming at different segments of the market. AMD going for the 380/960 replacements with a smallish chip, with rumoured good power usage and very good performance and NVidia going for the 980/390 replacement with a middle size chip and at present unknown power or performance.
It is quite possible that they might actually both be very successful as they would be aiming at different segment of the market, with what has been rumoured I fully expect NVidia with the much larger chip to be much faster, but by comparison AMD with the smaller chip will be much cheaper and less power hungry. Different parts of the market all together. They wont come back into direct competition until one or the other releases the next tier up or down of card.
 
All I want is decent performance over what I got. Furyx was that card but amd sadly messed up with the pump noise etc and I didn't want to take a gamble.
The more I waited the more I came to realise I best just wait for next generation.

I'll be more than happy with something along Furyx/980ti and around 100 to 200 cheaper asking much?
 
I have a Samsung s4 and an iphone 5s, I would choose the iphone everytime as I like it better.

I currently use NVidia as I like it better, what you have to ask yourself is why do people like yourself with an amd gpu compare NVidia to Apple like its a bad thing?
I actually have a 970 lol.

From everything I read people seem to be the same about the iphone as they are about nvidia. Some of it is just because atm nvidia is better but many people seem to think or go about as if nvidia is and always has been the best and never will be surpassed.

Also it was kind of a joke but the as is the apple crowd don't enjoys jokes about their stuff either.
 
Last edited:
I'm suprised that folks don't seem to be discussing recent rumours that the Polaris 10 will be priced at $300 (almost 390 price) and will have almost 980ti levels of performance. I can see a card like the R9 490/GTX1070 performing like a 980ti, but I don't see it for a card that's meant to be 'mainstream' or a R9 480 as other rumours suggest. Thus one of these rumours must be wrong (if not all of them).

If they're all right, then AMDs R9 480 will release at almost 390 price with 980ti performance... I call BS on that. I'm sticking to my guns that Polaris 10 is likely to be the 480 at regular R9 x80 prices performing like a current 390, maybe even 390x. It makes even more sense considering the system requirements for VR, it would make VR even more accessible and we all know how much AMD supporting VR.

I've also noticed that folks are super cynical on the Pascal thread concerning Pascal performance. As if they're suggesting it won't be a significant improvement. If true, AMD could make a comeback by releasing after Pascal with their originally intended (better) price to performance. Might make Nvidia realise they need to try a bit better. Otherwise, I like the possiblity that we'll be able to choose between card like we can now at the mid-range and above. Though the under £200 range is dominated by AMD's R9 380 currently...

The following just some irrelevant nonsense about how dumb it is being a fan of companies/manufacturers, i.e. my take on the Nvidia = Apple thing:

I have a Samsung s4 and an iphone 5s, I would choose the iphone everytime as I like it better.

I currently use NVidia as I like it better, what you have to ask yourself is why do people like yourself with an amd gpu compare NVidia to Apple like its a bad thing?

Heresy! I used to use an S4 and I still have it despite moving on to a newer phone. I had very few issues with it and honestly, I feel like it's the best phone I've ever purchased. My current phone has amazing battery life for playing music though.

I really don't understand the fanboyism towards certain companies, it doesn't serve any benefit to the consumer. It can mean that one can get screwed over when a product flops.

I have a 970 currently and I had the choice of a 390, despite a lot of folks claiming that the 390 is better, I'd still choose my 970 every time. But I'm not a fan of of Nvidia or even AMD for that matter. Competition is good, which is why I'm routing for AMD to do something cool to light a fire under Nvidia and get them rolling too.

I'll choose whichever graphics card will suit my needs best and I think that many others are the same way, we don't really care who makes the card as long as it's good. Same thing with phones.

While I've never owned an iPhone, back when I was buying my S4, I considered an iPhone 5S which was on the same deal. I almost went with it too. A couple years later, instead of being a fan of Samsung and going with the S6 to upgrade, I looked around and chose the phone that suited my needs best.

Picking something just because a certain company made it isn't always the best choice. Sure we might choose a companies products because we've had good experiences in the past and they might be well known for certain things (i.e. reliable motherboards from Gigabyte and Asus), but relying on that too much ends up screwing oneself over. That and the companies that folks choose to fanboy over tend to not be perfect in their respective sectors. I don't see very many fans of Asus and Gigabyte motherboards around...

All that said... I hate Apple for their bad value for money and snail's pace improvements. Other smartphone companies are now doing the same as them... and I don't like it when companies in other industries do the same either. We had Nintendo with handheld consoles and now possibly Nvidia? I'd argue slightly against Nvidia being like Apple though, since the iterations aren't very common and they do actually produce products with significant improvements (700 series -> 900 series). Maybe one could use the bad value for money argument, but the 970 exists.
 
umm.... i had an iPhone, i'm now using Samsung and never looked back.

iPhones are perceived to be the best phones, almost like its fashionable to say they are the best and to disagree is blasphemy.

All i can say to that is this is the power of advertising and the human need to belong to something, anything greater than themselves, religion is a good example of that, iPhones are a religion, to some so is belonging to a brand of CPU / GPU's is a religion.

I'm an Atheist!
 
Last edited:
I want saying nvidia as a brand is like apple. I meant to say nvidia has many fans that are as stuck as Apple fans are with iPhones.

I do look forward to these new gpus and it will be great if amd give nvidia the boot this time maybe we will see nvidia push out what people expect they are always holding back just for times like this.
 
Bit of a weird one tbh as I don't like apple as A company but like iPhones,

And I don't like nvidia as a company but like their cards.

I like AMD as a company but don't like thier cards / whole package.

I suppose that makes me an amd fan.
 
I suppose that makes me an amd fan.

of course.
Red, hot and sexy.
anyone be a fan.
(not to say AMD followers get that joke)

We have more fun as Polaris shines brightly upon us we are truly blessed by the mighty power as there is no more efficient fusion than in a star.

We call it Polaris
 
I'm suprised that folks don't seem to be discussing recent rumours that the Polaris 10 will be priced at $300 (almost 390 price) and will have almost 980ti levels of performance. I can see a card like the R9 490/GTX1070 performing like a 980ti, but I don't see it for a card that's meant to be 'mainstream' or a R9 480 as other rumours suggest. Thus one of these rumours must be wrong (if not all of them).

If Polaris 10 ends up Fury/X/Nano performance and R9 390 prices then what happens to the Fiji lineup from AMD? Their top end enthusiast level GPUs become totally obsolete and AMD will have nothing at that price range. This scenario did happen before when HD 6870 mid range was released and gave HD 5870 performance for less money and lower power usage. A few months later HD 6970 was released but was always slower than GTX580.

AMD conceding the higher end enthusiast market caused them to drop from 50%+ Marketshare to ~17% marketshare in the space of ~4 years. They continually underestimate the power of halo marketing and if they do the same with Polaris it will be another failure in a long list of marketing/PR failures for AMD.

IMHO AMD have been consistently second best in a two horse race since HD7970 in 2012 and they show no signs of catching up if latest rumours that this years Polaris is pure low/midrange are accurate.

Anything lower than ~20%+ performance over FuryX will be a failure to pretty much everyone here IMHO. AMD Polaris will be totally ridiculed if Nvidia have a GPU ~30% faster.
 
If Polaris 10 ends up Fury/X/Nano performance and R9 390 prices then what happens to the Fiji lineup from AMD? Their top end enthusiast level GPUs become totally obsolete and AMD will have nothing at that price range. This scenario did happen before when HD 6870 mid range was released and gave HD 5870 performance for less money and lower power usage. A few months later HD 6970 was released but was always slower than GTX580.

AMD conceding the higher end enthusiast market caused them to drop from 50%+ Marketshare to ~17% marketshare in the space of ~4 years. They continually underestimate the power of halo marketing and if they do the same with Polaris it will be another failure in a long list of marketing/PR failures for AMD.

IMHO AMD have been consistently second best in a two horse race since HD7970 in 2012 and they show no signs of catching up if latest rumours that this years Polaris is pure low/midrange are accurate.

Anything lower than ~20%+ performance over FuryX will be a failure to pretty much everyone here IMHO. AMD Polaris will be totally ridiculed if Nvidia have a GPU ~30% faster.

If Polaris 10 matches Fury X, then AMD would gladly discontinue Fury X. Remember Fury X is humongous chip, plus interposer, plus HBM chips. Fury X uses around 300Ws. It would be replaced by chip half the size, more than half the power consumption and probably more VRAM (for Kaap). Polaris 10 would also come with HDR and HDMI 2.0 support which Fury X lacks.
I would say AMD would be over the moon if their Polaris 10 matched Fury X in performance ;)

Also, what is this assumption that because AMD was second best (which it wasn't) at high end, it lost all this market share??? They lost all this market share because they did not have any products for mid range and mobile market. Guess what is Polaris 11 and 10 addressing? Mid range and mobile market ;)
 
Last edited:
If Polaris 10 ends up Fury/X/Nano performance and R9 390 prices then what happens to the Fiji lineup from AMD? Their top end enthusiast level GPUs become totally obsolete and AMD will have nothing at that price range. This scenario did happen before when HD 6870 mid range was released and gave HD 5870 performance for less money and lower power usage. A few months later HD 6970 was released but was always slower than GTX580.

AMD conceding the higher end enthusiast market caused them to drop from 50%+ Marketshare to ~17% marketshare in the space of ~4 years. They continually underestimate the power of halo marketing and if they do the same with Polaris it will be another failure in a long list of marketing/PR failures for AMD.

IMHO AMD have been consistently second best in a two horse race since HD7970 in 2012 and they show no signs of catching up if latest rumours that this years Polaris is pure low/midrange are accurate.

Anything lower than ~20%+ performance over FuryX will be a failure to pretty much everyone here IMHO. AMD Polaris will be totally ridiculed if Nvidia have a GPU ~30% faster.

'Here' is a small segment of the market. AMD looked at how well the 970 sold with the wider market and are trying to match that success more than the top end 980ti segment. Also, AMD cards pretty much outperform Nvidia's apart from right at the top end now.
 
If Polaris 10 ends up Fury/X/Nano performance and R9 390 prices then what happens to the Fiji lineup from AMD? Their top end enthusiast level GPUs become totally obsolete and AMD will have nothing at that price range. This scenario did happen before when HD 6870 mid range was released and gave HD 5870 performance for less money and lower power usage. A few months later HD 6970 was released but was always slower than GTX580.

AMD conceding the higher end enthusiast market caused them to drop from 50%+ Marketshare to ~17% marketshare in the space of ~4 years. They continually underestimate the power of halo marketing and if they do the same with Polaris it will be another failure in a long list of marketing/PR failures for AMD.

IMHO AMD have been consistently second best in a two horse race since HD7970 in 2012 and they show no signs of catching up if latest rumours that this years Polaris is pure low/midrange are accurate.

Anything lower than ~20%+ performance over FuryX will be a failure to pretty much everyone here IMHO. AMD Polaris will be totally ridiculed if Nvidia have a GPU ~30% faster.

Marketshare is in the mainstream..it is counted by numbers. AMD will gain marketshare by selling 100.000 480 catds not, 2000 Fury 2 cards.
Also as it was pointed out Fury is very expensive to produce, i think they'll gladly stop its production if they can sold a cheaper chip with the same margin, but in lot bigger numbers.
 
If Polaris 10 matches Fury X, then AMD would gladly discontinue Fury X. Remember Fury X is humongous chip, plus interposer, plus HBM chips. Fury X uses around 300Ws. It would be replaced by chip half the size, more than half the power consumption and probably more VRAM (for Kaap). Polaris 10 would also come with HDR and HDMI 2.0 support which Fury X lacks.
I would say AMD would be over the moon if their Polaris 10 matched Fury X in performance ;)

Also, what is this assumption that because AMD was second best (which it wasn't) at high end, it lost all this market share??? They lost all this market share because they did not have any products for mid range and mobile market. Guess what is Polaris 11 and 10 addressing? Mid range and mobile market ;)

spinoff fury to radeon pro, because that card is expensiv and the 4Go doesnt look good right now, Nvidia will definitly have the higher performing card since they have a chip 80mm² bigger.
but i think the smart move from AMD is to go after market share, having GPUs for OEMs, notebooks, mainstream, with a very agressive price/perf , they might not have the highest performing card, but they can cash in on mainstream, and metigate enthusiast market by frequent updates on Vega, whatever enthusiast grade GPU to be released with this first line up would be the worst gpu investment, with a very short life and a very high price point, knowing higher performing GPUs with HBM2 are coming 4-6months later
 
Marketshare is in the mainstream..it is counted by numbers. AMD will gain marketshare by selling 100.000 480 catds not, 2000 Fury 2 cards.
Also as it was pointed out Fury is very expensive to produce, i think they'll gladly stop its production if they can sold a cheaper chip with the same margin, but in lot bigger numbers.

But will they sell 100K 480s if they don't have a Halo card and the marketing behind that? there is a reason the Nvidia 970 has been one of the greatest selling GPUs in history.

AMD definitely need solid products in the low and mid-end that meet good power targets, but they can't afford to ignore the high end for long.
 
If Polaris 10 ends up Fury/X/Nano performance and R9 390 prices then what happens to the Fiji lineup from AMD? Their top end enthusiast level GPUs become totally obsolete and AMD will have nothing at that price range. This scenario did happen before when HD 6870 mid range was released and gave HD 5870 performance for less money and lower power usage. A few months later HD 6970 was released but was always slower than GTX580.

AMD conceding the higher end enthusiast market caused them to drop from 50%+ Marketshare to ~17% marketshare in the space of ~4 years. They continually underestimate the power of halo marketing and if they do the same with Polaris it will be another failure in a long list of marketing/PR failures for AMD.

IMHO AMD have been consistently second best in a two horse race since HD7970 in 2012 and they show no signs of catching up if latest rumours that this years Polaris is pure low/midrange are accurate.

Anything lower than ~20%+ performance over FuryX will be a failure to pretty much everyone here IMHO. AMD Polaris will be totally ridiculed if Nvidia have a GPU ~30% faster.

Nope - AMD managed to hold onto reasonable marketshare during the HD3000 and HD4000 series days. Even during the HD5000 days,the GTX470 and GTX480 matched and exceeded the HD5870,and it was the same during the HD6000 days.

AMD/ATI focussed on value for money during the HD3000,HD4000 and HD5000 series and it payed dividends.

AMD actually has been far more competitive with top dog cards in the last 4 years when compared to the last decade.

1.)HD2000,HD3000 and HD4000 series = AMD had no competitive top end card.
2.)HD5000 and HD6000 series = only had top card since Nvidia did not show up to the fight and yet once they did had the fastest cards.
3.)HD7000 series - had the fastest card for nearly three months in the HD7970. The HD7970GE then was the fastest card(just about) for nearly six months until the Geforce Titan was released.
4.)AMD managed to get the fastest card for a few weeks with the R9 290X but then was pipped to the post by the GTX780TI. The R9 295X2 ended up beating the Titan Z and was generally considered the fastest card for quite a while.
5.)Then Nvidia started releasing Maxwell,with the GTX750TI.

In the first two instances where AMD only ONCE had the fastest graphics card in 5 years,they defended their marketshare gaining upto 50% of the market,even if they were nowhere near first to the market,ie,HD3000 and HD4000 series.

In the last 4 years,they have had the top card three to four times,but the marketshare rot started to take place. Plus they tried again with the Fury X which could actually challenge the GTX980TI and Titan X in certain situations.

On top of this the HD7000 series marked the first time AMD in many years tried to get close to Nvidia launch pricing. It did not work.

Why?? Look at AMD mobile marketshare which has been on downwards trajectory since the HD7000 days. The issues with AMD Enduro pushed more companies towards Nvidia,and when Nvidia launched the GM107,it made things worst and they got more of the desktop OEM market too.

Then Nvidia managed to play AMD at their own game and did a valued focussed part in the GTX970 which was £250.

Look now - outside the odd PC with a R9 390 or Fury series card,how many prebuilt PCs from mainstream companies,ie,not boutique PC companies,have AMD cards?? Not that many and its even worse in laptops.

People see Nvidia plastered everywhere in Dells,HPs,etc and you barely see a mention of AMD anywhere.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom