AMD Polaris architecture – GCN 4.0

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 6 May 2016 at 14:12

ltron said:
That's all well and good, but why can't they do both? I'm sure that Nvidia will have some cheaper cards that match the minimum VR spec based on Pascal too.

Look in the Pascal thread - the GP106 and GP107 specs were leaked and are supposedly penciled in for a Q3 2016 launch.

ltron said:
Who's going to get these cards then? I'm personally waiting for big Pascal/Vega as I want a big jump from my 390X in order to justify the cash.

Well,I might as I have a GTX960,and know a few mates with cards like the HD7870,etc,but will wait for a full range launch from both companies first. Would rather see the cards each has to offer first.

russ21282 · 6 May 2016 at 14:16

Gregster said:
... it would have done AMD the world of good to release a Titan X/Fury X beating GPU first.

If AMD are going for the mainstream market, it could work out better for them this way rather than starting with the bigger cards.

If they end up being 390/Fury levels, VR ready and cheap with low power consumption, it will tick the boxes for most consumers.

Replicating Nvidia's success with the 970 would be the best way to claw back some market share.

ltron · 6 May 2016 at 14:16

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Look in the Pascal thread - the GP106 and GP107 specs were leaked and are supposedly penciled in for a Q3 2016 launch.

Well,I might as I have a GTX960,and know a few mates with cards like the HD7870,etc,but will wait for a full range launch from both companies first. Would rather see the cards each has to offer first.

That sounds like a good idea, whichever you choose should be a massive upgrade from your current card. If these cards really are more affordable we just need VR to follow suit and it will be the start of a new era in gaming.

muziqaz · 6 May 2016 at 14:26

ltron said:
Who's going to get these cards then? I'm personally waiting for big Pascal/Vega as I want a big jump from my 390X in order to justify the cash.

Do you think we here are all the customers of AMD/nVidia?

There are so many people who still play on some ancient GPUs, including intel integrated ones. If they learn that there is some quite powerful GPUs which don't require a lot of other hardware upgrades they will go for it.

ltron · 6 May 2016 at 14:33

muziqaz said:
Do you think we here are all the customers of AMD/nVidia?
There are so many people who still play on some ancient GPUs, including intel integrated ones. If they learn that there is some quite powerful GPUs which don't require a lot of other hardware upgrades they will go for it.

Ha ha

. I suppose I do view these things through the prism of an enthusiast. You're right that these GPUs are a massive upgrade for the people you mentioned if they really want to get into modern PC gaming at high resolutions.

I would bet that many people on "overclockers" are like me though, the clue's in the name

.

LoadsaMoney · 6 May 2016 at 14:37

ltron said:
That's all well and good, but why can't they do both? I'm sure that Nvidia will have some cheaper cards that match the minimum VR spec based on Pascal too.

I think their 1060/70 will be the Polaris competitors.

muziqaz · 6 May 2016 at 14:47

ltron said:
Ha ha. I suppose I do view these things through the prism of an enthusiast. You're right that these GPUs are a massive upgrade for the people you mentioned if they really want to get into modern PC gaming at high resolutions.

I would bet that many people on "overclockers" are like me though, the clue's in the name.

I myself as enthusiast will be most likely disappointed with Polaris, but I am very enthusiastic about AMD prospects this time in grand scheme of things. I hope they will use their advantage(which they believe they have) and get themselves into black sooner than later

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 6 May 2016 at 14:50

Oi!! The GTX960 overclocks as well!!

David Bisset · 6 May 2016 at 14:55

ltron said:
Ha ha. I suppose I do view these things through the prism of an enthusiast. You're right that these GPUs are a massive upgrade for the people you mentioned if they really want to get into modern PC gaming at high resolutions.

I would bet that many people on "overclockers" are like me though, the clue's in the name.

pfft, only a couple of years ago I was overclocking a voltage locked 5750.
Overclocking doesn't require modern or high-end parts

indeed as CAT is suggesting above even if going modern mid-range doesn't magically exclude overclocking. (Heck, sometimes it's better - my 7850 can manage a full 50% over stock which the higher-end cards of the day mostly could not do, yes they had more up front performance but this being overclockers surely it's more about what extra perf you're getting?

likewise a 2.66Ghz i5 750 going to 4GHz is a pretty big jump, a 6600k can't touch that for overclocking headroom!)

humbug · 6 May 2016 at 15:16

Gregster said:
I distinctly recall Charlie claiming NVidia were 6 months behind AMD, so that was my point there and a bit tongue in cheek but the point still stands, regardless of dates/times and it would have done AMD the world of good to release a Titan X/Fury X beating GPU first.

You believe everything Charley says?

Gregster said:
Look pal, I don't care for this and that when it comes to fanboys but you clearly do. You seem to insist that everything is AMD V NVidia and I seriously have no patience for that type of posting, so maybe look for someone else to debate that with?

No, its obvious you care a lot.

Gregster · 6 May 2016 at 15:45

russ21282 said:
If AMD are going for the mainstream market, it could work out better for them this way rather than starting with the bigger cards.

If they end up being 390/Fury levels, VR ready and cheap with low power consumption, it will tick the boxes for most consumers.

Replicating Nvidia's success with the 970 would be the best way to claw back some market share.

Quite agree there Russ and the majority of GPUs sold are the low to mid tier GPUs and the majority of gamers are going for the 960/970 going by the Steam survey figures. This is why I would have liked to see AMD release first. The current outlook for NVidia is the 1080 and 1070 (which I assume is the 980 and 970 replacements) and AMD are going for the smaller chip, so yer, they might well be able to steal a lot of new customers but would people buy a mid to low tier chip? Unless of course I have this wrong and AMD are releasing a high end GPU soon?

james.miller · 6 May 2016 at 15:49

the money's on the 970 replacement being a runaway success assuming its priced well. Perhaps AMD no they cant quite compete in that sector at launch and and trying to be more conservative. unsure.

Dave2150 · 6 May 2016 at 16:11

james.miller said:
the money's on the 970 replacement being a runaway success assuming its priced well. Perhaps AMD no they cant quite compete in that sector at launch and and trying to be more conservative. unsure.

Most likely the case. Nvidia have the brilliant Maxwell architecture to build upon, while AMD only have the Hawaii/Fiji to build upon - so obviously AMD had a lot more work to do, to compete with nvidia.

I'm still hoping AMD will surprise us all, but my money's on Pascal outperforming it in every area, albeit it at a significantly higher price point across the board.

queamin · 6 May 2016 at 16:15

Dave2150 said:
Most likely the case. Nvidia have the brilliant Maxwell architecture to build upon, while AMD only have the Hawaii/Fiji to build upon - so obviously AMD had a lot more work to do, to compete with nvidia.

I'm still hoping AMD will surprise us all, but my money's on Pascal outperforming it in every area, albeit it at a significantly higher price point across the board.

Yeah maxwell hold out well against amd in dx12. :rolleyes:

flopper · 6 May 2016 at 16:18

queamin said:
Yeah maxwell hold out well against amd in dx12.

I detect a hint of sarcasm but your accent confuse me

maonayze · 6 May 2016 at 16:20

I actually think that tomorrows 2am Event will be an announcement of product specs and launch dates for 1070/80 and the products will be available June/July.

Nothing more, nothing less.

See you all at 2am

queamin · 6 May 2016 at 16:26

flopper said:
I detect a hint of sarcasm but your accent confuse me

If dave had said that 9 month ago then fine but since then everything below the 980ti is struggling and to say it is great yes in dx11 it is but not now, it is no where as good in dx12.

You look at 380/x to 960 and 390/x to 970/980 even fury puts up a good fight now and it will improve over time if anything to go by older generation cards.

humbug · 6 May 2016 at 16:34

Dave2150 said:
Most likely the case. Nvidia have the brilliant Maxwell architecture to build upon, while AMD only have the Hawaii/Fiji to build upon - so obviously AMD had a lot more work to do, to compete with nvidia.

I'm still hoping AMD will surprise us all, but my money's on Pascal outperforming it in every area, albeit it at a significantly higher price point across the board.

Maxwell is a bit crap for the game stuff thats coming, its an architecture for 2014, Hawaii is already an architecture for 2017.
Its Nvidia who have a lot more work to do.

JediFragger · 6 May 2016 at 16:37

LoadsaMoney said:
Don't think AMD are competing with Nvidia, as going different markets, AMDs only going for the VR market, they are just bringing out cheaper cards for its minimum spec.

Very wise, the PC VR market is *massive*

/s

Zeed · 6 May 2016 at 16:56

JediFragger YE even if you got money cant buy VR helmet you are in queue still...

And DX12 ??? Well windows 10 is so far seen as **** UP and DX12 games are a joke they run or at same speed or WORSE than on dx11...

I cant see 2016 being a DX12/windows 10 year