AMD Polaris architecture – GCN 4.0

Orangey · 3 Jun 2016 at 13:11

If [H] was right then Polaris wasn't supposed to be this cheap and they only lowered the price because it couldn't get beyond Hawaii perf.

If he was telling the truth then Polaris did, in fact, fail. We will have to wait and see once final user benchmarks and OC potential are known.

Ferrari100 · 3 Jun 2016 at 13:11

old gamer said:
Your talking rubbish you noob, superman will duff up batman any day of the week

+1
Nothing competes with laser eyes.

Gregster · 3 Jun 2016 at 13:12

old gamer said:
Your talking rubbish you noob, superman will duff up batman any day of the week

I will see you after school behind the bike sheds

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 3 Jun 2016 at 13:13

TheRealDeal said:
Sometimes it's all about timing as well. I managed to bag my 290 for £170 after selling off the games. It should have some decent legs for awhile as i don't game much so won't waste money on high end stuff. At the price to performance that the Rx480 and possibly the 1060 come in at it's a boost that was needed in the sub £200 range.

Yep,and a good price war between the RX480 and GTX1060 will force the GTX1070 and Vega down in price.

The RX480 with even near R9 390X level pricing is not HD4870 impact but it is enough to make sure AMD and Nvidia pricing is kept honest.

RJC · 3 Jun 2016 at 13:14

Can we stop with the pathetic bickering please, otherwise suspensions will be handed out.

Ferrari100 · 3 Jun 2016 at 13:14

Orangey said:
If [H] was right then Polaris wasn't supposed to be this cheap and they only lowered the price because it couldn't get beyond Hawaii perf.

If he was telling the truth then Polaris did, in fact, fail. We will have to wait and see once final user benchmarks and OC potential are known.

IMO polaris is only a fail if it does not deliver at least or round abouts 390 level of performance

AMD have not claimed it to be anything other than ready for VR ready - which is acknowledged to be a 390 right now.

If it achieves that then how can it be a fail? It can't because nobody has been told it will be more than that.

Toss3 · 3 Jun 2016 at 13:16

Orangey said:
If [H] was right then Polaris wasn't supposed to be this cheap and they only lowered the price because it couldn't get beyond Hawaii perf.

If he was telling the truth then Polaris did, in fact, fail. We will have to wait and see once final user benchmarks and OC potential are known.

Just because it isn't what it was supposed to be doesn't make it a failure. :rolleyes:

The lower price and great price/performance is going to make a big splash, and I've seen a lot of people excited about the RX 480. So it definitely isn't a fail by any means, at least not until we have published reviews stating that it underperforms and is hot.

meldarthx · 3 Jun 2016 at 13:19

Gregster said:
Superman would have no chance for the record

But spot on. These are bought for fun and not a life or death thing.

Techically Batman has only beaten Supes 2 in there 15 matches....rest Supes won pretty handedly. I'll provide links if you want

Howling · 3 Jun 2016 at 13:19

old gamer said:
Your talking rubbish you noob, superman will duff up batman any day of the week

Martha disagrees.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 3 Jun 2016 at 13:20

Orangey said:
If [H] was right then Polaris wasn't supposed to be this cheap and they only lowered the price because it couldn't get beyond Hawaii perf.

If he was telling the truth then Polaris did, in fact, fail. We will have to wait and see once final user benchmarks and OC potential are known.

Which is a load of rubbish. He literally said on his on forum that a 232MM2 AMD chip should be similar in size to a 300MM2 Nvidia Pascal one.

Hence if it could not get close it was a fail. He got confused by the node scaling.

It is a 232MM2 die on a process known to favour power saving and density and TSMC 16NM is meant to clock better.

The chip is no different than the 200MM2 to 250MM2 die sizes AMD has used for the last few generation for its midrange chips.

Those have at most only been slightly slower or slightly faster than the AMD 350MM2 to 400MM2 chips of the previous generation.

The R9 390/R9 390X level performance level was known ages ago - I called it months ago and all the information leaked hinted at that.

All the most negative people in this thread are those who will NEVER buy a £200 card - those wanting to buy GTX1070,GTX1080,Titans,etc.

A card offering 40% to 50% over an R9 380X with a 232MM2 die instead of a 365MM2 die is now performance performance increase twisted into being a failure.

It is becoming beyond a joke now.

Mauller · 3 Jun 2016 at 13:21

Orangey said:
If [H] was right then Polaris wasn't supposed to be this cheap and they only lowered the price because it couldn't get beyond Hawaii perf.

If he was telling the truth then Polaris did, in fact, fail. We will have to wait and see once final user benchmarks and OC potential are known.

I still think we have not been shown what it is fully capable of and were just given a glimpse of its base performance and price to wet peoples appetites and to throw some water on Nvidias parade.

Orangey · 3 Jun 2016 at 13:23

Ferrari100 said:
IMO polaris is only a fail if it does not deliver at least or round abouts 390 level of performance

AMD have not claimed it to be anything other than ready for VR ready - which is acknowledged to be a 390 right now.

If it achieves that then how can it be a fail? It can't because nobody has been told it will be more than that.

Toss3 said:
Just because it isn't what it was supposed to be doesn't make it a failure. The lower price and great price/performance is going to make a big splash, and I've seen a lot of people excited about the RX 480. So it definitely isn't a fail by any means, at least not until we have published reviews stating that it underperforms and is hot.

It would be a lot less hassle to just drop the price of the 390 down to 200 again, rather than tape out a whole new chip (hundreds of mils) on an expensive new process.

james.miller · 3 Jun 2016 at 13:24

RJC said:
Can we stop with the pathetic bickering please, otherwise suspensions will be handed out.

Why have you deleted my post? There was nothing wrong with it. I'm not going t stay quiet whilst cat the fifth sits there and lies about me.

Vince · 3 Jun 2016 at 13:25

These forums get more embarrassing every release! Every time it is the same old people having the same old argument over information that we don't even have. Somewhere buried in all the **** is actual information that people may actually find useful or remotely informative but instead you have to dig through layers of rubbish to get there.

That's 82 pages of which perhaps a handful are of any use. IMO its a real shame that:

1) The mods haven't cleaned up this tripe to make it easier to actually get at relevant information.
2) Stuck to the 3 strike rule that is a sticky at the top of this forum.

meldarthx · 3 Jun 2016 at 13:27

Orangey said:
If [H] was right then Polaris wasn't supposed to be this cheap and they only lowered the price because it couldn't get beyond Hawaii perf.

If he was telling the truth then Polaris did, in fact, fail. We will have to wait and see once final user benchmarks and OC potential are known.

Please ever since H was refused a Nano - they've ran nothing but hit pieces and thrown their pieces out of their pram/stroller - Until Kyle grows up *seriously not the first time he's done this; and he ended up blackballed from Nvidia for alittle while* could have AMD handled it a little bit; I think so but at the same point - writing a predrawn conclusion - then shaping your tests to show that when everyone else shows otherwise is a good way to get blackballed....

If you call him out you get banned

Ferrari100 · 3 Jun 2016 at 13:27

Orangey said:
It would be a lot less hassle to just drop the price of the 390 down to 200 again, rather than tape out a whole new chip (hundreds of mils) on an expensive new process.

Absolutely not in this instance.

This GPU will feature in the new Playstation and Apple products where those two deals alone will require at least 30 million+ (estimate) produced GPU's.

It is quite the opposite to what you suggest.

Without semi-custom design wins you would be absolutely correct in what you say but that absolutely is not the case.

I am half expecting the RX 480 to be cut down GPU's while Apple and/or Sony take the best binned GPU's but that remains to be seen. As long as the 480 is what AMD says it will be - ready for VR - then there is no fail at all.

Gregster · 3 Jun 2016 at 13:32

Ferrari100 said:
IMO polaris is only a fail if it does not deliver at least or round abouts 390 level of performance

AMD have not claimed it to be anything other than ready for VR ready - which is acknowledged to be a 390 right now.

If it achieves that then how can it be a fail? It can't because nobody has been told it will be more than that.

Even if it is under 390 performance I wouldn't consider it a fail in truth. They might have some clever technique like NVidia with the Simultaneous multi-projection for VR which will give it a massive boost to frames. The price is good, very good infact, so if it is touching 390 performance or even just under, I would be happy with that.

Ferrari100 · 3 Jun 2016 at 13:32

Vince said:
These forums get more embarrassing every release! Every time it is the same old people having the same old argument over information that we don't even have. Somewhere buried in all the **** is actual information that people may actually find useful or remotely informative but instead you have to dig through layers of rubbish to get there.

That's 82 pages of which perhaps a handful are of any use. IMO its a real shame that:

1) The mods haven't cleaned up this tripe to make it easier to actually get at relevant information.
2) Stuck to the 3 strike rule that is a sticky at the top of this forum.

+1

I guess the mods are in between a rock and a hard place though with sanctions.
I just wish that when potential consumers,and the potential sales they may or may not bring, could read and be part of constructive conversations. It is upsetting to think that people may come here and be put off straight away by misinformation of products and/or trolling and spamming.

I don't think it is rife but it's still a shame when it happens.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 3 Jun 2016 at 13:33

Orangey said:
It would be a lot less hassle to just drop the price of the 390 down to 200 again, rather than tape out a whole new chip (hundreds of mils) on an expensive new process.

Apart from the fact people are forgetting this is the midrange chip being launched first?? AMD always would have had a chip this size in its lineup.

AMD would always have launched this chip. The problem is Vega is delayed for whatever reason.

Have you not considered that Polaris 10 has far more chance of getting into performance laptops and AIO PCs in a mobile variant than a R9 390X??

Why do you think so many prebuilt PCs have GTX970 cards instead of R9 390 series ones?? They need less power and less cooling and OEMs love products like that.

There is a lot of noise that the PS4K has the same basic chip as Polaris 10,ie,2304 shaders at 911mhz.

AMD has been destroyed by Nvidia in the mobile and OEM markets.

This is a mass market chip.

It is going to cost less than the R9 380 and R9 380X in the AMD product stack to make and EOL the even bigger Hawaii based cards.

Plus add WSA into the mix,they have saved money there.

Lokken86 · 3 Jun 2016 at 13:37

Gregster said:
Even if it is under 390 performance I wouldn't consider it a fail in truth. They might have some clever technique like NVidia with the Simultaneous multi-projection for VR which will give it a massive boost to frames. The price is good, very good infact, so if it is touching 390 performance or even just under, I would be happy with that.

Not for the customer no but it wouldn't be great for AMD. They really ought to try and push the boat out this time and bring more than the usual increases from gen to gen. At least once to restore some credibility and market. NVIDIA can get away with it easier because they have the mindshare.