• 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 VEGA confirmed for 2017 H1

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kaapstad said:
Sorry but the latest intel CPUs are garbage
Click to expand...
You're......serious, aren't you? lol

Kaapstad said:
If CPU performance increases had kept pace with GPU performance increases things would be a lot more interesting but they have not.
Click to expand...
Things would NOT be a lot more interesting. Not for gamers.

Besides, CPU's are not GPU's. Different technologies dont magically have the same exact room/potential for growth. That's not how technology development works and I'm really surprised that you especially, and on an enthusiast hardware board like this, would assume it is.
 
Panos said:
Pro Duo are 2 FURY (no X) on same PCB.
Nano is FURYX in small PCB.

And having seen the overclocks the majority has obtained with their normal FuryX, Nano overclockes at same speeds, with half the power supply provided when watercooled like the normal one.......

Which resembles the reference GTX1080 with the 6+1 phases, and the Zotac with the 16+3 phases. Both clock at around 2100.....
Click to expand...

Incorrect.

Fury has 3584 stream processors.

Fury X and Nano both have 4096 Stream Processors.

Pro Duo has 2 x GPU's each with 4096 Stream Processors both of which equate to AMD Nano GPU's.

Here's a little chart for you that shows it's 2 x Nanos on the same PCB, I thought this was common knowledge by now -

wiBKB4l.png
 
Telecaster said:
B) You're a regular gamer, in which case the enthusiast chips are a waste of money, the 6700k will be all you'll need.
Click to expand...

For single GPU use maybe, but speaking as a multi GPU user I have noticed excellent gains with my 5930k over my 4790k. 40 lanes v 28 lanes gives 10% increased performance in titles that fully support SLI, and the increased minimum fps is something that you really need to see for yourself rather than go by benchmarks.

I wouldn't even consider a CPU that couldn't provide x16/x16 bandwidth for SLI, and right now I believe only the enthusiast chips can provide this. Which is why they are called "enthusiast" chips. ;)
 
Seanspeed said:
You're......serious, aren't you? lol


Things would NOT be a lot more interesting. Not for gamers.

Besides, CPU's are not GPU's. Different technologies dont magically have the same exact room/potential for growth. That's not how technology development works and I'm really surprised that you especially, and on an enthusiast hardware board like this, would assume it is.
Click to expand...

I am serious and I know exactly what I am talking about.

The bottom line is the 6950X is a £1500 CPU yet it still takes 5 min between turns on the new Master of Orion game. Total garbage.

If the 6950X had the processing power of a GPU it would take a fraction of the time.

6950X approx. 3.2 billion transistors

GP100 approx. 15.3 billion transistors

No contest

It is about time the intel monopoly was ended not to mention Wintel as well.
 
String said:
For single GPU use maybe, but speaking as a multi GPU user I have noticed excellent gains with my 5930k over my 4790k. 40 lanes v 28 lanes gives 10% increased performance in titles that fully support SLI, and the increased minimum fps is something that you really need to see for yourself rather than go by benchmarks.

I wouldn't even consider a CPU that couldn't provide x16/x16 bandwidth for SLI, and right now I believe only the enthusiast chips can provide this. Which is why they are called "enthusiast" chips. ;)
Click to expand...

Hence why I put "regular" gamer, you're not a regular gamer, SLI/XFire users are very much the minority.

This is the problem, people who are at the extreme ends of the spectrum expecting things to be developed for them on a mass market scale and price. It's not going to happen.

Intel will design and make CPUs based on what they think the majority of the market need and what will sell, not what someone with 64 GPUs on an internet forum thinks or needs.
 
Kaapstad said:
I don't care about TDP but it is also nice to have a PC that can do other things apart from gaming.

You do realize that there are games that not even a 6950X is anywhere quick enough to run.

Civ 5 is getting on a bit now but some of my games on huge maps just won't load on my 6950X system as the CPU/RAM is not up to the job.

The new reworked Master of Orion is another game that makes my 6950X grind to a halt.

Sorry but the latest intel CPUs are garbage and have not kept pace with the times.

If CPU performance increases had kept pace with GPU performance increases things would be a lot more interesting but they have not. Also remember the core of a GPU has many times more transistors than an intel CPU.
Click to expand...

Kaapstad I do not have the Master of Orion game so can`t comment on that one but Civ 5 yes and the problem with civ5 is the antiquated coding that is still being used and most likely still will be in Civ 6
 
I'd have thought it would take nothing short of jumping forward two CPU & GPU generations for anyone to pay much attention to what is happening with AMD. Time after time they set themselves up to get owned by their competition. I'm not an expert in marketing strategy but I would say AMD's sucks.
 
Telecaster said:
Hence why I put "regular" gamer, you're not a regular gamer, SLI/XFire users are very much the minority.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, I interpreted regular gamer to mean someone who games regularly.

Telecaster said:
Intel will design and make CPUs based on what they think the majority of the market need and what will sell, not what someone with 64 GPUs on an internet forum thinks or needs.
Click to expand...

I don't see why you need to belittle an enthusiast with the exaggeration and sarcasm, after all who do you expect to
to be speaking to in the GPU sub forum of a major component distribution retailer?

Actually, Intel do care what the enthusiast thinks... That's why they manufacturer the enthusiast chips.
 
Telecaster said:
Hence why I put "regular" gamer, you're not a regular gamer, SLI/XFire users are very much the minority.

This is the problem, people who are at the extreme ends of the spectrum expecting things to be developed for them on a mass market scale and price. It's not going to happen.

Intel will design and make CPUs based on what they think the majority of the market need and what will sell, not what someone with 64 GPUs on an internet forum thinks or needs.
Click to expand...

Lets get it right

intel who have a near monopoly will do the bare minimum to get people to upgrade. This means new CPU families will have nothing more than 10% better performance than the previous generation.

All this would change if intel had some very serious competition forcing them to give at least 50% improvement per new generation.

Look back to WW2 and all the tech improvements that came along when there was serious competition. WW2 even gave birth to the first computers.

Thankyou Tommy Flowers

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Flowers
 
The 2011 CPU's aren't anymore enthusiast than the desktop counterparts, they're built for creative professionals. If Intel really gave that much of a toss about enthusiasts they would start binning CPU at the manufacturing stage and sell these at a premium.

Saying that, nitpicking is always irritating. Not worth arguing about.
 
Bluntwrapped said:
The 2011 CPU's aren't anymore enthusiast than the desktop counterparts, they're built for creative professionals. If Intel really gave that much of a toss about enthusiasts they would start binning CPU at the manufacturing stage and sell these at a premium.

Saying that, nitpicking is always irritating. Not worth arguing about.
Click to expand...

Devils canyon 5ghz on air springs to mind. :p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom