Last edited:
-
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.
M295X Benchmarked
- Thread starter Final8y
- Start date
M295X, its a mobile chip
Those are some decent scores though, beating dual equivalent 7870s with decent fps at 1440p
Yes, its actually the 2048 Shader Tonga GPU that never materialised for the Desktop, now we know why.
Its been binned as the latest Mobile GPU, its does indeed beat CF 7870's (D300's) and a GTX 780M, sometimes it kills them once even doubling performance.
Impressive.
Last edited:
Yup, here it is http://videocardz.com/50737/amd-radeon-r9-m295x-tonga-gpu-32-compute-units
The 285 is the salvage part (insufficient bins) from that ^^^ by the looks of it.
Last edited:
Well it is a full fat (as far as we know) tonga based part, of course this one is tuned to work in the mobile environment, so not necessarily representative of a full fat tonga desktop part. But in essence yes.
It might be worth explaining this a little.
I think 'at this point' first and foremost Tonga may have always been intended as a Mobile part, with those not making the bin grade for that ending up as discrete Desktop cards in cut down form.
The R9 M295X runs at 800Mhz, that will be its optimum speed for low volts resulting in low power, its probably only pulling about 80 Watts with 0.8v or 0.9v, it would have to be or it would overheat a laptop or an iMac (essentially the same thing)
Ones that are not stable at those volts, higher leakage parts, don't make the grade.
Instead of writing them off they are used as parts where low power consumption is not important, they will get higher clocks and a lot more volts to make them stable.
That can have a significant effect on power consumption, while an M295X destined to be a mobile part might only pull 80 Watts, one salvaged and destined for the descrete Desktop market or OEM's might pull 160 Watts.
Its running outside its optimal range, the silicon is not very efficient to start with, its running a lot more volts.
This is not actually all that different to taking a CPU you bought here, which runs at X Mhz with X volts, you overclock it and add a handful of volts, its no longer running in its optimal range and the power consumption rockets up.
Casing point.
FX-8350 4Ghz: 125 Watt TDP
FX-9590 4.7Ghz (+17%) : 220 Watt TDP (+80%)
Its the same with the GTX 780M vs the GTX 770.
I think 'at this point' first and foremost Tonga may have always been intended as a Mobile part, with those not making the bin grade for that ending up as discrete Desktop cards in cut down form.
The R9 M295X runs at 800Mhz, that will be its optimum speed for low volts resulting in low power, its probably only pulling about 80 Watts with 0.8v or 0.9v, it would have to be or it would overheat a laptop or an iMac (essentially the same thing)
Ones that are not stable at those volts, higher leakage parts, don't make the grade.
Instead of writing them off they are used as parts where low power consumption is not important, they will get higher clocks and a lot more volts to make them stable.
That can have a significant effect on power consumption, while an M295X destined to be a mobile part might only pull 80 Watts, one salvaged and destined for the descrete Desktop market or OEM's might pull 160 Watts.
Its running outside its optimal range, the silicon is not very efficient to start with, its running a lot more volts.
This is not actually all that different to taking a CPU you bought here, which runs at X Mhz with X volts, you overclock it and add a handful of volts, its no longer running in its optimal range and the power consumption rockets up.
Casing point.
FX-8350 4Ghz: 125 Watt TDP
FX-9590 4.7Ghz (+17%) : 220 Watt TDP (+80%)
Its the same with the GTX 780M vs the GTX 770.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 31,192
This chip reaches 103c looping Heaven in the new iMac 
(source: MacRumour forums)
(source: MacRumour forums)
Yes, its actually the 2048 Shader Tonga GPU that never materialised for the Desktop, now we know why.
Its been binned as the latest Mobile GPU, its does indeed beat CF 7870's (D300's) and a GTX 780M, sometimes it kills them once even doubling performance.
Impressive.
Let's not get too carried away, let's compare the tonga against maxwell 970m 980m.
Certainly a possibility and making a good deal of sense, although not a certainty by any means.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 9,221
- Location
- Knowhere
How does it compare to the current mobile 900 chips?
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2012
- Posts
- 1,737
The GTX780M is essentially the same GPU as a desktop GTX 680 but underclocked. My 780M easily reaches desktop 680 clocks with temps below 75C. I doubt the M295X would clock that well and stay cool.
I think thats a fair comparison to make, yes.
I think the 980 will be good, but it also depends on how well the Retail Desktop parts are already binned as to how much more efficient they will be.
I AMD have done quite well here, the GPU it replaced (8970M) is a Pitcairn XT (full fat 7870) running at about 800Mhz, again pulling about 80 Watts vs 160 Watts for the Desktop variant.
for the same sort of power range AMD have more than doubled performance, the M295X basically an 80 Watt 7970, thats pretty impressive.
Now, Maxwell is also impressive, i think it is fair to ask which is better, i also think the 980m may have it, but i don't think its a given certency, i think they maybe closer than it would appear at the moment.
Last edited:
I think thats a fair comparison to make, yes.
I think the 980 will be good, but it also depends on how well the Retail Desktop parts are already binned as to how much more efficient they will be.
I AMD have done quite well here, the GPU it replaced (8970M) is a Pitcairn XT (full fat 7870) running at about 800Mhz, again pulling about 80 Watts vs 160 Watts for the Desktop variant.
for the same sort of power range AMD have more than doubled performance, the M295X basically an 80 Watt 7970, thats pretty impressive.
Now, Maxwell is also impressive, i think it is fair to ask which is better, i also think the 980m may have it, but i don't think its a given certency, i think they maybe closer than it would appear at the moment.
I agree with most of your points, tonga was to replace pitcairn in workstation and mobile.
My 7950 can run at 925 mhz at 0.93v and instead of 1.18v. However 970m only uses 1280 cores (a 7870) and the 980m uses 1536 (6970 7890). Tonga is 1792 and 2048.
The scaling of mobile maxwell brings performance very close to the desktop maxwells.
However the 970m uses a 192 bus, and mobile maxwell uses slower memory.
Another factor is the choice of laptop processor may change between reviewers and hold back performamce.
Ideally the mobile cards need to be tested on an interface card into a desktop system.
Tonga may have more memory bandwidth and throughput, however maxwell may be more efficient as an all round product. Which is why i'm saying hold your horses until a proper comparison is made.
Depending on factors from what i've seen the stock 980m provides around 30-40% gain over a 880m, which puts in parity with a gtx770. From viewing videos i've seen bad frame drops and frametimes.
The reason could be cpu or gpu related so it's still unknown.
Heres thE video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGSajLEWkuI
Last edited:
Yeah looking at those Frame Rates the 980M looks to be about 15% faster than the 680 and 10% slower than the 780. that is impressive, but so is the M295X.
Remember, the 780M is not far behind the 680, the M295X beats that comfortably, i think they may be pretty close.
Last edited: