New leaked photo of Vega 10! It's called the RX 590 X, and is a quad GPU. Looks like the scalability of Navi has been pushed forward.
Specs like that would make a few AMD fans hard.
-
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.
Radeon RX 480 "Polaris" Launched at $199
- Thread starter Kaapstad
- Start date
Specs like that would make a few AMD fans hard.
I think they needed to get some proper software out to the public so they can test things on a wider scale and also get a sense of where to put their priorities. It is still lacking plenty of things that many of us expect from games nowadays, and it will probably take a while for it to grow into a really appealing prospect. If it ever does, obviously, no guarantee of it or anything.
I dunno its like there is no one left at MS any more with real experience or broadness of vision. Some of the stuff with Windows 10 while a good idea on paper the implementation even a 5 year old could see is a bad decision never mind someone with ostensibly years of software development experience.
Very strange thing to say considering the intent behind UWP and the unification of their console and PC gaming efforts. I dont know how successful it'll be in the end, but this is what I've been hoping MS would do for a while now and I'm quite excited to see what comes of it.
Games for Windows Live 2.
Because if you do something badly once, you are forever doomed to do it badly in the future?
Soldato
A 2560 shader part@ 1400mhz would still only be 7.1Tflops. Still not even close to a FuryX.
When you do it for all the wrong reasons, yes.
Associate
Soldato
Bring on the annihilation of the current low and mid-range market 
This should be a quote for the graphics card section!
Like many things MS are working on at the moment - the intent behind it is one thing (and often great ideas) but the implementation, the actual execution of the idea, is badly flawed and suffer from what I'm not sure is either exceeded narrow mindedness or lack of direction and just throwing something together and seeing what works/doesn't work except if the latter was the case I'd have hoped they'd be more proactive about making changes/going back on things that plainly doesn't work rather than as things are where they seem to be really reluctant to go back on their work.
I mean the whole thing with the wifi/facebook thing - great idea in principle but only an idiot couldn't see that the implementation and default options they went with were ridiculous wrong. Same with things like the changes to how metered connections work in Windows 10 - its like whoever worked on it has no idea how things work in the realworld where things are messy and connections don't nicely conform to one standard and/or some people actually have real, limited, metered connections to deal with - again only an idiot couldn't see the potential problems. Or even the changes to onedrive in 10 - it was going in a good direction with 8 and now you have to wonder what on earth the person(s) involved in the implementation in 10 were thinking (well apparently not thinking).
Last edited:
Soldato
It would run far closer to its theoretical performance though, so it would be far closer to the fury x than you expect. If not matching or exceeding it.
Consider the preliminary info on the rx480 showing it having greater than 390x performance but lower theoretical performance.
Associate
why I keep thinking and pointing out - 480 will most likely start with 390X/980 performance and end up with driver improvements about nano speed..I'm thinking fury x speed is a little high hehe
Soldato
We are talking about hypothetical 480x speeds.
Going back to the reply I got. Iv been wondering is it possible to achieve the same gaming performance with less tflops on the same vendor?
Depends on how well the architecture can utilise its on paper compute figures - it looks like Polaris will be able to perform closer to its on paper capabilities than previous.
Soldato
In the original quote he was talking about a theoretical 480X with 40CU's at 1.4ghz. which is what the Fury-x part is in reference to.
the 480 bit underneath is just me explaining the increased per shader performance giving the part better performance than the 390x, even though its theoretical performance is lower than the 390x.
hence a larger part with higher clocks and more shaders should match the fury x or exceed it, even if its theoretical performance is lower.
Soldato
I would say so with architectural design improvements and refinement. I don't see why they wouldn't be able to really. FLOPS isn't everything though it is a factor so improving other things could still improve overall speed of a card.
Associate