Jump to content

AMD silently nerfing the performance of older GCN cards

Repost
By Repost
in Tech News
 Share
Posted
16 minutes ago, RagnarokDel said:

Congratulations, you agree with me? Guess what 5% of 16 is.

 

21 hours ago, RagnarokDel said:

except in this case it would be 16 fps vs 16.2 fps maybe 16.8 in best case scenario.

You said 16.2 and 16.8

 

So between 1% and 5%. This is EXACTLY the same as between 5% and 7%. Come on guy... 

 

The Async Compute implementation in Ashes is very light, Async Compute can provide up to 10% with a better implementation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
33 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Generations are defined by the manufacturers and developers of the technology, not the users.

Otherwise, Kaby Lake wouldn't be regarded as a generation (It's literally Skylake with a higher clock and onboard TB3 controller). Haswell-E wouldn't be part of the 5th generation lineup, nor Broadwell-E as the 6th either.

 

Also, they're not almost identical. There is enough variance in the generations that each generation requires driver optimization.

Haswell-E is using the fourth gen architecture on the fourth gen node. Kaby Lake is using the 6th gen architecture on the 6th gen node. Intel can all them whatever the fuck it wants, but Haswell-E is still 4th gen and Kaby-Lake is just a refreshed 6th gen. 

 

There is very literal work required to make a 390 driver benefit a 290. 

PSU Tier List | CoC

Gaming Build | FreeNAS Server

Spoiler

i5-4690k || Seidon 240m || GTX780 ACX || MSI Z97s SLI Plus || 8GB 2400mhz || 250GB 840 Evo || 1TB WD Blue || H440 (Black/Blue) || Windows 10 Pro || Dell P2414H & BenQ XL2411Z || Ducky Shine Mini || Logitech G502 Proteus Core

Spoiler

FreeNAS 9.3 - Stable || Xeon E3 1230v2 || Supermicro X9SCM-F || 32GB Crucial ECC DDR3 || 3x4TB WD Red (JBOD) || SYBA SI-PEX40064 sata controller || Corsair CX500m || NZXT Source 210.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
1 hour ago, M.Yurizaki said:

https://techaltar.com/amd-rx-480-gpu-review/2/

 

This to me suggests the RX 480 isn't 1/32 FP32 FP64 performance, considering it handily beats a Titan XM.

Titan XM is 1/32 FP64, with a FP32 performance of 6.14TFLOPS

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9059/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review

 

Polaris 10, aka RX 480 is 1/? FP64, with a FP32 performance of 5.83TFLOPS

Hawaii XT, aka R9 290X is 1/8th FP64 in consumer cards, and 1/4th in Firepro variants. FP32 performance is 5.73TFLOPS

Fiji XT, aka Fury X is 1/32 FP64, with a FP32 performance of 8.6TFLOPS

 

i cannot find reliable FP64 vs FP32 tests for polaris.

 

I also cannot find any good FP64 tests for Bristol Ridge APUs.... i COULD test my old Kaveri APU, but Kaveri is based on a Hawaii hybrid, whilst Bristol Ridge is Tonga?

Tonga is 1/16th FP64, that much is confirmed.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9801/amd-launches-radeon-r9-380x

Current setup

Images of setup: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/183-show-off-your-setup/?p=5872590

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
1 minute ago, Prysin said:

Titan XM is 1/32 FP64, with a FP32 performance of 6.14TFLOPS

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9059/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review

 

Polaris 10, aka RX 480 is 1/? FP64, with a FP32 performance of 5.83TFLOPS

Hawaii XT, aka R9 290X is 1/8th FP64 in consumer cards, and 1/4th in Firepro variants. FP32 performance is 5.73TFLOPS

Fiji XT, aka Fury X is 1/32 FP64, with a FP32 performance of 8.6TFLOPS

 

i cannot find reliable FP64 vs FP32 tests for polaris.

 

I also cannot find any good FP64 tests for Bristol Ridge APUs.... i COULD test my old Kaveri APU, but Kaveri is based on a Hawaii hybrid, whilst Bristol Ridge is Tonga?

Tonga is 1/16th FP64, that much is confirmed.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9801/amd-launches-radeon-r9-380x

According to Anandtech, Fury X is 1/16 FP32 http://www.anandtech.com/show/9390/the-amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-review

I have a blog! And a list of guides I've posted

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
On 12/7/2016 at 9:15 AM, TheRandomness said:

Well, it's true on some level, because I can flash a 390 BIOS to my 290 and it'd still be perfectly fine.

 Your 290 has 8gb of vram?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
2 minutes ago, TheRandomness said:

No, it has 4GB but it works with the 390 BIOS. Same chip, just refined a little and renamed.

I've seen the sapphire 290x 8gb successfully flashed to 390x, but I've never heard of the 4gb cards using the 3xx bios.  Do you have a source?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
6 minutes ago, ace_cheaply said:

I've seen the sapphire 290x 8gb successfully flashed to 390x, but I've never heard of the 4gb cards using the 3xx bios.  Do you have a source?

I'll give you a source once I've finished modding my 290. May take a day though.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1564219/modded-r9-390x-bios-for-r9-290-290x-updated-02-16-2016#post_24153393

Quote

But in reality most models share the same crucial components, what's why mixed BIOSes usually do work. This also differs greatly between GPU models. For example, Tahiti-based cards like HD7970 / R280X are much more diverse than Hawaii-based R9290's. With Tahiti you can probably brick or even burn the card by flashing it with alien BIOS due to many different VRMs used. For R9 290 VRM design is usually the same, so most BIOSes are working. Even R9 390X BIOS works in R9 290, despite supporting totally different memory type and size.

 

USEFUL LINKS:

PSU Tier List | F@H stats

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

I have 7770 Ghz edition with 1 GB GDDR5 (i guess it's rebranded to R7 250 these days or something like that) and async compute wouldn't do anything in games, the card is just too old already.

 

I don't care that they disabled async support for those older cards including mine (because it was pointless, minimal if any benefits), I suppose it's easier to design the drivers starting from a minimal set of options supported by all cards, and those GCN 1 cards maybe don't have such features.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
48 minutes ago, TheRandomness said:

I'll give you a source once I've finished modding my 290. May take a day though.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1564219/modded-r9-390x-bios-for-r9-290-290x-updated-02-16-2016#post_24153393

 

Awesome, thanks!   I remember claiming something similar and at that time there was no way to flash the different memory sizes,  so It couldn't be done then, which is why it stuck with me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
4 hours ago, ace_cheaply said:

I've seen the sapphire 290x 8gb successfully flashed to 390x, but I've never heard of the 4gb cards using the 3xx bios.  Do you have a source?

You just need to edit a single address to change the BIOS from 8GB to 4GB.

| Intel i7-3770@4.2Ghz | Asus Z77-V | Zotac 980 Ti Amp! Omega | DDR3 1800mhz 4GB x4 | 300GB Intel DC S3500 SSD | 512GB Plextor M5 Pro | 2x 1TB WD Blue HDD |
 | Enermax NAXN82+ 650W 80Plus Bronze | Fiio E07K | Grado SR80i | Cooler Master XB HAF EVO | Logitech G27 | Logitech G600 | CM Storm Quickfire TK | DualShock 4 |

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
1 minute ago, xAcid9 said:

You just need to edit a single address to change the BIOS from 8GB to 4GB.

yup. its the same method used to flash 290X Reference over to FirePro W9100. Altghough a bit more VBIOS editing as you have to edit away the lack of ECC VRAM and such

Current setup

Images of setup: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/183-show-off-your-setup/?p=5872590

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
5 minutes ago, Prysin said:

yup. its the same method used to flash 290X Reference over to FirePro W9100. Altghough a bit more VBIOS editing as you have to edit away the lack of ECC VRAM and such

Or just fuck with some SMCs ;)

USEFUL LINKS:

PSU Tier List | F@H stats

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

I spent all night installing every drivers between 16.3.1 and 16.9.2. The break point is the driver 16.4.2(released in April). After this driver no more Async Compute on GCN 1.0. So Nixxes was aware that Async Compute was not active on GCN 1.0. They released Async Compute patch for Rise Of The Tomb Raider in July, specifying that only GCN 1.1 and superior can take advantage of Async Compute.

I received a good amount of results all around the world that users did for me and their results just confirmed my findings. Thank you all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Even if the difference was minimal, I do not agree with turning it off. Maybe that's because I have one of those cards but yea...

|  The United Empire of Earth Wants You | The Stormborn (ongoing build; 90% done)  |  Skyrim Mods Recommendations  |  LTT Blue Forum Theme! | Learning Russian! Blog |
|"They got a war on drugs so the police can bother me.” ― Tupac Shakur  | "Half of writing history is hiding the truth" — Captain Malcolm Reynolds | "Museums are racist." — Michelle Obama | "Slap a word like "racist" or "nazi" on it and you'll have an army at your back." — MSM Logic | "A new command I give you: love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another" — Jesus Christ | "I love the Union and the Constitution, but I would rather leave the Union with the Constitution than remain in the Union without it." — Jefferson Davis |

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
58 minutes ago, RagnarokDel said:

still dont get the drama. GCN 1 doesnt have hardware support for async compute...

Yes it does, always has it's a fundamental part of the design of GCN even before async compute was in graphics APIs. Check the very post above yours with a screenshot taken from an official AMD slide presented from memory during the Polaris launch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

I swear i saw someone posted a slight decrease when disabling AsyncCompute in Timespy benchmark with 280x many months ago.

2 hours ago, RagnarokDel said:

still dont get the drama. GCN 1 doesnt have hardware support for async compute...

2 ACE with 8 queues per engine. IIRC.

| Intel i7-3770@4.2Ghz | Asus Z77-V | Zotac 980 Ti Amp! Omega | DDR3 1800mhz 4GB x4 | 300GB Intel DC S3500 SSD | 512GB Plextor M5 Pro | 2x 1TB WD Blue HDD |
 | Enermax NAXN82+ 650W 80Plus Bronze | Fiio E07K | Grado SR80i | Cooler Master XB HAF EVO | Logitech G27 | Logitech G600 | CM Storm Quickfire TK | DualShock 4 |

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
6 hours ago, Kwee said:
 
AMD presentation June 2016, Async Compute retired in GCN 1.0 in April.

amazing how it retired in April when its says "Updates over time"

 

Also, i love the response you get from AMD Employees

Quote
Re: Are you gonna re enable As Compute in gcn 1.0 cards or do we have to sue amd, i didnt buy 1000$ gpu (7990) just to have it gimped
ray_m
ray_m Employee Dec 8, 2016 1:17 PM (in response to kingfish)

I think the point Kingfish is making is that the HD7xxx series products were NEVER sold with the async compute feature. This a technology and feature which we enabled only within the last year or so.

 

 

In essence Kwee. this seems to be just you running around trying to cause a storm in a glass of water.

Current setup

Images of setup: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/183-show-off-your-setup/?p=5872590

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
12 hours ago, Prysin said:

amazing how it retired in April when its says "Updates over time"

 

Also, i love the response you get from AMD Employees

 

 

In essence Kwee. this seems to be just you running around trying to cause a storm in a glass of water.

I see what you mean but GCN 1.0(aka GCN 1) received Async Compute after release date, like GCN 1.1(aka GCN 2). If the next day AMD took of Async Compute on GCN 1.1(aka GCN 2), would you be happy ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing Tech News

×