Thoughts on AMD

[TheConverter]

Its what they choose to implement for VSR for a max res nothing you can really do about it besides use CRU

 

Ayy lmaao so a GTX 950 can do 8K DSR but a 295X2 can do 3200x1800 maximum... okayyy AMD

[othertomperson]

But Gamesworks as also cause laziness on the devs side. 

But you have a point, besides the 290x is 3+ years old now and was ment to keep up with the 780ti, not even the 780 keeps up with the 970. The cards are just old.

 

Does it "cause" laziness? If Nvidia have a bunch of libraries that devs can use, and the devs know full well that these work better for one brand than the other, then as far as I can tell the controversy lies with the dev for taking that route.

 

The 290X never did keep up with the 780 Ti though (the 970 just about does if you overclock it). It was somewhere between the 780 and the 780 Ti. Its raw performance, though, was monstrous and, all things equal, should have absolutely dominated the Titan Black, but it didn't.

 

I will be interested to see if Directx 12 has much of an impact on these AMD cards. The thread with the graphs on it have shown it able to keep up with a 980 Ti with the new API. I swear if this was what it was capable of all along and that the only thing keeping it back were shit drivers and a lack of firmware/bios engineering...

[Raudi_]

Ayy lmaao so a GTX 950 can do 8K DSR but a 295X2 can do 3200x1800 maximum... okayyy AMD

Also max VSR can do is 3820x2400 at 1080p, 1440p is 3200x1800 max. 

 

Does it "cause" laziness? If Nvidia have a bunch of libraries that devs can use, and the devs know full well that these work better for one brand than the other, then as far as I can tell the controversy lies with the dev for taking that route.

 

The 290X never did keep up with the 780 Ti though (the 970 just about does if you overclock it). It was somewhere between the 780 and the 780 Ti. Its raw performance, though, was monstrous and, all things equal, should have absolutely dominated the Titan Black, but it didn't.

Well look how GTA V turned out it has Gameworks and AMD features and it runs pretty well on both AMD and Nvidia GPU's, its not like AMD isn't willing to work with a dev to work on getting stuff implemented. 

I like my 290x I had the 780 only actually used it for a week or so was really dissapointed with the drivers from Nvidia now. They used to be real good till the Greenlight Program was implemented, which really locked shit down for vendors.

[looncraz]

It's important to note though that AMD turning themselves around is wishful thinking. Let's be serious, even Intel isn't doing particularly well at the moment.

 

We're speculating here but must think "What if" so "what if" Zen was shit? What then? You can't just turn around to me and say "but Zen is going to be good because AMD says so" I mean it's a load of horse and don't we all know it. AMD is in a bubble of self-delusion if it thinks that Zen will compete with what Intel has by the time that they release it. I remember reading an article in 2013 saying it was going to be 10-15%5 better than Ivy Bridge (according to AMD at the time) and then in 2014 saying it's going to be much better than Haswell. Now people are saying it's going to be better than Skylake? It's barely going to be APU fodder by the time they've finished it. They fucked up. They underinvested in research, they must pay the price.

 

The only thing I've heard from AMD is that Zen will have 40% higher IPC than Excavator, and that Zen is grouped in 4-core groups for layout purposes (only sharing the L3, officially).

 

Excavator's IPC is very slightly better than Yorkfield's (Core 2 Quad 9xxx).  Haswell has, according to Intel, 39.39% higher IPC than Yorkfield.

 

So, if AMD delivered, exactly, 40% IPC improvement, they will have Haswell IPC.  That will be 12% slower than Skylake's IPC.

 

AMD will have to compete with clock speed, core count, platform, and price.  We know some of their apparent plans in regards to core counts and the platform - and they're very good plans (8-cores will still be on AM4, and they have teamed up with AsMedia to deliver a mature out-of-the-box experience from day one using time-tested designs that are often superior to Intel's designs).

 

Of course, AMD won't want to mix up the marketplace pricing too much.  Intel has kept their prices at a good level, which is the only thing that is allowing AMD to possibly come back from the brink.  Assuming AMD can match Haswell IPC, clockrates, but also SMT performance, I expect pricing to be as follows:

 

Zen 4C/8T @ 3.0Ghz: $179.99

Zen 4C/8T @ 3.5Ghz: $219.99

Zen 4C/8T @ 3.8~4.0Ghz: $259.99~279.99

 

Zen 6C/12T @ 3.0GHz - $299.99

Zen 6C/12T @ 3.3GHz - $359.99

Zen 6C/12T @ 3.6GHz - $399.99

 

Zen 8C/16T @ 2.8GHz - $499.99

Zen 8C/16T @ 3.1GHz - $649.99

Zen 8C/16T @ 3.4GHz - $829.99

 

If they can't match the same SMT performance, then pricing will be reduced.  I'm also assuming AMD will have yield issues with the 8C, as well as clockrate issues, that are worse than Intel's.  If they can scale Zen to higher clocks with 8 cores in this scenario, we can expect them to charge more for every step up.  They would be foolish not do so, as Intel would just push 6 and 8-core Kaby Lake CPUs into the mainstream and erode the margins.  AMD has a vested interest in keeping margins high.  I also didn't take into account Skylakes pricing.  If Skylake is the same price as current comparable CPUs when Zen is released, then this whole structure is simply cheaper by about $20 at the lower end and mabe $50 at the higher end.

 

If Intel has Kaby Lake out, then AMD CPUs will be cheaper still - and that much less competitive.

[TheConverter]

Also max VSR can do is 3820x2400 at 1080p, 1440p is 3200x1800 max. 

 

My previous gpu, the TRI-X R9 290 could only do 3200x1800 max which was stupid because you can conncect a 4K display without any problems to a R9 290...

 

And yes, DSR/VSR is AWESOME. Games and especially older games look awesome in 4K on a 1080P display and in 5K on my 1440P display now.

[Sauron]

Ayy lmaao so a GTX 950 can do 8K DSR but a 295X2 can do 3200x1800 maximum... okayyy AMD

 

To be fair there are pretty easy workarounds. Besides I'd rather just straight up have a 4k monitor like I do ^^

[TheConverter]

To be fair there are pretty easy workarounds. Besides I'd rather just straight up have a 4k monitor like I do ^^

 

Nope, when I had the R9 290 I've tried injecting resolution with .DLL didn't work either. If a game resolution is 3840x2160 it just plain crashes. Now I can play (old) games in 8K 60FPS without anyproblems

 

I have the Acer Predator XB280HK and the Acer XB270HU near each other, and the HK is literately shit with worst TN colours i've ever seen and 60hz refresh rate

The difference between 1440P and 2160P is minimal, i can't understand how people give up 144hz for that...

[looncraz]

I still have no idea how mobile R9 290X were even able to run safely inside a laptop considering how hot they get.

 

Mobile GPUs are usually half or less of their Desktop counter-parts.  A mobile 290X has half the cores, reduced clock speed, half the memory bus width, and half the power consumption as a result.

 

R9 M290X scores 5,294 in Firestrike.  An R9 290X scores 10,438.

[looncraz]

How is it people keep saying AMD wil lose the x86 license making them useless, forgetting entirely that intel will also lose their x86-64 license making them also useless...

Whatever company buys them will simply make a deal with intel for the licenses, they'll both have no choice but to do that.

 

If AMD goes bankrupt there will still be lawyers and AMD will be relegated to collecting royalties and licensing fees for existing IP until their debts are paid.  Intel will still be able to use  AMD64.

[Dabombinable]

Yeah, but it doesn't mean that Arctic Islands will be refreshes. Just because they've done it a time or two doesn't mean that's what they'll always do. I bet that AMD will not have a single refresh in their 400 series.

As in 1, maybe 2 new GPU, with the rest all being rebadges. And AMD kind of did it with the 'second' last generation as well.

[Photonic]

I would really hate Samsung buying AMD as they would overprice the CPU's

[Sauron]

The difference between 1440P and 2160P is minimal

 

I really wouldn't say that at all, but to each their own I suppose ^^ to me the difference is glaring. Besides 144hz 1440p is considerably harder to drive than 4k 60hz is.

[Dabombinable]

We are ignorant of what they will do.  AMD also talks a lot.

I'm doing what's called a prediction. I got proven right with the 300 series so....yeah I'm sticking with it.

[Dabombinable]

I really wouldn't say that at all, but to each their own I suppose ^^ to me the difference is glaring. Besides 144hz 1440p is considerably harder to drive than 4k 60hz is.

@TheConverter hasn't fully converted himself from playing games on a console. He doesn't realise how much of a difference there is on laptops with 1440p screens compared to those with 2160p screens.

[Dabombinable]

I feel like AMD is being bipolar and it is losing them money.  Rebrands, new stuff, and cheating to compete by making duals and counting them as single cards.

Its worked to a point for them. And loads of people are forgetting that they should be surprised that AMD has lasted so long. They did start manufacturing their CPU based off licensed Intel designs in the 80's after all.

[Dabombinable]

That's true.  I'm probably like the only guy here going,  "But, we need AMD otherwise the other 2 are gunna jack prices!"

And that is the sad part. Via, Cyrix, Texas Instruments and a wide range of x86 CPU manufacturers are no longer in business. Though if I remember correctly, Via does still have a CPU that leads in the performance/watt department-though its performance is low due to a very strict power target.

[TheConverter]

@TheConverter hasn't fully converted himself from playing games on a console. He doesn't realise how much of a difference there is on laptops with 1440p screens compared to those with 2160p screens.

I haven't converted? Wutt?? I never had a console (well except some old gamecube I found at a thrift market)

 

60hz is for console players.

[LemonCheek]

 

I'm still rooting for them. I like to see competition in the market.

[Dimetime35c]

So from my other post yesterday it seems like the general thinking is if Zen fails AMD will not be able to recover and will fold. If that's the thinking what do you guys think the market will look like with Intel and Nvidia having no competition? Do you think they will dominant the market or do you think some unknown company will rise to take AMDs spot? Could you see Nvidia buying out AMD to eliminate any chance of them rising from the ashes? Or could you see Intel buying them and using the GPU line to take on Nvidia? Personally if I was in charge of Intel I'd be looking to grab the GPU line from AMD and tweak it to go after Nvidia. I'd have no one able to challenge me in the CPU department, why not go for broke and try and grab the GPU market as well?

[AlwaysFSX]

AMD will be bought and the competition will continue, simple as that.

[KamiKatze]

AMD will be bought and the competition will continue, simple as that.

 

Wasn't there a rumor about Microsoft thinking about buying AMD?

[KarateHottie93]

I guess me buying them out wasn't a good enough answer for you?

[Guest]

what happens when you try folding on a AMD CPU (Kidding of course) 

They'll make a good comeback with Zen (Assuming the architecture is extremely better compared to AM3+ )

[Chugle]

-snip-

No, AMD isn't keeping the market going. Both Intel, AMD, and Nvidia are keeping the market going. 

[BuckGup]

Wasn't there a rumor about Microsoft thinking about buying AMD?

Not gonna happen