AMD, with Polaris, is gambling big on VR

[Bouzoo]

7 hours ago, zMeul said:

here's something else: AMD marketed the R9 380 as a 1440p card

don't believe me? 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Except for AAA games you can run basically everything at 1440p, so majority is fine, so technically they haven't lied. When I was buying my card few years ago even many AAA games ran great at that res on my card, and this one is supposed to be better. I'm not def them, AMD has had their share of false marketing, but I'm open to all good news. Well if they don't deliver I'm going NV this year. 

[Tomsen]

12 hours ago, zMeul said:

again with the misquoting ...

 

for AMD to make a step in mainstream VR they need a cheap product

a cheap product cannot be at the same perf level of a R9 290X or GTX 970; not even if they die shrink existing designs

a new process node doesn't deliver a good number of usable chips / wafer - the fab needs to finetune the manufacturing process and that doesn't happen overnight

 

I believe Polaris 10 will be around the performance level of a R9 380X - and with the appropriate tweaks it could drive a VR headset

the PS4 APU has a much much lower performing incorporated GPU and can drive SONY's VR

 

----

 

here's what VideoCardz.com said: http://videocardz.com/59445/amd-polaris-aiming-at-vr-capable-graphics-cards

he has the exact performance evaluation as me

Why can't a cheap product have the same performance level of r9 290x or GTX 970?

Yields is a factor of many things. Do you know the yields of a potential 232mm chip versus a 350mm chip vs a +600mm chip?

 

I believe you will be wrong. I could easily see polaris 10 exceed the r9 380x in performance.

We have yet to see sonys implementation of VR, have we?

 

The author of the videocardz article doesn't seems to agree with you. He doesn't make any point regarding the performance as you do.

 

In generel, why would you aim at todays minimum requirements for VR for a product of the future?

Hope you can see why that doesn't make sense.

[Sakkura]

12 hours ago, Bouzoo said:

Yeah, I wrote that after looking at them, and I stand behind that they are pure bs in my opinion. Anyhow, I remembered how R9 270 series was renamed R7 370, so "performance" tier dropped 1 lane into mainstream on their own roadmap, if they did the same this year, or at least they might think of 480 as mainstream now, with new cards like Fury and Vega (or however that one will be called). Who knows.

The R9 270 is not the same as the R7 370. The 370 is a rebadged R7 265.

 

However, their entire lineup was shifted one position because the top (single-GPU) card wasn't the 390X, but the Fury X. So if you want to compare with the 200 series on a lineup level, the Fury X replaced the 290X, the 390X replaced the 280X, the 380X replaced the 270(X), and so on.

[Sakkura]

2 hours ago, Tomsen said:

Why can't a cheap product have the same performance level of r9 290x or GTX 970?

Yields is a factor of many things. Do you know the yields of a potential 232mm chip versus a 350mm chip vs a +600mm chip?

 

I believe you will be wrong. I could easily see polaris 10 exceed the r9 380x in performance.

We have yet to see sonys implementation of VR, have we?

 

The author of the videocardz article doesn't seems to agree with you. He doesn't make any point regarding the performance as you do.

 

In generel, why would you aim at todays minimum requirements for VR for a product of the future?

Hope you can see why that doesn't make sense.

Heck, Polaris 10 will probably outperform the R9 290X and GTX 970. It's a double die shrink with a new architecture, and Polaris 10 is the medium-sized GPU of its generation. So it's the Tahiti of 14nm. The Tahiti-based Radeon HD 7970 obviously crushed the GTX 560 and Radeon HD 6870, and that was only a regular die shrink.

 

I expect the same from Nvidia's (presumed) GP104. We're not getting 16/14nm mega-GPUs yet, but that doesn't mean performance won't be good.

[alamox]

high end polaris on mobile have the potential of being a killer GPU for VR, at around 50-100watt and  290 level of performance, low price...

you can have a cheap laptop, with a decent battery life, straped to a backpack with extra battery, this would work wonders on the Vive, you would be able to walk out into your garden and set your 5x5meter roomscale, i see from here a 1500-2000€ bundle, with backpack+laptop+Vive

and it's something easy to do, ppl are already trying laptop backpacks, but the only issue so far is the GPU perf/tdp, if polaris helps diminishing the draw backs and make it fairly usable, you will see every demo made in shows or streamers youtubers... using backpack laptops, and everyone would want to get one, even ppl with 980Ti desktop.

so this is just at the top of my head for VR potential for AMD, so i can't tell you ppl paid to R&D how to cash on it, they probably have stuff we didnt think of yet.

[Carclis]

9 hours ago, Daegun said:

I have a question. A double node shrink, and a new architecture, and you're saying they won't be able to do what they are already doing. Why?

 

And I think you mean 290/390 because that's the card on par with the 970 and competing with it on price.

It took three pages for someone to mention this. Does anybody remember that Hitman demo on Polaris running at a solid 60fps at 1440p? Thats the kind of performance you get from a 980/fury which is about to become a mainstream card. I'm not sure why people still think performance will remain the same on Polaris.

[Bouzoo]

I know, I meant renamed as successor, i.e. dropped 1 tier. And that's exactly what I meant. If they follow that trend, 380 will be the next mainstream, ans I see no reason for it not to br VR capable. Not at 980Ti lvl, but above 980 if we're really really really lucky. 

4 hours ago, Sakkura said:

The R9 270 is not the same as the R7 370. The 370 is a rebadged R7 265.

 

However, their entire lineup was shifted one position because the top (single-GPU) card wasn't the 390X, but the Fury X. So if you want to compare with the 200 series on a lineup level, the Fury X replaced the 290X, the 390X replaced the 280X, the 380X replaced the 270(X), and so on.

 

[Mihle]

Funny how zMeul in earlier treads did say Polaris would be like 260/270/360/370, but now he have changed his mind to say 380X.

 

zMeul getting little bit less biased towards Nvidia over time

 

 

[Notional]

3 hours ago, Mihle Gaming said:

Funny how zMeul in earlier treads did say Polaris would be like 260/270/360/370, but now he have changed his mind to say 380X.

 

zMeul getting little bit less biased towards Nvidia over time

 

 

I found a video of @zMeul