AMD Radeon RX 480 Leak

[marldorthegreat]

1 minute ago, DXMember said:

i know that but I don't want to believe that Vega's gonna have HBM1

They have said hbm2 several times 

[Energycore]

1 minute ago, ivan134 said:

 

Polaris and Vega are gcn 4. It's the same damn architecture. Tonga and Fiji have different names but they're both gcn 3.

To quote someone before, they're different macroarchitectures based on the same microarchitecture.

 

Possibly the only difference besides size on Vega chips is the different memory controllers.

[marldorthegreat]

1 minute ago, Dackzy said:

I am sorry, but yes HBM 1 and there is no performance benefit for a consumer to get HBM 2

More memory, the fury x is held back by 4gb's of ram. 

[DXMember]

1 minute ago, marldorthegreat said:

They have said hbm2 several times 

but tell that to @Dackzy

[Dackzy]

3 minutes ago, marldorthegreat said:

More memory, the fury x is held back by 4gb's of ram. 

you can have more than 4gb of ram with HBM 1

[Prysin]

1 minute ago, DXMember said:

how? what? why? no!

https://youtu.be/4qJj1ViyyPY?t=378

 

 

[Prysin]

4 minutes ago, marldorthegreat said:

More memory, the fury x is held back by 4gb's of ram. 

HBM1 can support 8GB of VRAM.

HBM2 can support 32GB of VRAM.

 

the Fury X is held back by a lack of ROPs more then its VRAM. For fucks sake, it has the same amount of ROPs as the 390X.... Despite nearly twice the shader count, it STILL cannot push that much more pixels. Just apply effects to images faster.

[marldorthegreat]

1 minute ago, Prysin said:

HBM1 can support 8GB of VRAM.

HBM2 can support 32GB of VRAM.

 

the Fury X is held back by a lack of ROPs more then its VRAM. For fucks sake, it has the same amount of ROPs as the 390X.... Despite nearly twice the shader count, it STILL cannot push that much more pixels. Just apply effects to images faster.

Then why didnt the fury x have 8gbs of ram 

[Dackzy]

1 minute ago, marldorthegreat said:

Then why didnt the fury x have 8gbs of ram 

Because that would not help anything, they needed to have more ROP.

[Prysin]

4 minutes ago, marldorthegreat said:

Then why didnt the fury x have 8gbs of ram 

most likely yields. HBM yields werent great (read: bad) for the first two three months of the FuryX launch.

If it was hard to get good yields with 4GB, imagine 8GB.... remember, they pioneered a new memory tech. There will take some time before the process is able to mature.

 

Its not like we saw 32GB of GDDR5 running 6GHz right after GDDR5 came out either. The technology needed time to get chip density, frequency binning and yields in check.

[marldorthegreat]

5 minutes ago, Dackzy said:

Because that would not help anything, they needed to have more ROP.

Most high end games at 4k, what the card was targeted at, uses up all 4gb's. 

[Dackzy]

3 minutes ago, marldorthegreat said:

Most high end games at 4k, what the card was targeted at, uses up all 4gb's. 

Yeah, but then they will run in to a problem with the ROPs and as Prysin said it would be insanely hard to get 8GB of HBM. When new tech comes to marked it will take some time, before it is good and cheaper and easier to make.

[Prysin]

1 minute ago, marldorthegreat said:

Most high end games at 4k, what the card was targeted at, uses up all 4gb's. 

no. The benchmarks showed, and proved that the Fury X didnt hit VRAM limit before 5k.

 

The memory compression and massive bus (data can reside in the bus and in VRAM, giving you more "effective" VRAM) makes it so that only a few games can hit that 4GB limit at 4K. With the massive shader array, most of the VRAM heavy stuff like shaders and AA, is dealt with so fast it doesnt need to stay in VRAM for long.

[Energycore]

Just now, Prysin said:

no. The benchmarks showed, and proved that the Fury X didnt hit VRAM limit before 5k.

 

The memory compression and massive bus (data can reside in the bus and in VRAM, giving you more "effective" VRAM) makes it so that only a few games can hit that 4GB limit at 4K. With the massive shader array, most of the VRAM heavy stuff like shaders and AA, is dealt with so fast it doesnt need to stay in VRAM for long.

HBM does have pretty wide buses.

[Shahnewaz]

13 minutes ago, ONOTech said:

According to this article, the RX 480 is priced at $199 and delivers performance similar to $500 graphics cards (assuming the 980 & Fury).

http://www.wsj.com/articles/amd-prices-3-d-cards-to-spur-virtual-reality-market-1464725394

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Advanced Micro Devices Inc. is angling to lower the cost of virtual reality, targeting the field with a new line of graphics hardware priced at $199—half or less the cost of comparable products.

AMD said the first chips based on its new Polaris design are expected to arrive in graphics cards for personal computers at the end of June. The company aims to help push the starting cost of PCs that can deliver VR experiences as low as $799 from above $1,000.
Consumers also face the cost of the latest generation of VR headsets—$599 for the Oculus Rift from Facebook Inc. ’s Oculus VR unit, for example, or $799 for HTC Corp. ’s Vive.
ADVERTISEMENT
But the need for a PC with an add-in card that includes a beefy 3-D graphics chip is another barrier that stands in the way of widespread adoption of VR. An online survey conducted in April by the Advanced Imaging Society found that 68% of respondents said VR equipment was too expensive.
“Less than 1% of PC users have systems that are capable of doing VR,” said Raja Koduri, senior vice president and chief architect of AMD’s Radeon technologies group. “The entry point is very, very high.”
AMD said its new Radeon RX cards, certified for use in VR by HTC and Oculus VR, deliver performance equivalent to that of $500 graphics cards used for VR.
Patrick Moorhead, an analyst with Moor Insights & Strategy briefed on AMD’s strategy, estimated that the current minimum price on cards comparable to AMD’s new models is $399. He said the $199 pricing comes as a surprise.
“It’s great for getting more people into VR,” said Kelt Reeves, president of Falcon Northwest Computer Systems Inc., a boutique maker of gaming PCs that serves the market.
AMD competes with Nvidia Corp. in the chips known as graphics processing units, or GPUs. Mercury Research estimates that Nvidia had 70.6% of shipments in the first quarter of 2016 to 29.4% for AMD, though the latter’s share is up three percentage points from the fourth quarter.
Standard practice in the GPU business has been to start new product lines with high-end cards that command hefty prices and profit margins. Mr. Koduri said AMD hoped that breaking from tradition by starting with a lower-cost model could have a bigger impact. For one thing, he said, computer retailers prefer to stock machines for less than $999.
Nvidia on May 7 introduced a new flagship model called the GTX 1080 at a $599 price tag that is expected to succeed a $1,000 model called the Titan X. Nvidia also introduced a $379 model called the GTX 1070, which is likely to be seen as competition to the new AMD model.
“It’s up to Nvidia to come up with a lower-priced card,” Mr. Moorhead said.
An Nvidia spokesman had no immediate comment.
AMD, based in Sunnyvale, Calif., plans to formally announce the new chips early Wednesday at the Computex trade show in Taiwan.

And I quote:

Whoa...

Keep the news coming.

[Revinval]

4 hours ago, Valentyn said:

That's a not a bad price for GTX 980 performance at all. Makes you wonder what the 480X, 490 and 490X will do on Polaris then. Never mind Vega 10 and Vega 11

From my understanding of the rumor mill the X90(X) and Fury will be Vega 10 and 11 respectively. 

[Dackzy]

4 minutes ago, Shahnewaz said:

Whoa...

Keep the news coming.

in about 4-5 hours they will start the conference

[Shahnewaz]

2 minutes ago, Dackzy said:

in about 4-5 hours they will start the conference

[Dackzy]

1 minute ago, Shahnewaz said:

Yeah if you don't live in a part of the world were it starts like 4-5 in the morning.

[Energycore]

1 minute ago, Shahnewaz said:

 

 

3 minutes ago, Dackzy said:

 

I made a countdown!

 

AMD's Thingy

[Dackzy]

1 minute ago, Energycore said:

 

I made a countdown!

 

AMD's Thingy

Good for you. I will be sleeping when it starts and maybe wake up 3-4 hours after it started.

[Shahnewaz]

2 minutes ago, Dackzy said:

Yeah if you don't live in a part of the world were it starts like 4-5 in the morning.

That's fine. I'm not watching the entire thing, probably not even live. I just want to be updated.

Even if it started at 4AM in my time, that is fine by me. I can wait.

It's not like the news is going to disappear after the event, and you can watch the whole thing later too.

[Dackzy]

2 minutes ago, Shahnewaz said:

That's fine. I'm not watching the entire thing, probably not even live. I just want to be updated.

Even if it started at 4AM in my time, that is fine by me. I can wait.

It's not like the news is going to disappear after the event, and you can watch the whole thing later too.

I will just read all the more important things, when i get up.

[Thiback]

3 hours ago, lots of unexplainable lag said:

So the performance of a $400 GPU (980) for $250-$300 with a single 6-pin and fully capable of VR. Or does the RX mean that it's the 480X? 

 

I'm happy with that. Makes me even more exited for the -X variant and the 490(X) GPUs. Not to mention the behemoths that are Vega 10 and 11 (the latter of which is apparently having over 6000 stream processors).

Where did you get that 6000 stream processors info from ? I can get find it anywhere. 

With the "mainstream" segment of litterally tomorrow rivaling the "enthusiast" segment of today, I am as excited by the next few GPUs releases as If I were about to experience a mad roller coaster dive and looping.

[Shahnewaz]

7 minutes ago, Dackzy said:

I will just read all the more important things, when i get up.

See? Nothing to fret. It's actually better if you wait, people can summarize the event for you.