AMD silently nerfing the performance of older GCN cards

[IGJoe2192]

I am fine with that... still running 7970Ghz, they just need to hurry up and release Vega.

[Wolther]

34 minutes ago, IGJoe2192 said:

I am fine with that... still running 7970Ghz, they just need to hurry up and release Vega.

Your fine with that? 

Why? 

Even if it had no use to you, why are you fine that they took a feature away from your card that you paid money for 

[xAcid9]

55 minutes ago, IGJoe2192 said:

I am fine with that... still running 7970Ghz, they just need to hurry up and release Vega.

Can you do a favor and run Timespy with and w/o Async?

 

Sold your 480s btw?

[IGJoe2192]

17 minutes ago, xAcid9 said:

Can you do a favor and run Timespy with and w/o Async?

 

Sold your 480s btw?

Yeah, I want something from AMD in a single GPU that will drive my freesync 1440P 144hz monitor. Waiting patiently.

[IGJoe2192]

47 minutes ago, Wolther said:

Your fine with that? 

Why? 

Even if it had no use to you, why are you fine that they took a feature away from your card that you paid money for 

Is there enough of these cards on the market to matter? Am I missing out on a big performance increase? The point is, this card is 3 generations old and I don't expect AMD to support it forever. I want them to release a new powerhouse on the 14nm architecture.

[Kwee]

3 minutes ago, IGJoe2192 said:

Is there enough of these cards on the market to matter? Am I missing out on a big performance increase? The point is, this card is 3 generations old and I don't expect AMD to support it forever. I want them to release a new powerhouse on the 14nm architecture.

  AMD Radeon HD 7900 Series 1.20% -0.04%
  AMD Radeon HD 7700 Series 1.09% -0.02%
  AMD Radeon HD 8800 Series 1.08% -0.01%
  AMD Radeon HD 7800 Series 0.91% -0.01%
  AMD Radeon R7 Graphics 0.72% +0.04%
  AMD Radeon R5 Graphics 0.67% -0.02%
  AMD Radeon R9 200 Series 0.61% -0.02%
  AMD Radeon HD 8500 Series 0.60% -0.02%
  AMD Radeon R9 380 Series 0.54% -0.03%
  AMD Radeon R7 300 Series 0.53% 0.00%
  ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5000 Series 0.51% -0.02%
  ATI Radeon HD 5450 0.50% +0.01%
  AMD Radeon HD 8470D 0.49% +0.04%
  AMD Radeon R9 390 Series 0.48% -0.03%
  ATI Radeon HD 5700 Series 0.42% -0.01%

 

Statistics from Steam 

[Prysin]

5 hours ago, Kwee said:

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 ?

i could not care less. because my dual 290X is in great need of replacement already. And the games i play wouldnt know what AS/AC is. Heck, their DX9 based and runs like shit.

[Kwee]

1 hour ago, Prysin said:

i could not care less. because my dual 290X is in great need of replacement already. And the games i play wouldnt know what AS/AC is. Heck, their DX9 based and runs like shit.

Okay can i take you some time and give me the results of this tool ?  https://mega.nz/#!IJNQ0S4a!oLn5-FzqBqZ2potDqYRtY6nahF3bcvAPZQ26PUIMFvA Thank you.

[Humbug]

I see a lot of ridiculous posts on this topic by a particular section of fans. Why can't we as consumers hold a company accountable for their actions rather than making excuses. I am not saying they did it on purpose, it may be a bug or oversight. But don't make excuses. Force them to fix it.

 

- it doesn't matter if the GPU in question is 5 years old. Disabling features is never ok. Even after 15 years. This is not the same as discontinuing support.

-We all know the required hardware is on the GPUs and capable of async compute.

-we have all seen it in action when AOTS came out on GPUs like the 7970.

-it doesn't matter that the performance gain was small or large. It was still present and measurable.

-NVidia's poor track record on long term support is irrelevant. This does not excuse AMD.

-if an IHV is purposefully disabling a feature in a driver release it should be explicitly mentioned in the driver release notes. No excuses for leaving that out.

 

I await AMD's official response. Hopefully a fix in next driver.

 

[leadeater]

1 hour ago, Kwee said:

Okay can i take you some time and give me the results of this tool ?  https://mega.nz/#!IJNQ0S4a!oLn5-FzqBqZ2potDqYRtY6nahF3bcvAPZQ26PUIMFvA Thank you.

Dual AMD R9 290X - Reference

Radeon 16.10.2

 

Spoiler

Compute only:
1. 51.04ms
2. 51.03ms
3. 51.03ms
4. 51.03ms
5. 50.98ms
6. 51.01ms
7. 51.00ms
8. 51.03ms
9. 51.06ms
10. 51.03ms
11. 51.03ms
12. 51.00ms
13. 51.02ms
14. 50.97ms
15. 51.01ms
16. 51.04ms
17. 51.02ms
18. 51.02ms
19. 51.03ms
20. 51.02ms
21. 51.02ms
22. 51.02ms
23. 51.01ms
24. 50.99ms
25. 51.01ms
26. 51.02ms
27. 50.97ms
28. 51.06ms
29. 51.03ms
30. 51.03ms
31. 51.01ms
32. 51.03ms
33. 51.03ms
34. 51.04ms
35. 51.04ms
36. 51.02ms
37. 51.02ms
38. 51.05ms
39. 51.02ms
40. 51.00ms
41. 51.04ms
42. 51.02ms
43. 51.04ms
44. 50.98ms
45. 51.03ms
46. 51.01ms
47. 51.03ms
48. 51.01ms
49. 51.00ms
50. 51.04ms
51. 51.02ms
52. 51.00ms
53. 51.02ms
54. 51.01ms
55. 51.03ms
56. 50.95ms
57. 51.04ms
58. 51.04ms
59. 51.03ms
60. 51.01ms
61. 51.03ms
62. 51.02ms
63. 51.01ms
64. 51.03ms
65. 51.02ms
66. 51.03ms
67. 51.05ms
68. 50.98ms
69. 51.05ms
70. 51.03ms
71. 51.01ms
72. 51.00ms
73. 51.01ms
74. 51.02ms
75. 50.99ms
76. 50.99ms
77. 51.03ms
78. 50.99ms
79. 51.03ms
80. 51.05ms
81. 51.03ms
82. 51.02ms
83. 50.99ms
84. 51.03ms
85. 51.00ms
86. 51.02ms
87. 50.99ms
88. 51.02ms
89. 51.02ms
90. 50.99ms
91. 51.01ms
92. 51.01ms
93. 50.99ms
94. 50.97ms
95. 51.02ms
96. 51.04ms
97. 51.01ms
98. 51.02ms
99. 51.01ms
100. 51.00ms
101. 51.01ms
102. 51.01ms
103. 51.02ms
104. 50.98ms
105. 51.01ms
106. 51.01ms
107. 51.02ms
108. 50.98ms
109. 51.03ms
110. 51.03ms
111. 51.03ms
112. 51.03ms
113. 50.99ms
114. 50.97ms
115. 51.01ms
116. 51.00ms
117. 51.02ms
118. 51.04ms
119. 51.02ms
120. 51.02ms
121. 51.01ms
122. 51.06ms
123. 51.02ms
124. 51.00ms
125. 51.02ms
126. 51.00ms
127. 50.99ms
128. 51.01ms
Graphics only: 28.57ms (58.73G pixels/s)
Graphics + compute:
1. 51.49ms (32.58G pixels/s)
2. 51.23ms (32.75G pixels/s)
3. 51.55ms (32.55G pixels/s)
4. 51.32ms (32.69G pixels/s)
5. 51.27ms (32.73G pixels/s)
6. 51.70ms (32.45G pixels/s)
7. 51.44ms (32.62G pixels/s)
8. 51.74ms (32.43G pixels/s)
9. 51.54ms (32.55G pixels/s)
10. 52.21ms (32.13G pixels/s)
11. 52.30ms (32.08G pixels/s)
12. 51.59ms (32.52G pixels/s)
13. 51.61ms (32.50G pixels/s)
14. 51.72ms (32.44G pixels/s)
15. 52.58ms (31.91G pixels/s)
16. 51.68ms (32.46G pixels/s)
17. 51.76ms (32.41G pixels/s)
18. 52.48ms (31.97G pixels/s)
19. 51.84ms (32.36G pixels/s)
20. 53.80ms (31.19G pixels/s)
21. 52.42ms (32.01G pixels/s)
22. 52.43ms (32.00G pixels/s)
23. 51.94ms (32.30G pixels/s)
24. 51.97ms (32.28G pixels/s)
25. 54.00ms (31.07G pixels/s)
26. 51.70ms (32.45G pixels/s)
27. 51.94ms (32.30G pixels/s)
28. 52.13ms (32.18G pixels/s)
29. 53.78ms (31.20G pixels/s)
30. 53.33ms (31.46G pixels/s)
31. 52.03ms (32.25G pixels/s)
32. 53.09ms (31.60G pixels/s)
33. 52.09ms (32.21G pixels/s)
34. 53.34ms (31.45G pixels/s)
35. 53.22ms (31.53G pixels/s)
36. 53.54ms (31.34G pixels/s)
37. 52.09ms (32.21G pixels/s)
38. 52.14ms (32.18G pixels/s)
39. 56.01ms (29.96G pixels/s)
40. 53.46ms (31.38G pixels/s)
41. 52.63ms (31.88G pixels/s)
42. 52.57ms (31.91G pixels/s)
43. 53.56ms (31.32G pixels/s)
44. 54.15ms (30.99G pixels/s)
45. 54.11ms (31.00G pixels/s)
46. 53.96ms (31.09G pixels/s)
47. 53.77ms (31.20G pixels/s)
48. 52.08ms (32.21G pixels/s)
49. 55.52ms (30.22G pixels/s)
50. 58.12ms (28.87G pixels/s)
51. 54.18ms (30.96G pixels/s)
52. 55.63ms (30.16G pixels/s)
53. 52.55ms (31.93G pixels/s)
54. 52.94ms (31.69G pixels/s)
55. 54.91ms (30.55G pixels/s)
56. 54.93ms (30.54G pixels/s)
57. 54.13ms (31.00G pixels/s)
58. 54.84ms (30.59G pixels/s)
59. 55.17ms (30.41G pixels/s)
60. 55.16ms (30.41G pixels/s)
61. 55.63ms (30.16G pixels/s)
62. 52.44ms (32.00G pixels/s)
63. 55.46ms (30.25G pixels/s)
64. 57.57ms (29.14G pixels/s)
65. 53.29ms (31.48G pixels/s)
66. 53.33ms (31.46G pixels/s)
67. 52.49ms (31.97G pixels/s)
68. 57.09ms (29.39G pixels/s)
69. 52.73ms (31.81G pixels/s)
70. 55.54ms (30.21G pixels/s)
71. 56.51ms (29.69G pixels/s)
72. 60.41ms (27.77G pixels/s)
73. 60.77ms (27.61G pixels/s)
74. 56.09ms (29.91G pixels/s)
75. 52.69ms (31.84G pixels/s)
76. 53.69ms (31.25G pixels/s)
77. 55.18ms (30.41G pixels/s)
78. 53.71ms (31.23G pixels/s)
79. 57.79ms (29.03G pixels/s)
80. 58.03ms (28.91G pixels/s)
81. 57.02ms (29.42G pixels/s)
82. 60.79ms (27.60G pixels/s)
83. 56.00ms (29.96G pixels/s)
84. 57.68ms (29.09G pixels/s)
85. 54.00ms (31.07G pixels/s)
86. 56.56ms (29.66G pixels/s)
87. 52.80ms (31.77G pixels/s)
88. 62.01ms (27.06G pixels/s)
89. 56.50ms (29.69G pixels/s)
90. 56.40ms (29.74G pixels/s)
91. 52.91ms (31.71G pixels/s)
92. 58.61ms (28.63G pixels/s)
93. 54.69ms (30.68G pixels/s)
94. 56.33ms (29.78G pixels/s)
95. 56.88ms (29.49G pixels/s)
96. 53.08ms (31.61G pixels/s)
97. 56.91ms (29.48G pixels/s)
98. 54.27ms (30.92G pixels/s)
99. 53.01ms (31.65G pixels/s)
100. 59.88ms (28.02G pixels/s)
101. 56.37ms (29.76G pixels/s)
102. 59.64ms (28.13G pixels/s)
103. 61.64ms (27.22G pixels/s)
104. 54.61ms (30.72G pixels/s)
105. 58.21ms (28.82G pixels/s)
106. 54.73ms (30.65G pixels/s)
107. 56.13ms (29.89G pixels/s)
108. 60.91ms (27.54G pixels/s)
109. 53.07ms (31.61G pixels/s)
110. 58.42ms (28.72G pixels/s)
111. 54.92ms (30.55G pixels/s)
112. 55.88ms (30.02G pixels/s)
113. 54.91ms (30.55G pixels/s)
114. 57.23ms (29.31G pixels/s)
115. 54.98ms (30.51G pixels/s)
116. 61.58ms (27.25G pixels/s)
117. 55.13ms (30.43G pixels/s)
118. 57.21ms (29.32G pixels/s)
119. 53.44ms (31.40G pixels/s)
120. 55.18ms (30.40G pixels/s)
121. 57.40ms (29.23G pixels/s)
122. 57.60ms (29.13G pixels/s)
123. 63.02ms (26.62G pixels/s)
124. 59.54ms (28.18G pixels/s)
125. 56.93ms (29.47G pixels/s)
126. 53.59ms (31.31G pixels/s)
127. 57.94ms (28.96G pixels/s)
128. 59.95ms (27.99G pixels/s)

 

[Kwee]

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

Dual AMD R9 290X - Reference

Radeon 16.10.2

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Compute only:
1. 51.04ms
2. 51.03ms
3. 51.03ms
4. 51.03ms
5. 50.98ms
6. 51.01ms
7. 51.00ms
8. 51.03ms
9. 51.06ms
10. 51.03ms
11. 51.03ms
12. 51.00ms
13. 51.02ms
14. 50.97ms
15. 51.01ms
16. 51.04ms
17. 51.02ms
18. 51.02ms
19. 51.03ms
20. 51.02ms
21. 51.02ms
22. 51.02ms
23. 51.01ms
24. 50.99ms
25. 51.01ms
26. 51.02ms
27. 50.97ms
28. 51.06ms
29. 51.03ms
30. 51.03ms
31. 51.01ms
32. 51.03ms
33. 51.03ms
34. 51.04ms
35. 51.04ms
36. 51.02ms
37. 51.02ms
38. 51.05ms
39. 51.02ms
40. 51.00ms
41. 51.04ms
42. 51.02ms
43. 51.04ms
44. 50.98ms
45. 51.03ms
46. 51.01ms
47. 51.03ms
48. 51.01ms
49. 51.00ms
50. 51.04ms
51. 51.02ms
52. 51.00ms
53. 51.02ms
54. 51.01ms
55. 51.03ms
56. 50.95ms
57. 51.04ms
58. 51.04ms
59. 51.03ms
60. 51.01ms
61. 51.03ms
62. 51.02ms
63. 51.01ms
64. 51.03ms
65. 51.02ms
66. 51.03ms
67. 51.05ms
68. 50.98ms
69. 51.05ms
70. 51.03ms
71. 51.01ms
72. 51.00ms
73. 51.01ms
74. 51.02ms
75. 50.99ms
76. 50.99ms
77. 51.03ms
78. 50.99ms
79. 51.03ms
80. 51.05ms
81. 51.03ms
82. 51.02ms
83. 50.99ms
84. 51.03ms
85. 51.00ms
86. 51.02ms
87. 50.99ms
88. 51.02ms
89. 51.02ms
90. 50.99ms
91. 51.01ms
92. 51.01ms
93. 50.99ms
94. 50.97ms
95. 51.02ms
96. 51.04ms
97. 51.01ms
98. 51.02ms
99. 51.01ms
100. 51.00ms
101. 51.01ms
102. 51.01ms
103. 51.02ms
104. 50.98ms
105. 51.01ms
106. 51.01ms
107. 51.02ms
108. 50.98ms
109. 51.03ms
110. 51.03ms
111. 51.03ms
112. 51.03ms
113. 50.99ms
114. 50.97ms
115. 51.01ms
116. 51.00ms
117. 51.02ms
118. 51.04ms
119. 51.02ms
120. 51.02ms
121. 51.01ms
122. 51.06ms
123. 51.02ms
124. 51.00ms
125. 51.02ms
126. 51.00ms
127. 50.99ms
128. 51.01ms
Graphics only: 28.57ms (58.73G pixels/s)
Graphics + compute:
1. 51.49ms (32.58G pixels/s)
2. 51.23ms (32.75G pixels/s)
3. 51.55ms (32.55G pixels/s)
4. 51.32ms (32.69G pixels/s)
5. 51.27ms (32.73G pixels/s)
6. 51.70ms (32.45G pixels/s)
7. 51.44ms (32.62G pixels/s)
8. 51.74ms (32.43G pixels/s)
9. 51.54ms (32.55G pixels/s)
10. 52.21ms (32.13G pixels/s)
11. 52.30ms (32.08G pixels/s)
12. 51.59ms (32.52G pixels/s)
13. 51.61ms (32.50G pixels/s)
14. 51.72ms (32.44G pixels/s)
15. 52.58ms (31.91G pixels/s)
16. 51.68ms (32.46G pixels/s)
17. 51.76ms (32.41G pixels/s)
18. 52.48ms (31.97G pixels/s)
19. 51.84ms (32.36G pixels/s)
20. 53.80ms (31.19G pixels/s)
21. 52.42ms (32.01G pixels/s)
22. 52.43ms (32.00G pixels/s)
23. 51.94ms (32.30G pixels/s)
24. 51.97ms (32.28G pixels/s)
25. 54.00ms (31.07G pixels/s)
26. 51.70ms (32.45G pixels/s)
27. 51.94ms (32.30G pixels/s)
28. 52.13ms (32.18G pixels/s)
29. 53.78ms (31.20G pixels/s)
30. 53.33ms (31.46G pixels/s)
31. 52.03ms (32.25G pixels/s)
32. 53.09ms (31.60G pixels/s)
33. 52.09ms (32.21G pixels/s)
34. 53.34ms (31.45G pixels/s)
35. 53.22ms (31.53G pixels/s)
36. 53.54ms (31.34G pixels/s)
37. 52.09ms (32.21G pixels/s)
38. 52.14ms (32.18G pixels/s)
39. 56.01ms (29.96G pixels/s)
40. 53.46ms (31.38G pixels/s)
41. 52.63ms (31.88G pixels/s)
42. 52.57ms (31.91G pixels/s)
43. 53.56ms (31.32G pixels/s)
44. 54.15ms (30.99G pixels/s)
45. 54.11ms (31.00G pixels/s)
46. 53.96ms (31.09G pixels/s)
47. 53.77ms (31.20G pixels/s)
48. 52.08ms (32.21G pixels/s)
49. 55.52ms (30.22G pixels/s)
50. 58.12ms (28.87G pixels/s)
51. 54.18ms (30.96G pixels/s)
52. 55.63ms (30.16G pixels/s)
53. 52.55ms (31.93G pixels/s)
54. 52.94ms (31.69G pixels/s)
55. 54.91ms (30.55G pixels/s)
56. 54.93ms (30.54G pixels/s)
57. 54.13ms (31.00G pixels/s)
58. 54.84ms (30.59G pixels/s)
59. 55.17ms (30.41G pixels/s)
60. 55.16ms (30.41G pixels/s)
61. 55.63ms (30.16G pixels/s)
62. 52.44ms (32.00G pixels/s)
63. 55.46ms (30.25G pixels/s)
64. 57.57ms (29.14G pixels/s)
65. 53.29ms (31.48G pixels/s)
66. 53.33ms (31.46G pixels/s)
67. 52.49ms (31.97G pixels/s)
68. 57.09ms (29.39G pixels/s)
69. 52.73ms (31.81G pixels/s)
70. 55.54ms (30.21G pixels/s)
71. 56.51ms (29.69G pixels/s)
72. 60.41ms (27.77G pixels/s)
73. 60.77ms (27.61G pixels/s)
74. 56.09ms (29.91G pixels/s)
75. 52.69ms (31.84G pixels/s)
76. 53.69ms (31.25G pixels/s)
77. 55.18ms (30.41G pixels/s)
78. 53.71ms (31.23G pixels/s)
79. 57.79ms (29.03G pixels/s)
80. 58.03ms (28.91G pixels/s)
81. 57.02ms (29.42G pixels/s)
82. 60.79ms (27.60G pixels/s)
83. 56.00ms (29.96G pixels/s)
84. 57.68ms (29.09G pixels/s)
85. 54.00ms (31.07G pixels/s)
86. 56.56ms (29.66G pixels/s)
87. 52.80ms (31.77G pixels/s)
88. 62.01ms (27.06G pixels/s)
89. 56.50ms (29.69G pixels/s)
90. 56.40ms (29.74G pixels/s)
91. 52.91ms (31.71G pixels/s)
92. 58.61ms (28.63G pixels/s)
93. 54.69ms (30.68G pixels/s)
94. 56.33ms (29.78G pixels/s)
95. 56.88ms (29.49G pixels/s)
96. 53.08ms (31.61G pixels/s)
97. 56.91ms (29.48G pixels/s)
98. 54.27ms (30.92G pixels/s)
99. 53.01ms (31.65G pixels/s)
100. 59.88ms (28.02G pixels/s)
101. 56.37ms (29.76G pixels/s)
102. 59.64ms (28.13G pixels/s)
103. 61.64ms (27.22G pixels/s)
104. 54.61ms (30.72G pixels/s)
105. 58.21ms (28.82G pixels/s)
106. 54.73ms (30.65G pixels/s)
107. 56.13ms (29.89G pixels/s)
108. 60.91ms (27.54G pixels/s)
109. 53.07ms (31.61G pixels/s)
110. 58.42ms (28.72G pixels/s)
111. 54.92ms (30.55G pixels/s)
112. 55.88ms (30.02G pixels/s)
113. 54.91ms (30.55G pixels/s)
114. 57.23ms (29.31G pixels/s)
115. 54.98ms (30.51G pixels/s)
116. 61.58ms (27.25G pixels/s)
117. 55.13ms (30.43G pixels/s)
118. 57.21ms (29.32G pixels/s)
119. 53.44ms (31.40G pixels/s)
120. 55.18ms (30.40G pixels/s)
121. 57.40ms (29.23G pixels/s)
122. 57.60ms (29.13G pixels/s)
123. 63.02ms (26.62G pixels/s)
124. 59.54ms (28.18G pixels/s)
125. 56.93ms (29.47G pixels/s)
126. 53.59ms (31.31G pixels/s)
127. 57.94ms (28.96G pixels/s)
128. 59.95ms (27.99G pixels/s)

 

Work as intended on R9 290s GCN 1.1 aka GCN 2.

Thanks.

[Kwee]

2 hours ago, Humbug said:

I see a lot of ridiculous posts on this topic by a particular section of fans. Why can't we as consumers hold a company accountable for their actions rather than making excuses. I am not saying they did it on purpose, it may be a bug or oversight. But don't make excuses. Force them to fix it.

 

- it doesn't matter if the GPU in question is 5 years old. Disabling features is never ok. Even after 15 years. This is not the same as discontinuing support.

-We all know the required hardware is on the GPUs and capable of async compute.

-we have all seen it in action when AOTS came out on GPUs like the 7970.

-it doesn't matter that the performance gain was small or large. It was still present and measurable.

-NVidia's poor track record on long term support is irrelevant. This does not excuse AMD.

-if an IHV is purposefully disabling a feature in a driver release it should be explicitly mentioned in the driver release notes. No excuses for leaving that out.

 

I await AMD's official response. Hopefully a fix in next driver.

 

[leadeater]

6 minutes ago, Kwee said:

Work as intended on R9 290s GCN 1.1 aka GCN 2.

Thanks.

Updated to 16.12.1 since I needed to anyway, no change works as expected.

[Carclis]

3 hours ago, Humbug said:

I see a lot of ridiculous posts on this topic by a particular section of fans. Why can't we as consumers hold a company accountable for their actions rather than making excuses. I am not saying they did it on purpose, it may be a bug or oversight. But don't make excuses. Force them to fix it.

 

- it doesn't matter if the GPU in question is 5 years old. Disabling features is never ok. Even after 15 years. This is not the same as discontinuing support.

-We all know the required hardware is on the GPUs and capable of async compute.

-we have all seen it in action when AOTS came out on GPUs like the 7970.

-it doesn't matter that the performance gain was small or large. It was still present and measurable.

-NVidia's poor track record on long term support is irrelevant. This does not excuse AMD.

-if an IHV is purposefully disabling a feature in a driver release it should be explicitly mentioned in the driver release notes. No excuses for leaving that out.

 

I await AMD's official response. Hopefully a fix in next driver.

 

It doesn't really make sense for them to disable such a feature for no reason. Do you think it has a reasonable "upkeep" so to speak, that is cutting into their efforts in optimising for other cards/titles? I mean their drivers have been better than ever over the past year with basically every noteworthy title getting day 1 drivers and few to none of their drivers having issues at all.

[TheRandomness]

1 hour ago, Kwee said:

Work as intended on R9 290s GCN 1.1 aka GCN 2.

Thanks.

Stop saying 1.x. AMD themselves call it GCN 1, 2...etc and the 1.x scheme came from news sources. 

[Kwee]

58 minutes ago, TheRandomness said:

Stop saying 1.x. AMD themselves call it GCN 1, 2...etc and the 1.x scheme came from news sources. 

It's that suppose to be useful ? Humm ?

 

1 - We(Hardware reviewers, Power Users, Games Developpers, Game Engine, etc)call it like that for more than 4 years because it was correct.

2 - I mention it in my post, so it's more like for annoying me.

3 - That's we call Marketing, Higher is better. You're more likely to buy a PS4 rather than a PS1.4 or PS3.2. 

4 - What do you bring to take forward the debate?

[Humbug]

4 hours ago, Carclis said:

It doesn't really make sense for them to disable such a feature for no reason. Do you think it has a reasonable "upkeep" so to speak, that is cutting into their efforts in optimising for other cards/titles? I mean their drivers have been better than ever over the past year with basically every noteworthy title getting day 1 drivers and few to none of their drivers having issues at all.

yes AMD's drivers have been top notch. But I don't see what 'upkeep' this feature has. The feature was there and working, it was upto game devs to take advantage of it. It's true that the capacity of gcn 1.0 to handle such workloads was different from latter architectures.

 

I certainly hope that they did not do this on purpose. Because if they did they better have a stellar explanation about why if was not mentioned in the driver release notes amongst all the other more minor changes.

[Yoinkerman]

Wow it's almost like they put intrusive ads in surreptitiously after the warranty/return period.

 

For shame.

[Sakkura]

17 hours ago, Humbug said:

I see a lot of ridiculous posts on this topic by a particular section of fans. Why can't we as consumers hold a company accountable for their actions rather than making excuses. I am not saying they did it on purpose, it may be a bug or oversight. But don't make excuses. Force them to fix it.

 

- it doesn't matter if the GPU in question is 5 years old. Disabling features is never ok. Even after 15 years. This is not the same as discontinuing support.

-We all know the required hardware is on the GPUs and capable of async compute.

-we have all seen it in action when AOTS came out on GPUs like the 7970.

-it doesn't matter that the performance gain was small or large. It was still present and measurable.

-NVidia's poor track record on long term support is irrelevant. This does not excuse AMD.

-if an IHV is purposefully disabling a feature in a driver release it should be explicitly mentioned in the driver release notes. No excuses for leaving that out.

 

I await AMD's official response. Hopefully a fix in next driver.

 

Disabling features may be okay if it fixes bugs (depends on the scale and severity, obviously). Otherwise I agree.

[Mira Yurizaki]

9 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

Disabling features may be okay if it fixes bugs (depends on the scale and severity, obviously). Otherwise I agree.

Careful, some of those bugs turn into features.

 

Microsoft has a laundry list of them.

[Nena Trinity]

Well there could be reasons for why AMD did disable it... (they should tell us why tough)

[IGJoe2192]

23 hours ago, Kwee said:

  AMD Radeon HD 7900 Series 1.20% -0.04%
  AMD Radeon HD 7700 Series 1.09% -0.02%
  AMD Radeon HD 8800 Series 1.08% -0.01%
  AMD Radeon HD 7800 Series 0.91% -0.01%
  AMD Radeon R7 Graphics 0.72% +0.04%
  AMD Radeon R5 Graphics 0.67% -0.02%
  AMD Radeon R9 200 Series 0.61% -0.02%
  AMD Radeon HD 8500 Series 0.60% -0.02%
  AMD Radeon R9 380 Series 0.54% -0.03%
  AMD Radeon R7 300 Series 0.53% 0.00%
  ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5000 Series 0.51% -0.02%
  ATI Radeon HD 5450 0.50% +0.01%
  AMD Radeon HD 8470D 0.49% +0.04%
  AMD Radeon R9 390 Series 0.48% -0.03%
  ATI Radeon HD 5700 Series 0.42% -0.01%

 

Statistics from Steam 

So my point is proven. Not enough to matter.

[Kwee]

13 hours ago, IGJoe2192 said:

So my point is proven. Not enough to matter.

Ahahah Do you know which models AMD sell lately ?

 

Did you see one of them ? 

 

 

Nah because the most popular models are old GCN products. HD 7900 + HD 7700 + HD 8800 + HD 7800 + R7 + R5 + R9 280 + R7 300 represent 7,5 %. Not enough to matter ? The others models(GCN 2) represent less than 1,1 %

 

Steam have about 15 Millions users active(the percentage is calculated on active users) which means there is 1 125 000 cards that use GCN 1 versus 165 000 cards that use GCN 2. 

[Humbug]

On 12/12/2016 at 8:34 AM, IGJoe2192 said:

Is there enough of these cards on the market to matter? Am I missing out on a big performance increase? The point is, this card is 3 generations old and I don't expect AMD to support it forever.

LOL Not supporting GPUs means that you don't spend development time on them getting new features working or optimizing for newer games. In that case what AMD does is they tell us GCN 1 support is end of life. And then future driver updates do not support them.

 

This is different. We have a feature which was already working. They released a driver which supports GCN 1 and they disabled said feature.
 

13 hours ago, IGJoe2192 said:

So my point is proven. Not enough to matter.

There is a problem that needs to be fixed it has to be fixed by AMD. The community will ask them to fix it. The product is not end of life, market share talk should not come up.. even if only 1 user remains it is AMD's responsibility to fix it.

 

Besides for AMD do you think that this is a tiny percentage of their userbase? No, it's a noticeable portion of the AMD GPU userbase. Only when you look at the total GPU market it will be small because AMD's market share is small.

 

[IGJoe2192]

1 hour ago, Kwee said:

Ahahah Do you know which models AMD sell lately ?

 

Did you see one of them ? 

 

 

Nah because the most popular models are old GCN products. HD 7900 + HD 7700 + HD 8800 + HD 7800 + R7 + R5 + R9 280 + R7 300 represent 7,5 %. Not enough to matter ? The others models(GCN 2) represent less than 1,1 %

 

Steam have about 15 Millions users active(the percentage is calculated on active users) which means there is 1 125 000 cards that use GCN 1 versus 165 000 cards that use GCN 2. 

Nope, not enough. Move along.