Corsair H170i Elite Capellix XT review
Forspoken: PC performance graphics benchmarks
ASRock Z790 Taichi review
The Callisto Protocol: PC graphics benchmarks
G.Skill TridentZ 5 RGB 6800 MHz CL34 DDR5 review
Be Quiet! Dark Power 13 - 1000W PSU Review
Palit GeForce RTX 4080 GamingPRO OC review
Core i9 13900K DDR5 7200 MHz (+memory scaling) review
Seasonic Prime Titanium TX-1300 (1300W PSU) review
F1 2022: PC graphics performance benchmark review
AMD Greenland Vega10 Silicon To Have 4096 Stream Processors?
Some interesting info surfaced on the web the past day or so. As you guys know, AMD is to release GPUs based on Polaris, however a recent AMD roadmap shows Vega and Navi Architectures. Vega is the successor to Polaris with HBM2 memory to be launched in the 2017 time-frame. An employee on their linked-in page noted Vega to have 4096 shader processors.
It seems that after Polaris in 2017 VEGA will make an appearance, the name is tagged with HBM2 meaning that HBM2 likely will not make it onto Polaris. Vega is the brightest star in the constellation Lyra, the fifth brightest star in the night sky and the second brightest star in the northern celestial hemisphere, after Arcturus. Next in line in the 2018 timeframe we see Navi with the two keywords being scalability and Nextgen memory.
Now the juicy part, The LinkedIn profile of Yu Zheng (who is an R&D manager at AMD) (info was removed btw) shows "shader processor" (stream processor) count of Vega10 to be 4,096, have a peek:
Interestingly enough, that's the same shader processor number as Fiji (Radeon R9 Fury X). Since the info does not state what model GPU (mid-range/high-end/enthusiast) it'll be used for it all remains guess work in terms of performance. We do know that perf per watt will increase significantly over Polaris and that these GPUs will be fitted with HMB2 graphics memory.
Since we are on the topic, "Polaris" architecture based names are oozing out. A high-end chip will be called "Ellesmere" or Polaris10. There will be a mid-range GPU called "Baffin" or Polaris11. And then "Ellesmere" is rumored to get 36 GCN 4.0 compute units, which works out to 2,304 stream processors; and a 256-bit wide bus, indicative for GDDR5/GDDR5X with 8 GB memory amount.
It's going to be an interesting year.
Ryu5uzaku
Senior Member
Posts: 7411
Joined: 2006-09-24
Senior Member
Posts: 7411
Joined: 2006-09-24
#5251854 Posted on: 03/30/2016 06:54 PM
Yup a 390x at 1600 would be silly fast. But not possible in normal circumstances just maybe under ln2
That is a pretty good average that 1150 yeah for both 390x and 390.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1561704/official-amd-r9-390-390x-owners-club
Had some good clocked cards. Some even at 1250.
A 390 at 1150-1200 should be roughly equal to a 970 at 1500. While 390x at 1150 should be somewhat faster considering it's position at stock is around stock 980.
Yeah the devil is the highest clocker, 1225 is high though, 1150 is a good average max clock, comparable to 1500 on gm204. If you look at water-cooled 970s 1600 is achievable
Yup a 390x at 1600 would be silly fast. But not possible in normal circumstances just maybe under ln2
That is a pretty good average that 1150 yeah for both 390x and 390.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1561704/official-amd-r9-390-390x-owners-club
Had some good clocked cards. Some even at 1250.
A 390 at 1150-1200 should be roughly equal to a 970 at 1500. While 390x at 1150 should be somewhat faster considering it's position at stock is around stock 980.
Ieldra
Senior Member
Posts: 3490
Joined: 2007-01-27
Senior Member
Posts: 3490
Joined: 2007-01-27
#5251858 Posted on: 03/30/2016 07:04 PM
Yup a 390x at 1600 would be silly fast. But not possible in normal circumstances just maybe under ln2
That is a pretty good average that 1150 yeah for both 390x and 390.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1561704/official-amd-r9-390-390x-owners-club
Had some good clocked cards. Some even at 1250.
A 390 at 1150-1200 should be roughly equal to a 970 at 1500. While 390x at 1150 should be somewhat faster considering it's position at stock is around stock 980.
Let me put it this way, if an oc 390 is 25%, or less, faster than a stock 970,it will be matched or outperformed when you overclock the latter. I ran the numbers too, clock scaling on maxwell is phenomenal, made a thread about this
Yup a 390x at 1600 would be silly fast. But not possible in normal circumstances just maybe under ln2
That is a pretty good average that 1150 yeah for both 390x and 390.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1561704/official-amd-r9-390-390x-owners-club
Had some good clocked cards. Some even at 1250.
A 390 at 1150-1200 should be roughly equal to a 970 at 1500. While 390x at 1150 should be somewhat faster considering it's position at stock is around stock 980.
Let me put it this way, if an oc 390 is 25%, or less, faster than a stock 970,it will be matched or outperformed when you overclock the latter. I ran the numbers too, clock scaling on maxwell is phenomenal, made a thread about this
evilkiller650
Senior Member
Posts: 4802
Joined: 2005-07-08
Senior Member
Posts: 4802
Joined: 2005-07-08
#5251871 Posted on: 03/30/2016 07:43 PM
All the newer/recent medium/high range cards are extremely amazing overclockers.
My 7950 is @ 1.15Ghz (+310Mhz) core and 1.5Ghz (+250Mhz) memory.
It crashed @ 1.2Ghz on The Division at startup but that's very sensitive to over-clocks and I've yet to try that speed on other games
All the newer/recent medium/high range cards are extremely amazing overclockers.
My 7950 is @ 1.15Ghz (+310Mhz) core and 1.5Ghz (+250Mhz) memory.
It crashed @ 1.2Ghz on The Division at startup but that's very sensitive to over-clocks and I've yet to try that speed on other games
Tree Dude
Senior Member
Posts: 532
Joined: 2005-10-09
Senior Member
Posts: 532
Joined: 2005-10-09
#5251920 Posted on: 03/30/2016 10:27 PM
I play a ton of GW2 which uses an older DX9 engine. I have seen pretty significant boosts to my performance. My wife has a older PC and picked up quite a few FPS when I updated her to the legacy beta 16.2.1 (she has an older 6000 series card).
AMD has been has been getting their overhead down quite significantly as they have lagged behind Nvidia in this area. Every game benefits.
I am not so sure about that man. I have older games I have personally played like Mass Effect and SC2, play MUCH better with drivers since 1018.0. Again, I have no numbers to prove anything, I haven't seriously tested.
I play a ton of GW2 which uses an older DX9 engine. I have seen pretty significant boosts to my performance. My wife has a older PC and picked up quite a few FPS when I updated her to the legacy beta 16.2.1 (she has an older 6000 series card).
AMD has been has been getting their overhead down quite significantly as they have lagged behind Nvidia in this area. Every game benefits.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Posts: 3490
Joined: 2007-01-27
In some reviews hardocp has started to include apples to apples comparison in the end with all cards on same settings.
Near stock 390x nets some 95 fps from TR and PC Devil one clocks to 1225 and gets 118 fps on same settings so it gains 25%. Now best case scenario for 390x would be 1250 on core imo. So it can clock rather high. 390's reach that 1200 too. But stock clocks for 390x is 1050 and 390 has 1000 stock clocks. Hilbert got in TR a 11% rise in fps with oc of 13% from 1010 to 1150 on a 390.
I never got my 290x to clock by much, only some 10%.
Yeah the devil is the highest clocker, 1225 is high though, 1150 is a good average max clock, comparable to 1500 on gm204. If you look at water-cooled 970s 1600 is achievable