That's weird, Nvidia show off its 9 TFlops GPU on 180W and AMD brings a 5.5 TFlops GPU at 150W ? Isn't Nvidia on 16nm while AMD are on 14nm btw? I know it's marginal, but it makes it look even worse :/..

That's weird, Nvidia show off its 9 TFlops GPU on 180W and AMD brings a 5.5 TFlops GPU at 150W ? Isn't Nvidia on 16nm while AMD are on 14nm btw? I know it's marginal, but it makes it look even worse :/..

FFS..these are not AMD's response to the 1070/1080. Polaris is a low-mid end card designed to give 390/390X performance at a much reduced power requirement and a much reduced price. Vega, due later this year or early next year, is the card AMD are releasing to compete with Pascal 1070/1080/1080Ti.

It seems that given the videocardz info the sp count is the same as the mobile p10.. Our comment: We received the exact same specifications just few days ago. Although it was noted that those are specifications for mobile GPUs, so you may want to take this into consideration.

This is most probably mobile. If it's not, then unless it's on a crazy frequency the 390/x will be faster (it has ridiculously more memory bandwidth too) and the 1070 will destroy the $300+ market.

So it will look like that. Still new card will show decent performance bost. How it will sell will depend from what NV will give as competition and what $ both companies will want for new cards. Radeon 380X --- 2048SP --- 3.1 TFlops Radeon 390 --- 2560SP --- 5.1 TFlops Radeon 480X --- 2048SP --- 5.5 TFlops Radeon 390X --- 2816SP --- 5.9 TFlops

So it will look like that. Still new card will show decent performance bost. How it will sell will depend from what NV will give as competition and what $ both companies will want for new cards. Radeon 380X --- 2048SP --- 3.1 TFlops Radeon 390 --- 2560SP --- 5.1 TFlops Radeon 480X --- 2048SP --- 5.5 TFlops Radeon 390X --- 2816SP --- 5.9 TFlops

mobile...

So it will look like that. Still new card will show decent performance bost. How it will sell will depend from what NV will give as competition and what $ both companies will want for new cards. Radeon 380X --- 2048SP --- 3.1 TFlops Radeon 390 --- 2560SP --- 5.1 TFlops Radeon 480X --- 2048SP --- 5.5 TFlops Radeon 390X --- 2816SP --- 5.9 TFlops

They said it's mobile. If it is true, then that's an impressive mobile part. If it's a desktop replacement for the 390xm then AMD is done.

Not mobile, just mid range desktop: http://bi9he1w7hz8qbnm2zl0hd171.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/AMD_Roadmap_RTG_GPU.jpg And very: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJxCdh1Ps48

Not mobile, just mid range desktop: http://bi9he1w7hz8qbnm2zl0hd171.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/AMD_Roadmap_RTG_GPU.jpg And very: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJxCdh1Ps48

This is an architecture roadmap. It doesn't say anything about the specific parts.

This is most probably mobile. If it's not, then unless it's on a crazy frequency the 390/x will be faster (it has ridiculously more memory bandwidth too) and the 1070 will destroy the $300+ market.

With those specs it obviously can't be nearly as expensive as 1070, and thus it would belong to a different market segment. It would be hard to imagine AMD suddenly beating Nvidia in the frequency game since they have been consistently slower over there for a while.

That's weird, Nvidia show off its 9 TFlops GPU on 180W and AMD brings a 5.5 TFlops GPU at 150W ? Isn't Nvidia on 16nm while AMD are on 14nm btw? I know it's marginal, but it makes it look even worse :/..

So weird how soon as nvidia started their main marketing thrust all these "negative" AMD rumors seem to be popping up everyday. "LOLZ AMD DED CUZ THEY CANT OVER 900MHZ!½!!! CARDZ FAIL, DONT BUY HERP, DERP! HEEEEEERP!!!! DEEEERPPPPPP!!!!!!".

AMD has stated that these current offerings are for the mainstream desktop market that want a VR ready rig and high-end gaming laptop segment. The lesser chip is targeted for laptops. AMD's "All In" for VR is expanding the install base so as to get the VR market to a larger piece of the pie. That is the purpose of these offerings. Nvidia and AMD are addressing different segments of the gpu market. They are not meant to be competing against each other with these offerings. If the current Polaris offerings were to compete against the 1070/1080, then lights out game over and shutter the windows. That is not the case though. Read and understand AMD's approach with a bigger picture perspective. Like mentioned earlier VEGA is AMD's enthusiast market chip. EDIT: The upper tier Polaris offering is a mainstream VR card. What that translates to in non-VR terms is what we are waiting to see.

So weird how soon as nvidia started their main marketing thrust all these "negative" AMD rumors seem to be popping up everyday. "LOLZ AMD DED CUZ THEY CANT OVER 900MHZ!½!!! CARDZ FAIL, DONT BUY HERP, DERP! HEEEEEERP!!!! DEEEERPPPPPP!!!!!!".

There should be a filter for anyone says Herp or Derp in their post that automatically puts them on ignore for the entire forum.

AMD has stated that these current offerings are for the mainstream desktop market that want a VR ready rig and high-end gaming laptop segment. The lesser chip is targeted for laptops. AMD's "All In" for VR is expanding the install base so as to get the VR market to a larger piece of the pie. That is the purpose of these offerings. Nvidia and AMD are addressing different segments of the gpu market. They are not meant to be competing against each other with these offerings. If the current Polaris offerings were to compete against the 1070/1080, then lights out game over and shutter the windows. That is not the case though. Read and understand AMD's approach with a bigger picture perspective. Like mentioned earlier VEGA is AMD's enthusiast market chip. EDIT: The upper tier Polaris offering is a mainstream VR card. What that translates to in non-VR terms is what we are waiting to see.

This is not the purpose of Polaris. Absolutely not, anyone spouting this has put zero thought into it. AMD's "VR push" is strictly marketing. Strictly. You can't get a VR solution for under 600 dollars. Frankly, you can't get a VR solution at all right now, you can just add yourself to a waiting list. But even then, you can't get VR for under 600. One of them is 800. It requires a lot of space, the res is low, the FOV is limited, the latency still isn't where they want it, there are almost zero games for it, and there's not even anything announced or incoming as VR's "killer app". And AMD has a stake in none of it. They see no benefit from VR headset sales or VR games sales. There's nothing special about their cards that allow them to perform strictly better in VR, they have no VR advantage and no reason to push it, at all. Finally, you can't expand the market with a cheap card if the barrier to entry is still 1000 dollars. Even if they give you 970 performance at 200 dollars, that doesn't make it any better for VR. People who want 970 performance at 200 on any screen will buy it, and they're not going to go buy rift's or vives just because they can. The barrier to entry is to high. AMD is spinning their inability to compete at the highest end. The end.

It being a mobile part doesn't preclude that translating into a desktop gpu for a lower tier Anyway, even if it is slightly slower than 390x in theoretical compute throughput it's geometry performance will be way higher which should mean better performance across the board

There should be a filter for anyone says Herp or Derp in their post that automatically puts them on ignore for the entire forum.

actually i think it's pretty amusing to use for parody purposes 🤓

Doing some math if the speed gain from 380X to 480X is maintained also for the 390X and 490X we will receive a 10,4 Tflop card, really competitive with 1080.

It being a mobile part doesn't preclude that translating into a desktop gpu for a lower tier Anyway, even if it is slightly slower than 390x in theoretical compute throughput it's geometry performance will be way higher which should mean better performance across the board

Pretty sure it's a driver bug. People said lowering tessellation does nothing over at /r/amd. Edit: wait what, did you edit your post or am I going insane?

Pretty sure it's a driver bug. People said lowering tessellation does nothing over at /r/amd. Edit: wait what, did you edit your post or am I going insane?

Yeah i edited it haha, too lazy to actually think about this :P + i checked tesselation + polygon trhoughput benchmarks comparing Fury X and 290x and it's nowhere near as big a divide as there is in doom

If the NEO specs are a mirror of the actual chip configuration, then the 40 CU part will have 2560 shader cores. If it runs at 1300+ and it sells under $300, it's a winner in my book. Can't wait for the actual reviews of everything, I'm between the 1070 and whatever the higher Polaris is.

If the NEO specs are a mirror of the actual chip configuration, then the 40 CU part will have 2560 shader cores. If it runs at 1300+ and it sells under $300, it's a winner in my book. Can't wait for the actual reviews of everything, I'm between the 1070 and whatever the higher Polaris is.

Well, to have a direct desktop version of the PS4 Neo chip kinda makes sense, especially with all the ports we get these days. I imagine the reasoning is even less work during porting.