| HollyGamer said: Yes GCN is similar to all across AMD GPU from Pitcairn until Navi but They have a major improvement ( Pitcairn to Polaris ) the improvement is smaller chip node, faster clock speed |
Not as major as you would think. It's evolutionary not revolutionary improvements.
Even then, on the odd occasion there was actually regression.
For example... Gamer Nexus did a comparison of Fiji and Vega's IPC. Vega didn't look all that pretty...
https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2977-vega-fe-vs-fury-x-at-same-clocks-ipc
| HollyGamer said: The same with Nvidia with all of their CUDA cores, like Maxwell and Pascal are actually the same but it just has smaller node from 24 nm to 16 nm |
Architecturally Maxwell and Pascal are brothers, Pascal did introduce a few improvements, namely an update to Delta Colour Compression which meant a good reworking of the ROPS.
However, Pascals main focus was on reducing leakage and noise so as to drive up clockrates instead, nVidia was pretty successful on that front.
Also 24nm wasn't a thing.
It was 28nm and 16nm respectively.
https://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/74849-nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-28nm-maxwell/
https://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/103213-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-ti-16nm-pascal/
| HollyGamer said: So i bet PS5 with Navi will have the same thing, even if you said " it's the same GCN ", with smaller chip Sony just can add more shaders unit or CU , even if you said it's limited to 64 CU , they can increase the clock speed , with more efficiency to reach 12 ,5 teraflop (vega 64 target) |
Increasing the clockrates has a better overall effect than just blowing out the CU count... Because like I alluded to prior, Graphics Core Next is limited to 64 ROPS (Although independent of the DRAM), 256 TMU's and 4x geometry units... So every-time you increase clockrates, you increase the performance of those components.
There is a reason why Vega 7 took the approach it did, it cut down on the CU count, but dramatically increased clockrates over Vega 64, it's a balancing act.
But for Graphics Core Next to scale beyond 64 CU's, there needs to be a significant reworking of the architecture to fix it's inherent bottlenecks that holds back gaming performance.
| HollyGamer said: Also yes everything is possible in the realm of logic, reality and "HUMAN KNOWLEDGE LIMITATION " hell nobody can guess what i am wearing now, neither you nor you and know what will Navi performance be, yes many expert out there who said Navi is "just another GCN, and then 7nm will not bring anything , AMD are not at the current situation to change." Yes they speak based on history data of bad thing from AMD result on GPU performance , they forgot AMD has done decent maybe not as good as Nvidia. |
Navi will perform better than Polaris, but less than Vega. That's the reality of the situation.
Navi is Polaris's replacement, not a high-end GPU.
It's the same rubbish that happened prior to Polaris's release, everyone was hyping it, but at the end of the day... It was a GPU that was destined for the mainstream markets, just like Navi, so don't expect high-end performance.
And I know this for a FACT because of AMD's statements... And when it comes to hardware, I tend to be right more often than not.
| HollyGamer said: Also the benchmark you are using is an old game crysis 3 , also some games is just play better on AMD GPU also you forgot on reality benchmark is bond to be different form one PC to another especially when it's just small few number . So yes GTX 970 -980 are equal with RX 480. |
Doesn't matter? It's not meant to test performance, it's meant to test load power consumption.
You only need the one gaming test, which is all that Anandtech provided, unless you are suggesting that you have a better knowledge-base than even Anandtech on this topic?
https://www.anandtech.com/show/10446/the-amd-radeon-rx-480-preview/6
I mean, you could cling to the power-virus "furmark" if you wish, but AMD's GPU's throttle in that.
If we take a look at Polaris Version 2. Aka. The Radeon RX 580. Power consumption is higher yet again, higher than a GTX 1070 which out-performs it.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11278/amd-radeon-rx-580-rx-570-review/16
| HollyGamer said: Flops is not everything, agree on that is like you mentioned that a millions times, just look at how Vega 64 12,6 teraflops compared to GTX 1080 which just 9 teraflops but beat Vega 64, but at current states you mentioned before what we have for now is just GCN architecture , that's how we measured AMD performance "until" we have a new 7+ nm architecture. |
What?
HollyGamer said:
New rumor just came, PS5 will be using Navi 9 or a cut down Navi 9. Navi 9 itself will be more powerful than navi 10 . navi 10 rumor to be as powerful as RTX 2070
|
A youtube video based on a youtube video rumor.
Grains of salt shall be had on this day.
The leaks I have seen pegs Navi at Vega 56 levels. RTX 2070 beats Vega 64... So...
https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/3072523/amd-navi-benchmarks-leak
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
