By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
HollyGamer said:

Ok  then our reference card is a mistake, change Hawaii to Tahiti, because Tahiti was a high end GPU from 2013  and being surpassed by Polaris, there you have Polaris to Navi comparison possibility able to surpassed Vega 64 and radeon VII

https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AMD-RX-480-vs-AMD-R9-390/3634vs3481

I thought Hawaii was the one on 7970 or R 390 but it was tahiti.

Tahiti was the Radeon R9 280... But your comparison link is between Polaris and Hawaii? Like... You what, mate?

I feel like you are extremely confused, but despite that... Intend to keep arguing the point anyway.

HollyGamer said:
The video already prove it both of the argument, theory, math and all calculation.

No. It asserts those points and proves nothing.
A youtube video evidence does not make. - Otherwise I can simply claim the Earth is flat, lots of youtube videos about that!

HollyGamer said:
We are not discussing if it could be better or not, we are talking a big jump in AMD , of course we are not comparing to Nvidia, we are comparing to AMD previous GPU, so that gain is big.

False. We are discussing the entire big picture.

Straffaren666 said:

There's a big difference between designing Navi for being built on the 7nm process node and shrinking Vega 7 to 7nm. Designing a SOC on the 7nm node is very expensive. Vega 7 is a low volume niche product and the shrink to 7nm was most likely a bare minimum effort.

The point I am making is that Navi is not designed and built for 7nm.
It's the same old Graphics Core Next architecture.

Straffaren666 said:

I don't believe there is a need for making a departure from GCN for AMD. All the current bottlenecks are not any major flaws in the architecture and can be overcome by evolutionary updates of the various units.

There is a massive need. The fact that AMD is a generation or two behind nVidia is a testament to that very fact.

Straffaren666 said:

Load balancing is not a major issue yet. The number of pixels per CU for 16 CUs@1080p is the same as 64 CUs@4K. There are not any significant inefficiencies when crossing the 16CU boundary at 1080p and the same applies when crossing 64CUs at 4K.

It's always an issue.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--