Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Dec 13, 2016.
my result 02.04.40....
100 samples 15.96 seconds
I am really hoping for the best for AMD. They cannot fail again but could they afford to fail again is the question.
Good that I actually helped AMD, 4 major cash disrupting things i bought lately: Bulldozer, R9 280, R9 280X and R9 390.
When kids from USA will start buying brand new 8 core CPUs, I can sit back relax, watch and enjoy the show. This is very important lesson - market has to have a competition !
What almost all of them did after seeing how badly GTX 970 was made, they went and buy another nvidia card ! why ? u want GPUs market to be broken like CPU ? U lacked performance all of the sudden ? I question their choice again:
GTX 1080: 8GB
Both of them have same performance or is it that nvidia did cut on memory ?
Too much wine.
To much something.
Pass the kutchie pon the lef' hand side?
But seriously WTF does mean. Google translate has failed me.
So anyone know more about the learning that ryzen is capable of?
Just curious how it works in layman terms.
Nice CPU..If it really delivers I will change my CPU on Our Family PC for an All AMD Build..
Tested Blender with my CPU..
I am not perfectly sure what settings the AMD test used but got 55s on 100 samples and 200 samples was 1 minute 47s for me
it seems correct one would be 150 samples.
I'll take a guess at what you wanted to say here:
Yes it's good that AMD is back in competitive mode! Will certainly help the market for CPUs.
Then again, the problem the 970 had was "unique" to the chip in Maxwell lineup. Why should one not buy other cards that don't suffer from such a bad memory bandwidth cut? Except you want to avoid hardware you've had troubles with. In that case I would have to rule out buying AMD GPUs ever again because of having bad cards with AMD chips (probably screwed up by the board partners and not AMD), as well as crappy drivers. Would that also be reasonable then?
And no, no no no, no no. No, no and no. No. No. Simply no. A PC with a reasonable CPU and a 1080 still does have better performance than a XB1. Check your facts friend, this is simply not true. It might have the flops and stuff, but if you'd know how console games are rendered and what you can get out of a 1080 on the PC, you'd not say that.
Xbox One GPU is equivalent to something like a HD7870 isn't it?
For the idiots that want to know how it works (or rather a visual for how it works).
Look, AMD insisted that 390(X) has to have 8GB vram, Sony and Microsoft did that for PS4 and Xbox 1 (yes i know it is shared memory but both of them can use almost all of it for textures). That means 3 BIG corps decided it is adequate to have 8GB for now and for future - both consoles and 390 are at 28nm
Now, what nvidia has done is a big big performance improvements with 1070 and 1080, they used 16nm Fab, they went next level ! but they left old memory capacity. How 1060/1070/1080 will stand the test of time when next next-gen consoles will show up ? will any game developer take into consideration a 8GB vram limit while they work on a AAA title for 12-16GB PS5 ?
Apparently they used 150 samples.
Then explain the Fury X and Polaris line. All 8GB or less.
What you say makes no sense. The 390 had 8GB years after the consoles appeared. The Scorpio which is the next console we'll see will have 12GB of memory and according to Phil Spencer it will ONLY use it to enable the 4k framebuffer and it won't be used for extra functionality really. So those 8GB on those GeForces and in the AMD cards are going to be fine for a lot of time. The fabrication process means nothing about the commonalities. The refreshes of the consoles (both the PS4 slim and the Xbox One S) are at 14nm, same as Polaris. I'm not even sure there will be a "PS5" in a reasonable amount of time. Not in the next three years at least. The model that the console manufacturers seem to follow is the mobile appstore one. The vanilla PS4/XboxOne will have as long, or even longer life as the Xbox360/PS3, and whatever comes next will maintain backwards compatibility which removes the available title problem that each new console generation has.
AMD also have a 480 with 4gb and 8gb so there's your "AMD insist on 8gb" argument right out the window.
I have a 980ti with it's lowly 6gb VRAM and I game at 1440p. Not once have I had a VRAM issue.
Talking about future, when games "require" 12-16gb VRAM I'll mostly have upgraded 2 or 3 times from this 980ti. Talking about future...
EDIT: Also, you might want to check what thread you're posting in. This is a AMD CPU thread, not sure why you're bringing GPUs and VRAM into this thread.
So I just saw this again @ video cardz
1500mhz gpu frequency with a whopping 12.7Tflops and not 9.8tflops like at first. That's a good 1-2Tflops more then TitanXP..
adult photo sharing