Page 7 of 10 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 91

Thread: AMD's HD7970 is ready for action! The most effiency and fastest card on earth.

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    383

    Default

    Sourse1: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norther...s_(GPU_family) - Sourse2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_400_Series - Sourse3: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_500_Series - Look at the gtx400 wiki under the history: Fermi has double precision, half the single precision. Radeon has 1/4(vliw4) or 1/5(vliw5). - Look at the gtx500 wiki: gtx580 has 1.6Tflops "estimated 64bit-FMA2 power". But we want the final 32bit-FMA3 power, so we multiply by 3(64bit-DualIssue=2*32bit)(FMA3=3ops when FMA2=2). If you see gtx400 wiki under the products: FMA3 has estimations for 2.5 and 2.7ops when the diagram has only count the base 2ops(FMA2). So true gtx580 power=4.7Tflops when Radeon6970=2.7Tflops. Thats 75% faster for gtx580. Prove: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/305?vs=292 - See that in the new Unigine (Heavy Tessellation Mode) gtx580=40%faster than Radeon6970. In DX11(high)=2x faster!!! And a real benchmark: h264 transcode= 75% faster (said so). Games are not good bench because multi-sampling is cheat and because there is not only FPS but FPS*Image Quality, and gtx580 has better FX that apply even in 3Dmark. - So how Radeon7000 with 35% better math (from 6970), can win gtx580??? And how can win a gtx600 that is 5times faster than gtx580: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...rce_600_Series ??? - Finlay VLIW has nothing to do with multiply. Vliw executes operations in parallel, based on a fixed schedule determined when programs are compiled, by a more complex compiler. So Vliw4 means that a vector register is 128bit and executes 4*32bit objects (Amd called those objects: stream processors). - Also Amd wont work for Linux: Many game crush when 3D starts (like CSS). Many have pure FPS due to pure Radeon D3D to OGL translations. Techs like Physics and CG wont work on GPU (only on CPU, so PCSX2 will run with 20fps on a Dual-SSSE3-@3ghz). Video acceleration does not do anything important, wille video transcoding practically don't exist (OpenCL expensive transcoders have bad quality, when Mediacoder-Cuda rocks), so I remember a friends phrase: "A bad h264 transcoder has less quality than a good Mpeg2".

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    383

    Default

    I mean poor, sorry!!!

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    383

    Default

    GTX 460se has only 100box new!!! Mine has 336cores unloked and 1.9ghz = 3,83Tflops(32bit-FMA3)!!!

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by efikkan View Post
    I'm still waiting for boards shipping with Coreboot, which my company would consider buying. Replacing the EFI is ok for home use, but not for commercial use.

    Keep in mind AMD is committed to EFI.
    Of course they must be committed to EFI, Windows 8 will not boot without EFI. I'm hopping they will go with coreboot with a EFI payload and linux users will be able to replace the payload with a useful one. BTW, your company wants desktops or servers? For servers there is a higher chance to find boards made specifically for linux.

    Quote Originally Posted by efikkan View Post
    Then maybe you should check it out before dismissing the driver.
    1 Usually in the next or the following driver release, within a month.
    2 For Debian-based distributions you can just use the one in the ppa or add the custom ppa.
    3 I would disagree.
    1 That's exactly what I said. For my work computer it may be ok to wait up to a month before upgrading to the latest kernel, I do that anyway, but my home computer is as bleeding-edge as possible.
    2 I don't use a Debian based distribution, and even if I did I don't think it would solve my problem, I'm talking about building my own custom kernel (make oldconfig; make -j5; make install; make modules_install) not using the one provided by the distribution or some ppa
    3 Did you do a `dmesg | grep -i taint` to check it or you just like to disagree? Debian wiki still mentions this as a problem http://wiki.debian.org/NvidiaGraphic...ints_kernel.22

    BTW, all the problems I mentioned are design problems that apply to all binary drivers (or even free drivers maintained out of the linux kernel) and will most likely never be fixed.

    Quote Originally Posted by efikkan View Post
    You didn't get my point. Both alternatives has proprietary componens, so by following your logic both should be evil. There is no way to avoid everything proprietary in the real world.
    Keeping the kernel not tainted is a big enough issue for me. I do use hardware that requires proprietary firmware and some user-space blobs as well, I try to replace them with free alternatives whenever possible, but proprietary kernel drivers it's too much.

    Quote Originally Posted by efikkan View Post
    If you do OpenGL development, you should write on the OpenGL 3.2+ platform which every following version is based on. Every modern hardware since GeForce 8000/Radeon HD 2000 series support this hardware feature level(SM4), and SM4 differs from older versions. There is no sensible reason to optimize for OpenGL 2.1 today, when every performing piece of hardware today is optimized for SM4, and SM3(or older) will be a serious bottleneck.

    Utilities like Blender and GIMP uses OpenGL and OpenCL, so proper support is actually important for a large group of people.
    With OpenGL 3.0 being almost ready and most features required for OpenGL 3.3 except for newer GLSL being implemented, the biggest issue still remaining is OpenCL.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by artivision View Post
    you don't have any clue about how to work with sources.
    you have to quote the part of the source covers your claim.
    do you really think the people read the hole bibel just because you claim the bibel is the source?
    also your source about the Northern Island GPU family are useless because no quote.

    Quote Originally Posted by artivision View Post
    and again a source without quote is useless.
    the same source claim complete different numbers than your numbers.

    this source point out that the GTX480 only do have 0,16 TFLOPS (DP) and not your claimed 4 TFLOPS DP.


    Quote Originally Posted by artivision View Post
    - Sourse3: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_500_Series - Look at the gtx400 wiki under the history: Fermi has double precision, half the single precision.
    you don't get the point that the gtx480 and gtx580 do have speed throttling in double precision. the speed throttling do a throttling to 1/8 of the speed.
    because of this the TESLA do have 0,666 Tflops DP without Throttling and the gtx580 only do have 0.18 Tflops DP.

    and even without Throttling the hd7970 is faster.


    Quote Originally Posted by artivision View Post
    Radeon has 1/4(vliw4) or 1/5(vliw5). - Look at the gtx500 wiki: gtx580 has 1.6Tflops "estimated 64bit-FMA2 power". But we want the final 32bit-FMA3 power, so we multiply by 3(64bit-DualIssue=2*32bit)(FMA3=3ops when FMA2=2). If you see gtx400 wiki under the products: FMA3 has estimations for 2.5 and 2.7ops when the diagram has only count the base 2ops(FMA2). So true gtx580 power=4.7Tflops when Radeon6970=2.7Tflops. Thats 75% faster for gtx580.
    and again you mix instruction set with raw calculating power FMA3 isn't RAW calculating power.

    and you don't understand the architecture of the VLIW its not 1/4.

    based on the optimisations and the workload its 100% of the speed not 1/4.

    I'm 100% sure your fake numbers are just your misunderstanding "So true gtx580 power=4.7Tflops " there are no "true power" you imagine a single workload with a specific instruction set. but without this kind of FAKE the gtx580 is much slower.


    Quote Originally Posted by artivision View Post
    your claimed prove prove you wrong :

    SmallLuxGPU 1.7beta - Luxball HDR
    Thousands of Rays per Second - Higher is Better

    gtx580- 6750 vs hd6970- 14600

    the amd card is 2,16 times faster than the nvidia.

    and surprise surprise this numbers covers the official numbers: 1,581 Tflops SP vs 2703 Tflops SP on amd side.

    Hell you are Stupid Really! i prove you wrong with you own SOURCE!

    Quote Originally Posted by artivision View Post
    - See that in the new Unigine (Heavy Tessellation Mode) gtx580=40%faster than Radeon6970.
    Tessellation has nothing to do with raw calculating speed.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    234

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by artivision View Post
    GTX 460se has only 100box new!!! Mine has 336cores unloked and 1.9ghz = 3,83Tflops(32bit-FMA3)!!!
    I also have a 460se. Can you tell me how you unlocked your card?

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    383

    Default

    1) FMA3(3ops),Madd+Mul(3ops),Madd(2ops), are not only parts of the instruction set, but raw power as well. - 2) 4.7TflopsSP-32bit or 2.3Tflops-64bit I said, and 2.3DP-32bit or 1.1DP-64bit. Each Vliw core is one DP regardless of the stream processors inside. At the end, even if a card does not have at all DP, you can make it happen in software, so not important. - 3) I am telling you exactly ware to look: gtx400 wiki under "products" tag and under "history" tag. - 4) Unigine is not tessellation, is a complete benchmark with heavy tessellation. And SmallLux is old, represents nothing. The truth is in the h264 transcoding. - 5) A friend of mine has Radeon6870@1ghz=22FPS with custom settings in a well known benchmark. I have gtx460@1.9ghz=26FPS at the same settings and same benchmark. - 6) Sorry for my tone, I mean no disrespect, but your knowledge is based in a very simplistic understanding of processors (not scientific way). - 7) I don't want to continue this dialog, it is not important from here on. The clues I give and the clues you give, are enough for anyone to understand what is more profitable for him. I don't sell Nvidia cards anyway.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by artivision View Post
    1) FMA3(3ops),Madd+Mul(3ops),Madd(2ops), are not only parts of the instruction set, but raw power as well.
    in fact you calculate the raw power without an FMA3 instruction set.
    because of this the nvidia Fermi cards do not have 4 Tflops DP
    the Fermi do have 0,666 Tflops DP

    your FMA3 Instruction Set claim only affect some calculations but not all.

    Quote Originally Posted by artivision View Post
    - 2) 4.7TflopsSP-32bit or 2.3Tflops-64bit I said, and 2.3DP-32bit or 1.1DP-64bit.
    the Official nvidia number is 1,5811 Tflop SP and not 4.7TflopsSP

    and again you imagine the speed up from a FMA3 instruction set as real Tflops but this is wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by artivision View Post
    4) Unigine is not tessellation, is a complete benchmark with heavy tessellation.
    in fact the Unigine benchmark do not test the calculation speed.

    And the gtx580 is only faster in this benchmark than the hd6970 because the tesselation unit is faster and now comes the super clue the hd7970 do have a faster tesselation unit than the gtx580.
    Quote Originally Posted by artivision View Post
    And SmallLux is old, represents nothing.
    In your source it represents the speed of Ray-Tracing. And in fact RayTracing is only calculation sped nothing more.
    the SmallLux Raytracing benchmark prove the hd6970 is faster in calculating than the gtx580.
    Quote Originally Posted by artivision View Post
    The truth is in the h264 transcoding. - 5) A friend of mine has Radeon6870@1ghz=22FPS with custom settings in a well known benchmark. I have gtx460@1.9ghz=26FPS at the same settings and same benchmark.
    no its not the "truth" you claimed your card is modification by bios manipulation.
    this means if you don't manipulate your card the radeon card is faster.

    also the h264 test do not prove the raw calculating speed its just speed up because of the FMA3 Instruction Set.

    Quote Originally Posted by artivision View Post
    3) I am telling you exactly ware to look: gtx400 wiki under "products" tag and under "history" tag. -
    ok i do your job for you:

    "So the theoretical single precision peak performance, with shader count [n] and shader frequency [f, GHz], can be estimated by the following, FLOPSsp ≈ f × n × 2 (FMA). Total Processing Power: for GF100 FLOPSsp ≈ f × m ×(32 SPs × 2(FMA) + 4 × 4 SFUs) "

    GF100-> f(1401mhz) × m ×(32 SPs × 2(FMA) + 4 × 4 SFUs)≈ 1,34496 TFLOPsp

    there is no room for your fake numbers.

    this just prove the nvidia card slower in raw calculating power.


    Quote Originally Posted by artivision View Post
    - 6) Sorry for my tone, I mean no disrespect, but your knowledge is based in a very simplistic understanding of processors (not scientific way).
    even your source prove 1,34TFLOPsp for the GTX480 and 1,6 TFLOPsp for the GTX580.

    and the ironie is i use the same sources than you but you claim if you use the same source its Scientific and if i use the same source its not Scientific.


    Quote Originally Posted by artivision View Post
    - 7) I don't want to continue this dialog, it is not important from here on. The clues I give and the clues you give, are enough for anyone to understand what is more profitable for him. I don't sell Nvidia cards anyway.
    sure your own source "wikipedia" and your benchmark source prove the nvidia as slower in raw Calculation.

    anyone can read this in YOUR Sources LOL

    anyway maybe raw-speed isn't all maybe only the instruction set FMA3 matters?

    but you can prove this with the FX8150 amd cpu-> no intel customer care about this.

    FMA4 doesn’t matter in real world.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,646

    Default

    @Ansla

    W8 boots fine without EFI, but maybe you will need EFI in order to use OEM preactivation. For the W8 logo the system must support secure boot. Maybe you didnt notice that there was a 32 bit W8 preview, that will never require EFI, because thats something for 64 bit systems only.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    @artivision i do have another source to prove you complete wrong:
    http://bitclockers.com/forums/index.php?topic=6.0

    HD6970=402Mhash/s
    GTX580=125Mh/s

    in fact the amd card is 4 time faster in calculations than nvidia!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •