Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD Announces The Rx 300 Series, Fiji-Based Fury X, R9 Nano, Project Quantum

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #51
    Originally posted by dungeon View Post
    He, he, one single oldest gen card in whole current card (and APU series does not support freesync)...
    Originally posted by dungeon View Post
    He, he, (one single oldest gen card in whole current card and APU series) does not support freesync...
    Not even sarcasm, just different ways to parse... I read it the first way above, but I think you meant the second way.
    Last edited by bridgman; 06-17-2015, 12:07 PM.

    Comment


    • #52
      Originally posted by bridgman View Post
      All gfxip8 and up (Tonga, Carrizo, Fiji, Iceland/Topaz) are supposed to use the amdgpu kernel driver. ...
      What about "Carrizo-L"?
      Is Carrizo-L "Sea Islands" or "Volcanic Islands"?

      Comment


      • #53
        Carrizo-L is Sea Islands AFAIK, so radeon.

        Comment


        • #54
          Originally posted by pete910 View Post
          Anyone else think that if AMD's driver got it's act together out of the door the fury nano would be perfect for the steam boxes!
          Yeah. That fury nano is really appealing. It would be nice to have an all in one with the nano.
          Btw, I was wondering if this new memory technology will be integrated in the future APUs. That would be mind blowing.

          Comment


          • #55
            Originally posted by Kano View Post
            DX10 means OpenGL 4 hardware. If you have got this then you could think about it.
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radeon_HD_4000_series

            D3D10 = OGL3.3

            Comment


            • #56
              Originally posted by boffo View Post

              Yeah. That fury nano is really appealing. It would be nice to have an all in one with the nano.
              Btw, I was wondering if this new memory technology will be integrated in the future APUs. That would be mind blowing.
              Since there isn't anything concrete it's hard to say but judging by the AMD cpu info roadmap AMD posted 2017 is the safest bet.
              Next year it's all about Zen then the new APU's come 2017 as 2016's model is supposed to be a carrizo respin AFAIK.

              Comment


              • #57
                Originally posted by dungeon View Post
                He, he, one single oldest gen card in whole current card and APU series does not support freesync... that is probably the biggest let-down for sure, one black sheep in the family
                So? Not the entire launch was a let-down.

                To recap:
                R7 360: meh
                R7 370: how about no?
                R9 380: nice
                R9 380X: sorely missed
                R9 390: meh
                R9 390X: meh
                R9 Fury nano: WANT
                R9 Fury: great
                R9 Fury X: great

                Another thing I don't like about the launch is that AMD is pulling tricks like preventing the newer drivers from running on the old cards. This shall presumably prevent reviewers from benchmarking both with the new drivers and proclaiming that there is no performance difference.

                Comment


                • #58
                  Originally posted by chithanh View Post
                  So? Not the entire launch was a let-down.
                  R7 360: meh
                  Why meh, that is first possible WOW performer for former iGPU users

                  R7 370: how about no?
                  Why not - raw perfomer per buck, much faster just slightly more expensive then first, because it is oldest.

                  R9 390: meh
                  R9 390X: meh
                  Currently still fastest GDDR5 AMD GPUs on the market are meh?

                  R9 Fury nano: WANT
                  You seems to like compact cards, like Lisa Su

                  R9 Fury: great
                  R9 Fury X: excellent
                  Fixed that for you

                  Another thing I don't like about the launch is that AMD is pulling tricks like preventing the newer drivers from running on the old cards. This shall presumably prevent reviewers from benchmarking both with the new drivers and proclaiming that there is no performance difference.
                  If you think about VLIW cards, those start to bitrotting probably year ago... no Mantle, no Vulkan, no DX12 reasones.

                  Or if you think about Fiji hotfix one, well that is not even a beta driver - more in sense "use this one on Fiji, if you can't wait"
                  Last edited by dungeon; 06-19-2015, 10:53 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #59
                    Originally posted by dungeon View Post
                    Why not - raw perfomer per buck, much faster just slightly more expensive then first, because it is oldest.
                    It's even slower than the R9 270X. It doesn't support FreeSync. It taints the whole 3xx line, because you now cannot simply tell someone to just get the card that fits his wallet, you have to tell him to specifically avoid a card if he wants variable refresh.

                    Originally posted by dungeon View Post
                    Currently still fastest GDDR5 AMD GPUs on the market are meh?
                    Yes. I want 4K HEVC and VP9 video decode.

                    Originally posted by dungeon View Post
                    Fixed that for you
                    No. In some respects the Fury X is excellent, but AMD messed up a couple of details.

                    Lack of HDMI 2.0 doesn't personally affect me, but this is a major showstopper for a lot of gamers if you read gaming oriented forums. Those people already have (or plan to buy) 4K TVs for gaming and it's all NVidia for them now.
                    4 GB memory is adequate at best.
                    No VP9 video decode acceleration (at least nowhere mentioned).

                    Except for the 4 GB memory which would have needed an expensive dual-link interposer to get to 8 GB that is all thanks to AMD's obsession with eliminating feature creep. Because if you cut too many features, you will end up a product which includes a showstopper for too many people.

                    Originally posted by dungeon View Post
                    If you think about VLIW cards, those start to bitrotting probably year ago... no Mantle, no Vulkan, no DX12 reasones.
                    No, I am talking about drivers that work on the 390X but not on the 290X.


                    Comment


                    • #60
                      Originally posted by chithanh View Post
                      It's even slower than the R9 270X. It doesn't support FreeSync. It taints the whole 3xx line, because you now cannot simply tell someone to just get the card that fits his wallet, you have to tell him to specifically avoid a card if he wants variable refresh.
                      That kind of things happens with many vendors and often happened many times especially in low end segment... R7 370 is now in mid/low end cards segment it is not flagship product, to care about much. Yes it is oldest gen currentlly in 3xx series, people should be informed by that of course if they want to use it on FreeSync monitor - that it does not support FreeSync, etc... so what, do AMD especially need to advertise 'NoFreeSync' on R7 370 boxes

                      You have those kind of things in Intel CPUs much more then on AMD CPUs, where often on low/mid level CPU some instructions are missing, but no one advertising missing features at all, etc...

                      Originally posted by chithanh View Post
                      Yes. I want 4K HEVC and VP9 video decode.
                      You probably don't want any of these cards, as VP9 decoder is not available on any of AMD cards.

                      Dunno what is issue about, you seems to want similar things like Kano - exactly what those don't have I guess you know those can't be added on a finished chips, so yelding about those does not help anymore...

                      Only it can be added to the wishlist, for some future chips

                      Someone might wish Titan X, GTX 980 an GTX 970 to have full HEVC like AMD Carrizo have it.. but to no avail, that can't happen

                      Originally posted by chithanh View Post
                      No, I am talking about drivers that work on the 390X but not on the 290X.
                      So you are complaing because AMD posts one preview driver installer which supports Fury and R3xx series on two 64bit OS only I guess this is the one in question?

                      http://support.amd.com/en-us/kb-arti...00-Series.aspx
                      Last edited by dungeon; 06-19-2015, 11:40 PM.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X