Originally posted by You-
View Post
More like GCN---+++ given that we removed the display engine, graphics pipeline and texture filtering but added hardware for matrix operations, more instruction overlap and new data types. Everything is debatable but we felt that continuing it GCN (Graphics Core Next) without even basic graphics functionality did not make sense.
And yes, if we had picked a different name for GCN that did not include the word "graphics" 10 years ago things would have been easier

Originally posted by You-
View Post
RDNA CUs gave considerably better graphics performance but since they took more silicon area there were generally fewer CUs for any given level of graphics performance... and the "fewer CUs" led to "less compute performance" but only if you were comparing chips with comparable graphics power.
Leave a comment: