- Joined
- Nov 4, 2005
- Messages
- 12,066 (1.72/day)
System Name | Compy 386 |
---|---|
Processor | 7800X3D |
Motherboard | Asus |
Cooling | Air for now..... |
Memory | 64 GB DDR5 6400Mhz |
Video Card(s) | 7900XTX 310 Merc |
Storage | Samsung 990 2TB, 2 SP 2TB SSDs, 24TB Enterprise drives |
Display(s) | 55" Samsung 4K HDR |
Audio Device(s) | ATI HDMI |
Mouse | Logitech MX518 |
Keyboard | Razer |
Software | A lot. |
Benchmark Scores | Its fast. Enough. |
What about them? There is an odd case of having better performance due to 1GB of extra VRAM but that os really all she wrote and has little to do with the argumentation which is that, once again we are hearing a repackaged AMD fine wine here. We know this doesnt really exist. In the larger scheme of things a 680, and a 7970 are equally obsolete and relegated to budget/low end performance level.
It needs no discussion that GCN is lacking the efficiency it needs to compete. That will only get worse as the die space and power budget is limited. The best architecture is the one that can keep clear of these limitations. The moment you touch them on the current node is a sign you are getting behind the curve, and AMD ignored those signs since 2013. Nvidia offers us an architectural update every time they risk having to move up from their cut down big die. The only time we got the full Titan in a consumer chip was with the 780ti, and only because Hawaii existed.
Hawaii was a worse performing graphic die but had potential for compute based off what AMD saw as the limiting factors of Tahiti. It was also aimed for a node shrink which didn't happen, and it took a mediocre chip and made it more bland with only 17% more performance than a 7970Ghz while using 13% more power too.
Adding more streaming processors made it worse, again, due to poor management of resources, but they worked great at actual streaming loads like Compute, mining anyone?