Look at this clueless person acting like he really knows how to design GPUs better a 200$ billion company which have been designing GPUs for ages.
So, based on your logic the Vega 56 is a more efficient GPU than AMD's latest and greatest 5700 XT, because it has more TFLOPS and much more compute units, and consumes similiar amounts of power,
Because you do know how to design a GPU, right ? Sorry your GPU architect badge must have fallen off.
So, based on your logic the Vega 56 is a more efficient GPU than AMD's latest and greatest 5700 XT, because it has more TFLOPS and much more compute units, and consumes similiar amounts of power,
Nope, that's based on your logic. Your understanding of what I said was obviously severely limited.
First of all Vega 56 uses more power, and runs at lower clocks. A legendary GPU architect like yourself would know that a larger processor at lower clocks runs more efficiently because shaders scale relativity linearly with power whereas a change in clocks incurs a change in voltage which isn't linear. In other words if let's say we have a GPU with N/2 shaders at 2 Ghz it will generally consume
more power than a GPU with N shaders at 1 Ghz.
Let's compile that with how Navi works : RX 5700XT runs at a considerably higher voltages and clocks and has way less shaders
and yet it generates a similar amount of FP32 compute with less power. It's obviously way more efficient architecturally, but as I already mentioned I am sure a world renowned GPU architect as yourself knew all that.
On the other hand, Volta and Ampere run at pretty much the same frequency and likely similar voltages since TSMC's 7nm doesn't seem to change that in any significant manner (in fact all 7nm CPU/GPU up until know seem to run at the same or even higher voltages), GA100 has 20% more shaders compared to V100 but also consumes 60% more power. It doesn't take much to see that efficiency isn't that great. It's not that hard to infer these things, don't overestimate their complexity.
Yes, I am sure when you factor in Nvidia's novel floating point formats it looks great, but if you look just at FP32, it's doesn't look great. It's rather mediocre. Do you not find it strange that our boy Jensen never once mentioned FP32 performance ?
I never said I knew how to design it better, stop projecting made up staff onto me. I said it was obvious they failed to do what they originally set out to do, hence why a considerable porton of the chip is fused off. They've done it in the past too.
, 400W, that's 150W over V100. Ouch, 7nm hasn't been kind, I was right that this is a power hungry monster.
