Next Gen AMD GPUs to Get a Massive Energy Efficiency Design Focus

[HumanSmoke]

I like that part but unfortunately, for the last couple of generations, the CPU portion of the die in Intel's CPUs has been getting smaller and smaller while the price per CPU has remained roughly the same (or has even increased) . And we'll keep getting screwed harder and harder without any competition for Intel.

But they aren't the only metrics in play are they? If they were, Intel would be turning over process nodes as fast as was technically possible and would have pushed to 450mm wafers ages ago. At least Samsung and TSMC and co. can gouge the hell out of their customers to offset the price of building/upgrading their fabs, clean room costs - litho tooling, test and validation tooling etc. Intel largely produces for its own product lines.
You also need to factor in the die space allocated for IGP (and eDRAM where applicable) for mainstream processors. And as you should be aware, die size for -E/-EP/-EN/-EX hasn't fallen for the most part.

 

[64K]

My ego calls bullshit.

To that end, let me be like most of the people I argue against. I am right because I said so. I will allow you to put forward the large amount of effort to comb through all my conversations, provide links to why the conclusions you draw are correct, and whenever you've put forward all of that effort I'm not going to pay any attention to it and still argue the point.

I cannot possibly be reacting to laziness with anger, because after hundreds of discussion where I tried to be the better person I've learned that the better person isn't the victor. It couldn't possibly be that after providing nuance, admitting to mistakes, and trying to be better I've gotten into more arguments than the people who just say "AMD sucks," "Nvidia sucks," and "Intel sucks." I haven't ever tried to ask people questions, giving them the clear opportunity to answer why I am wrong. I have to be ignoring the people who cite me getting angry.



You know what, you're right. For the next week I'll just put forward the effort most other people do. Consider these three paragraph superfluous. Just go with "I call bullshit. You're wrong." That gives you some insight into me, right? It gives you the opportunity to address me as something more than a child, incapable of saying what I mean.


Fuck it, we'll do it live!

Carry on son.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

I agree. It's a balancing act though, even for Nvidia. "Which part of the equation would you sacrifice Mr. CEO? Well...." You know what I'm saying? Making these kinds of good tough decisions is what keeps Nvidia on top.

But honestly, I think I would split it down the middle, 50% less power, 50% faster. Yea, I'll settle for that I want fluid gameplay...I'm lookin at you 4K

4k is exactly why they need efficiency, because 2x the performance of either gpu vendors top single gpu card is needed at the minute, putting twice the performance in a single chips going to require vast efficiency improvements.

I'm no expert but frequency isn't the best metric. IPC is? It doesn't matter if Brand A is 'x' Hz if those Hz don't give the performance.

The post I replied to implied Intel had been pushing clocks while gaining efficiency i mearly pointed out intel have kept clocks reasonably low, 3-4ghz and that as they add more cores they are cutting frequency back like crazy (latest 10 core 20 thread part 3.3ghz)im not wrong.
Ipc is not the most important metric these days as the billions of multi core ,high efficiency arm chips sold shows, least thats what i think.

 

[Frick]

You miss 50% of the feedback to your posts. Very few members dispute that you are very intelligent and have a good deal of tech knowledge to share with all of us, however, it's that you spin off into "people are stupid" regularly for some kind of extroverted egotistical self gratification thing that is mundane.

This may be off topic, but he doesn't spin off into that, and if he does you can call him out on it and he'll probably apologize if there's something to apologize for. Some of the internet-savants don't do that, so I'll rather have the hoff than some others I've encountered.

Ipc is not the most important metric these days as the billions of multi core ,high efficiency arm chips sold shows, least thats what i think.

Bulldozer is the gift that keeps on giving.

 

[BiggieShady]

For the love of god just agree with him.

LOL, too much text to agree with, I just wanna smoke some from his stash so I can also produce a wall of text

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

LOL, too much text to agree with, I just wanna smoke some from his stash so I can also produce a wall of text

Fine. Don't expect me to respond to anything from you any more. Have a nice day.


Edit:
One more go here.

You're an ass. I say this, because whenever I said the exact same thing in the past, that is what I was called. I'd prefer not to be a coward, and not address this.

I'm not incapable of taking the criticism, only unwilling to allow such a double standard to exist. If you'd care to make a comment I'd suggest a PM, assuming that gets past the ignore system.

 

[Pumper]

That's funny, because AMD fanboys keep saying that power consumption does not matter.

 

[medi01]

Fury over-hyped and under delivered. It was supposed to be the fastest GPU in the world (it wasn't) and was supposed to overclock well (it didnt, and when OCed it drew tons of power). It was the same price as a 980ti, but was slower, more power hungry, and required the mounting of a water cooler. And it released so much later than the 900 series, allowing nvidia to gain a massive portion of the market.

Fury is a great product (unlike Buldozer, which you've listed next to it)
It was never supposed to be "the fastest", they took on 980 and it is faster than 980 (Ti was released just to spoil the launch).
Fury is a family of products, some having no competition whatsoever (Nano) some coming with water cooling out of the box (X) and some with air cooling (non X).

Slower? Ah, at 1080p? Oh well...
At other resolutions, there was that lovely fishy thingy going with benchmarks:

IXBT.com FireStrike 1440p = FuryX is 3.4% faster
Guru3d.com FireStrike 1440p = 980 TI is 6.2% faster

IXBT.com GTA5 1440p = FuryX is 5% faster
Guru3d.com GTA5 1440p = 980 TI is 16.2% faster

IXBT.com Shadows of Mordor 1440p = FuryX is 18.7% faster
Guru3d.com Shadows of Mordor 1440 = 980 TI is 2.1% faster

https://translate.google.com/transl...u=http://www.ixbt.com/video3/fiji-part3.shtml


And heck, if that is not enough, just slap more "nVidia bribed devs" games into the mix or use even older driver. Cool stuff.

 

[BiggieShady]

You're an ass.

I've been known to piss people off both when I'm being an ass and when I'm not. Ignored or not, I just want to make clear (to anyone reading this) that my comment wasn't meant to be hurtful ... sometimes it's hard to determine sensitivity levels and/or chance of successful communication of one's sentiment ... oh well

 

[Casecutter]

WCCFT says, "two times energy efficiency which AMD had promised in their slides during the Financial Analyst Day 2015." while referencing the May 2015 Slide that shows "High Performance with 2X the Energy Eficiency²". I would think the super-script 2 at the end is the caveat that would need to be discussed.

From that we get @btarunr with his TITLE that inflates with rhetoric of "Massive Energy Efficiency Design Focus"

This is old news... a short snippet based on a May 2015 slide, and we are lulled into discussing what is just "A Focus toward a Energy Efficiency Design" into some huge promise with Massive improvements.

I also don't believe WCCFT "analogy" that the two new "these new GPUs will be powering the high-end enthusiast and the performance sector". I'd be more of the option that these are Hawaii and Tonga replacement for Mid-to-High segment, while permitting Tonga to move down to Pitcairn parts and commence their EoL.