AMD RX Serije

D3m0r4l1z3d je 31. avg 2017 ob 15:42 izjavil:

Norca se lahko dela vsak, če hoče ali noče, poanta pa je, da se skuliraj s primerjavami golih številk iz specifikacije, že za Radeonke iz zadnjih zaporednih generacij na GCN to velja, kaj šele, da bi primerjal z Geforci. Anandtech ugotavlja, da AMD nima dovolj resursov in da so se morali čimbolj pametno tega lotiti oziroma se prilagoditi. En čip kot gaming, kot server in kot professional flagship. RX, FE in Instinct. Lahko si predstavljaš kaj je prvi problem tega.

D3m je 31. avg 2017 ob 14:29 izjavil:

???

Saj Senitel nima Vege ali Fiji.

D3m je 31. avg 2017 ob 15:47 izjavil:

Predator X je 31. avg 2017 ob 15:14 izjavil:

D3m je 31. avg 2017 ob 14:29 izjavil:

???

Saj Senitel nima Vege ali Fiji.

Če se prav spomnim sta senitel in anymal trdila, da je AMD uporabil več tranzistorjev, da je dosegel višje hitrosti.
Kar pa nista poudarila, da je NVIDIA naredila enako. Zgleda, da se jim bolj splača uporabit 30% več traznistorjev za višje hitrosti, kot pa za druge stvari.

VEGA ima 4MB L2 cacha,to je 2x večkot Fury X.

Kolikor je meni znano ima Pascal longer pipelines za dosego višjih frekvenc med tem ko ima Polaris krajše vendar kar pomeni razlika 700 Mhz v prid GeForce vendar, če gledaš konec koncev HW specifikacijo sta si GTX 1060 in RX480/580 konkurenta.

D3m0r4l1z3d je 31. avg 2017 ob 15:49 izjavil:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11717/the...
Given the overall design similarities between Vega 10 and Fiji, this gives us a very rare opportunity to look at the cost of Vega's architectural features in terms of transistors. Without additional functional units, the vast majority of the difference in transistor counts comes down to enabling new features.

Talking to AMD's engineers, what especially surprised me is where the bulk of those transistors went; the single largest consumer of the additional 3.9B transistors was spent on designing the chip to clock much higher than Fiji. Vega 10 can reach 1.7GHz, whereas Fiji couldn't do much more than 1.05GHz. Additional transistors are needed to add pipeline stages at various points or build in latency hiding mechanisms, as electrons can only move so far on a single (ever shortening) clock cycle; this is something we've seen in NVIDIA's Pascal, not to mention countless CPU designs. Still, what it means is that those 3.9B transistors are serving a very important performance purpose: allowing AMD to clock the card high enough to see significant performance gains over Fiji.

D3m je 31. avg 2017 ob 15:53 izjavil:

D3m0r4l1z3d je 31. avg 2017 ob 15:49 izjavil:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11717/the...
Given the overall design similarities between Vega 10 and Fiji, this gives us a very rare opportunity to look at the cost of Vega's architectural features in terms of transistors. Without additional functional units, the vast majority of the difference in transistor counts comes down to enabling new features.

Talking to AMD's engineers, what especially surprised me is where the bulk of those transistors went; the single largest consumer of the additional 3.9B transistors was spent on designing the chip to clock much higher than Fiji. Vega 10 can reach 1.7GHz, whereas Fiji couldn't do much more than 1.05GHz. Additional transistors are needed to add pipeline stages at various points or build in latency hiding mechanisms, as electrons can only move so far on a single (ever shortening) clock cycle; this is something we've seen in NVIDIA's Pascal, not to mention countless CPU designs. Still, what it means is that those 3.9B transistors are serving a very important performance purpose: allowing AMD to clock the card high enough to see significant performance gains over Fiji.

Kam je šel performance? Oz. kje je?

dolenc je 1. sep 2017 ob 19:27 izjavil:

Fullcover blok je gor ja. Nimam battlefielda in ker vzame 40gb ga tud ne bom mel :P. Pa tud sej pravem, nč od tega ti ne bo nič povedal.

hojnikb je 1. sep 2017 ob 20:08 izjavil:

a bi rad sliko al kaj ?