AMD DX 11 Evergreen to be unveiled Aboard USS Hornet

gstanford · Posted: Sat Aug 22, 2009 9:42 am

Trust me Rollo, I'm only too familiar with the arguments/fallacies the fanatics trot out, unfortunately.

My bet is that the die size increased primarily to properly support DirectX Compute (GPGPU), since ATi are incapable of adequately supporting * easily useable* GPGPU with their current architecture. I don't doubt that there will be extra shaders etc also, but I don't believe that is what caused the die size increase, (and it couldn't be DX11 support since ATi's chips are so "special" and already have most of DX11's features in them.... wank wank wank).

I'll be watching how ATi and the fanatics explain any GPGPU architecture changes with great interest and an extra large bag of popcorn!

Of course, bigger die size has implications for multigpu on a card as well. We've been told endlessly that small efficient dies are the way to go there.

gstanford · Posted: Sat Aug 22, 2009 9:55 am

apoppin wrote:

Rollo wrote:

gstanford wrote:

Well, it would seem that ATi's die size has grown somewhat even though they are using 40nm fab tech.
http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/417/ ... mprint.jpg

Given the sh!t they and their loyal fanatics have slung nvidia's way over die size since Rv770 launched it will be interesting indeed to see how they spin a story to explain the increase.

You apparently are unfamiliar with how things work Greg.

If ATi increases the die size, it is necessary for more gaming power! If NVIDIA does it, it is because of their "inefficient designs". (that mysteriously best ATi with 1/4 the shaders)

If ATi puts out their dual GPU card on one PCB, it is "elegant" and something to be desired. If NVIDIA does, they're making them cheaper and screwing you.

If ATi cards are slower and cheaper, it's only common sense a person would want to save money and buy them. If NVIDIA's cards are slower and cheaper, they are junk no one would want.

If ATi has a feature that isn't even in any games, it's the most important thing in the world to have. If NVIDIA has a feature that's in several games, those games either "suck" or "it's no good because you can't run it at framerate X, but if it was at framerate X, it would be good".

If ATi buys optomization for a game, it's a reason to buy a card. If NVIDIA buys optomization, it's a reason to call the Better Business Bureau and post your hatred of them.

Etc Ad Infinitum

I have watched this play out in exactly this way for the last 5 years as a Focus Group Member. It never changes, never varies, and it will be this way until AMD's high debt load, low marketshare, low average cost per unit, and low mind share sink it into the primordial ooze from which it sprang.

Now, let's get back to waiting for this year's R4800....errrr.....'the pleasant surprise".

and you *Still* aren't over it yet .. after all these years ?
:tease:

Why should nVidia people be over it? We never started the forum wars way back when, its the fanatics who did that, and the fanatics who continue to post their sh!t all over the internet.

Rollo · **Joined:** Wed Feb 04, 2009 8:22 pm **Posts:** 743

gstanford wrote:

Trust me Rollo, I'm only too familiar with the arguments/fallacies the fanatics trot out, unfortunately.

My bet is that the die size increased primarily to properly support DirectX Compute (GPGPU), since ATi are incapable of adequately supporting * easily useable* GPGPU with their current architecture. I don't doubt that there will be extra shaders etc also, but I don't believe that is what caused the die size increase, (and it couldn't be DX11 support since ATi's chips are so "special" and already have most of DX11's features in them.... wank wank wank).

I'll be watching how ATi and the fanatics explain any GPGPU architecture changes with great interest and an extra large bag of popcorn!

You don't have to wait gstanford, here's how it will go:

ATi's GPGPU will do something better than the 3 year old NVIDIA GPGPU arch. This will be because ATi was wisely waiting to "do it right". It will only be a matter of time before developers wisely start optimizing for ATi's arch. The apps developed for CUDA thus far "suck", but will likely be improved upon for the ATi arch. A "pleasant surprise" is coming in STREAM.

[quote=gstanford]
Of course, bigger die size has implications for multigpu on a card as well. We've been told endlessly that small efficient dies are the way to go there.[/quote]

Only necessary implications. If it's hotter and more power hungry, these things were necessary to give you the best gaming experience possible.

Do I need to tell you everything Greg?

apoppin · Posted: Sat Aug 22, 2009 10:46 am

gstanford wrote:

apoppin wrote:

and you *Still* aren't over it yet .. after all these years ?
:tease:

Why should nVidia people be over it? We never started the forum wars way back when, its the fanatics who did that, and the fanatics who continue to post their sh!t all over the internet.

What is the good of being bitter?
:doh:

let people believe whatever crap they want to believe
- the truth will come out; we expect to test the new GPUs from both companies :think:

i would say ignore it .. who cares WHO started it?
- i thought the war was originally started by 3DFX fans :tease:

gstanford · Posted: Sat Aug 22, 2009 11:07 am

Oh I am mostly ignoring it, trust me. And yeah, the war was started by 3dfx fans who only had ATi to turn to when 3dfx folded since nVidia was already the enemy. I often wonder what that sort thought of nv40, since nv40's lead architect was Bob Kilgarrif, one of 3dfx's main engineers. In fact there was supposedly a fair bit of rampage thinking in nv30 (3dfx engineers helped out on nv3x also, but didn't totally design it).

apoppin · Posted: Sat Aug 22, 2009 11:13 am

i am much more interested in the hardware than anyone's preconceived opinions and/or FUD

these are *exciting times*

New DX11 GPUs from both companies, Win7 and the new core i5/i3

i am now not so sure which intel CPU platform to get - i7 or i5
= Gaming perf is SO close; and i5 is not so power hungry

viewtopic.php?f=44&t=15313

what to do?
:scratch:

gstanford · Posted: Sat Aug 22, 2009 11:21 am

Well, if I were buying intel the choice would be incredibly simple, because I like highend multi-gpu graphics, and IMO i5 is gimped for that with only 16 PCi-e 2.0 lanes, needing to be split outside the chipset, and even if you use something like nForce200 on the board, it only gives 16 lanes between the graphics cards, anything going back to chipset/cpu gets cut back to 8 lanes.

Truly retarded design decision on intels part imo.

apoppin · Posted: Sat Aug 22, 2009 11:40 am

well, no video card comes even close to using 8x PCIe bandwidth and likely won't for this next gen
- i am looking at the "value" segment, currently .. and if i5 overclocks better, it would work well for me

Maybe i will head to Microcenter for a 920 i7 - Tustin is about a 1 hour drive from my work (1 hour and 45 minutes drive home then)
http://www.microcenter.com/single_produ ... id=0302727
- $199 is a good price; and the mobos and DDR3 RAM have certainly got cheaper

still those i7 Mobos are well over $200

Rollo · **Joined:** Wed Feb 04, 2009 8:22 pm **Posts:** 743

apoppin wrote:

well, no video card comes even close to using 8x PCIe bandwidth and likely won't for this next gen
- i am looking at the "value" segment, currently .. and if i5 overclocks better, it would work well for me

Maybe i will head to Microcenter for an i7
http://www.microcenter.com/single_produ ... id=0302727
- $199 is a good price; and the mobos and DDR3 RAM have certainly has got cheaper

I can't believe you're thinking of an i-anything after telling me how they are unnecessary when I bought my 965. :scratch:

apoppin · Posted: Sat Aug 22, 2009 11:51 am

Rollo wrote:

apoppin wrote:

well, no video card comes even close to using 8x PCIe bandwidth and likely won't for this next gen
- i am looking at the "value" segment, currently .. and if i5 overclocks better, it would work well for me

Maybe i will head to Microcenter for an i7
http://www.microcenter.com/single_produ ... id=0302727
- $199 is a good price; and the mobos and DDR3 RAM have certainly has got cheaper

I can't believe you're thinking of an i-anything after telling me how they are unnecessary when I bought my 965. :scratch:

first, you need to realize that we are talking about PC gaming

then,
--i5/i7 is unnecessary for me and my little HD 4870 Tri-Fire setup; it is perfectly matched to a 4.0 GHz Q9550 .. i doubt there will be ANY improvement in framerates so as to make any practical difference .. and i would certainly need to overclock it just to match my OC'd penryn :doh:

However, as one of the Senior editors for ABT, it is *expected* that i keep up with evolving technology :tease:

- soon, there will be graphics cards that will take advantage of the "extra" the new CPUs provide
-- who knows, i may end up with Tri-SLi
:shock:

in which case, probably not i5
:grin:

AMD DX 11 Evergreen to be unveiled Aboard USS Hornet

Who is online