If 7nm is supposed to yield huge improvements in performance per watt...

OR,
dumbfuck retard summerfaggot user,
OR

AMD didn't have the right, qualified, experienced people who could do the work back then,
AND they didn't have the money to even hire those people, forget creating a 3-5 year plan to make RDNA a thing in 2014

Why is the 5700 XT dented?

It's the same chinese team, they said they were working on next gen years ago

If AMD's presenter is to be believed, apparently it gives better temperatures at lower volume, than if it wasn't "twisted"

Because they're using a completely different architecture design.

two words

hardware scheduler
the reason why nvidia also dropped it from 780ti and after
and its also the reason why nvidia is shit on async compute

Positive thing about amd hw scheduler is that you can lower prerendered frames in driver to zero, while nvidia cant go lower than one, meaning amd card having one frame less input lag than similarly powerful nvidia card. Doesnt mean much on gaming 144hz monitors, but on 60hz monitor one frame is 16,67ms and thats a big chunk of overall pc input lag. It is very sad that some reviewers didnt test it when they were comparing cards like 1060 or 580, which were quintessential 1080/60 cards and thats the situation where 16,67ms less lag could make game certainly more responsive.

Apparently the current Navi cards are a hybrid and a fully enabled RDNA card is coming next year

I goes deeper than that. Energy companies had sponsored the educations of many engineers which train them to favor high power designs over efficient ones. A lot of them work at AMD and Intel now.

is there any hope that an intcel gpu can come and clean up this mess?

Attached: NUNU_BAGGRUND-1-1.png (437x295, 223K)

How much of that is because everything on PC is optimized much more towards nVidia though?

Attached: 1380735943011.jpg (1097x550, 161K)

>intel
L000000000000L

not much, it's hardware SC
it's amazing they could down it this much lower than earlier GCNs. If you add hardware scheduler to nvidia it will go to 400w. Engineers at AMD probably feel underappreciated they do miracles here on technical level.
Feel bad for AMD staff, it's like company doesn't want to sell cards at all for the last 4 years.

hard to say, they've been preparing for patents expiring for a while now
they may undercut the hell out of both companies and do coreduo market shakedown.
but considering they have to outsource to samsung for CPU now, I really don't know if they will even have enough chips made

big if true

They literally copied maxwell so that these cards will perform well on nvidia optimized titles topkek

remains to be seen, I won't be surprised if it's old a little polished GCN again on practical level
wonder if drivers have same adaptations period

What I don't understand is how is this supposed to be used in consoles?
Either AMD as usual overclocks the shit out of their cards, or next gen will be aroud Vega 56 level.

AMD and Nvidia calculate TDP differently, so you can't directly compare the numbers.
We'll have to wait for the cards to be released and actual benchmarks performed.

Because AMD was enormously behind Nvidia in perf/watt such that even the 1.5x perf/watt of Navi from RDNA and 7nm combined is only enough to bring them up to a bit behind Nvidia in this measure. It's still a quantum leap forward compared to Vega though.

Because the silicon is overvolted in order to have every card reach the advertised clocks regardless of how unlucky the person was on top of being clocked to the limit past the efficiency curve because the cards won't be able to compete with Turing if gimped.
The user is more or less guaranteed to be able to get back those perfs per watt through Wattman if he so desires.

Navi is literally a mobile chip. It's efficient when not in nitro unlimited power mode and consoles will reflect that.

Radeon hasn't had enough funding for a while. At the end of the day, most people don't buy that much gpus. It's mostly just the few gaymer faggots shouting from the rooftop. The majority of pc users just use an igpu. On a related note, consoles.

And keep in mind this is TBP. ~200W TBP is actually pretty good. No idea how I managed to forget to mention the most important detail here.

Consoles are extremely low margin for AMD so focusing on them makes almost zero sense.

It actually does though. If they were to focus on desktop cards they might just get tied with Nvidia or maybe perform slightly above. But what would it get them? Almost nothing since even if AMD performs better then Nvidia, Nvidia will still sell way more cards due to marketing, anti competitive actions from Nvidia and mind share of the 'gaymers'.

Since AMD focuses on consoles right now they will get the full market share of the home consoles which gives them a higher market share across the board then they would've gotten if the just focussed on the desktop market. This market share is also very important. If a game is developed with the PS5 or Scarlet as it's primary target, it'll get optimized for RDNA which AMD will profit from if the game also comes to PC. If a game is developed for PC it'll get optimized for Nvidia.

Also don't forget AMD licensed RDNA to Samsung too for ARM SoCs, provides GPUs for Stadia and is trying to take over all markets that Nvidia doesn't have a monopoly in. This is clearly AMD taking the fight to the places their competition is weakest instead of trying to fight an uphill battle.

>This market share is also very important.
Not really, consoles are obviously a dying market and will soon be replaced by game streaming.

Because just like in the cpu department, AYYYYMD is several decades behind and unable to compete even with massive die shrinks

I wouldn't necessarily say that it's dying. It's doing fine.

However, do I need to remind you who delivers the GPUs for Stadia? I'll give you a hint. I said it in my last post. Also PS and Xbox streaming will also be done from AMD GPUs.

AMDrones are low IQ and don't really understand how this works. They think smaller = better, they don't understand that, for example, AMD needed 7nm to match Intel's 12nm. Size isn't all there is to it.

Attached: 1558306167545.png (396x408, 165K)

>I wouldn't necessarily say that it's dying.
It most certainly is, the only consoles that didn't bomb this gen are the PS4 and the Switch (which uses Nvidia hardware).
If these platforms can't capture at least 30% more mindshare next grn, then the writing is pretty much on the wall.
There's a reason every major publisher/platform is trying to move towards streaming and subscription fees.

>consoles are dying because 1 of the three consoles isn't doing so well
>moving to streaming will be bad for AMD even though they offer the most GPUs to streaming services
Did you even try to refute my arguments?

>1 of
user...

How I see it there are only three popular consoles at the moment. The PS4, XBone and the Switch. This shouldn't be surprising since those three are the only once that are backed by a lot of financing and game developers.

What other consoles should be relevant at the moment? The 3DS? That one is in its eol phase right now. Or maybe because the sales of the PS3, Xbox 360 and the Ouya are a bit disappointing today?

The PS4 has been sold more then the PS3 by now and the Switch has way more units sold then the Wii U in a short time period.

Mind explaining to me what criteria you're looking at that makes you conclude that consoles are dying? Also note, a market shrinking a bit =/= dying.

> AMD
> Great CPUs
> Shit GPUs

Buy AMD CPUs
Buy NVIDIA GPUs

Don't be a fucking fanboi

How about a console failing so badly that the creator tries to wipe its existence from memory?
Despite the Switch literally being a carbon copy of the less shit aspects of said console.

AMD does not have fabs

Their incompetence turned them fabless and thus have piggybacked off TSMC

Samsung and TSMC are the main fabs for mobile chips for Samsung stuff, Apple and Qualcomm

All the mobile dev money poured into these plants have ensured that they've leapfrogged Intel, who is focused on mostly computer chipset stuff

>Shit console being wiped from memory
Wii U was a decent console for the first two years, but after Smash 4 came out, that's all it was ever used for. Switch isn't a carbon copy of the less shit aspects, it improved on what other Nintendo consoles could and couldn't do. As for the 3 consoles, there's really only 2 competing. Xbox one died the moment they said 99% of Xbox one games are coming to PC, making everyone happily sell their overpriced HTPCs.

if only the g sync monitors were cheaper id buy N gpu but im not rich enough

Nvidia supports Freesync now. No point in getting a g-sync monitor.

then check for the G-Sync compatible monitors list (and for independent reviews of these monitors with nvidia gpu + gsync enabled), it should be good enough

Stop live in 2018

>Nintendo made a less then stellar console a generation back
>Clearly this means that consoles must be dying
Do I need to remind you that the Gamecube didn't do that well too? Or was the VirtualBoy also a sign that consoles were dying? Nintendo has always been hit or miss more or less. The Wii sold insanely good while the Wii U sold really bad. However, the Switch is doing great right now.

Besides, while the Wii U was selling really poorly, the PS4 and XBone still sold lots of units at the same time. Clearly this was a case of consoles dying instead of Nintendo dropping the ball for that generation.

The only market that's evidently doing bad right now is the dedicated handheld market. Which isn't too surprising since normalfags just like their phones too much.

So let me ask you again. Can you show me evidence that console gaming is dying? This means showing that the home console industry is rapidly falling in sales now across the board (a single console doing badly isn't a whole industry) and also a convincing argument why the next gen won't sell at all due to streaming (which means giving me arguments why a new market will gain market share rapidly enough to kill an established industry).

Also while you're at it, can you tell me why it matters to AMD if people use their GPUs on consoles or at the data center for streaming?

Too bad freesync is half-baked.
If only freesync had adaptive overdrive as standard

2/4 consoles bombing in a single generation is pretty telling user.
Especially when one bombed so hard that it had to be replaced before the generation even ended.
>Do I need to remind you that the Gamecube didn't do that well too?
The market was much smaller back then.
And even while the WiiU was bombing, so was the Xbone.
The problem with the console market nowadays is that games don't really sell all that well on consoles anymore outside of a small handful of AAA games, most of the rest of the market is made up of kids spending thousands of dollars on microtransactions in F2P games (with microtransactions making up literally almost 60% of revenue for major publishers like EA, Activision, and Ubisoft).

Attached: 1_M7HdTYjaAUCm3sgUoxtO9g.jpg (1200x807, 50K)

But yea, consider that ~30-50% of sales for EA's games are digital on consoles and their revenue from actual digital games is tiny compared to their revenue from microtransactions/subscriptions.

Attached: ea-slide.png (770x580, 138K)

It took a while to murder Intel. Only a little longer until they kill Nvidia too.

>The market was much smaller back then
So you're telling me that the market only grew instead of dyed off?
>And even wile the WiiU was bombing, so was the Xbone
You're right that the XBone didn't do well in the beginning, however don't forget how badly the thing was placed into the market. The whole announcement was talking more about TV, sports and gimmicks then games. Also the PS4 did well at the time.
>The problem with the console market nowadays is that games don't really sell all that well on consoles anymore outside of a small handful of AAA games, most of the rest of the market is made up of kids spending thousands of dollars on microtransactions in F2P games (with microtransactions making up literally almost 60% of revenue for major publishers like EA, Activision, and Ubisoft)
So you're telling me that there is no money spent on microtransactions on the consoles? Because that image that you added to your post is telling me otherwise. I don't know if Microsoft is the XBone and Windows combined but Sony generating the largest amount of revenue with almost half kind of tells me that the consoles are the biggest source of income from Fortnite.

Also, you forgot to include the numbers again that shows us the decline in revenue generated by consoles and why any of this matters to AMD.

>So you're telling me that the market only grew instead of dyed off?
No, the gaming market as a whole grew.
A lot of that market was syphoned off by mobile at the beginning of this generation.
>You're right that the XBone didn't do well in the beginning
We don't even know how the Xbone is doing now because it bombed so hard that MS refuses to release concrete sales numbers.
>So you're telling me that there is no money spent on microtransactions on the consoles?
No, I'm telling you that there's no money being spent on actual games on consoles.
90% of it is funneled to FIFA/CoD/Fortnite/BF/F2P games via microtransactions.
Having tons of money come from microtransactions is not a GOOD thing, especially considering these companies have all seen large drops in operating income over the past few years despite record microtransaction sales (largely because the actual game sales have suffered).
The console market is essentially a few thousand whales propping it up by spending millions of dollars on microtransactions.

Because Gimpworks and binning.

EA is not relevant to gaming at all. They do not make any games anyone sane interested in, they only make money from selling fifa games to children and overgrown children(play real fucking football).
All their games fail, all their studios closed. DICE and Bioware only ones left. They set zero trends.

even the king of amd AdoredTV says it is shit. yikes.

>selling fifa games to children and overgrown children(play real fucking football).
just join the army bro dont play any fps

>EA is not relevant to gaming at all.
They're literally the largest console publisher, mainly due to Fifa.
Without EA, the console market would lose out on upwards of $3 billion in revenue every year.

>No, the gaming market as a whole grew.
>A lot of that market was syphoned off by mobile at the beginning of this generation.
Which still means that the market for consoles grew over time. Also since it's not shrinking it's growing and not dying.
>We don't even know how the Xbone is doing now because it bombed so hard that MS refuses to release concrete sales numbers.
When did I tell you that the XBone was doing well? Because I think M$ bombed it pretty badly this generation.
>No, I'm telling you that there's no money being spent on actual games on consoles.
>90% of it is funneled to FIFA/CoD/Fortnite/BF/F2P games via microtransactions.
>Having tons of money come from microtransactions is not a GOOD thing, especially considering these companies have all seen large drops in operating income over the past few years despite record microtransaction sales (largely because the actual game sales have suffered).
>The console market is essentially a few thousand whales propping it up by spending millions of dollars on microtransactions.
And there is money being spent on games for other platforms nowadays? It's the same for all platforms, FtP has become really popular and with it the microtransactions model. However, as evidenced by the pic added to your last post, the microtransaction model is working really well on consoles too.
Also don't forget that Sony has Playstation Now and M$ had the Game Pass which are subscriptions that still give them revenue. Where is the Steam Pass for all those games?
And while all this is going on Nintendo seems to do great selling their sometimes €70 games, I don't know what they spent developing those but it do think that amounts to quite a bit of a markup people gladly pay for.

You're just suffering from tunnelvision. I don't know why you think consoles are dying but it seems that you can't fathom the idea that data exists that would indicate otherwise. I'd suggest looking up confirmation bias.

>Using Fortnite as a revenue source
OH NONONONO AHAHAHAH
You're fucking retarded for using Fortnite as a scope of how successful consoles are doing as a whole. The only reason why there isn't Nintendo on there is because the switch version released late and it didn't exist when the Wii U existed.

console market is $25B as far as I remember
gaming wouldn't change if EA closes tomorrow

No, it would change.. For the better.

you do not get killed by playing football on weekends

Here's a question. Why the fuck is this on Jow Forums? This should belong in /v/ man.

because getting responded to with "seething", "cope" and "dilate" is tiresome

PC gamers don't give a shit about fortnite though. It's for little kids who don't know how to make their own computer so they buy a console.

It kind of escalated didn't it? I was just trying to argue that consoles and streaming are two important markets AMD is aiming for. Never meant to debate with that user about if consoles are dying for that long.

We get that already here too. Their names are just intards instead.

Utter nature of Jow Forums kid.

I guess it is. I didn't even care about his opinion really and I still tried to correct him. Also I barely even play games (maybe 2-3 a year) and I don't even own a console.

I think that's basically what that graph was conveying. Less then 20% of the revenue from Windows and MacOS combined.

But they are competiting with nVidia, on their mid tiers. If your'e spending anything under $500 for a GPU, 5700/XT are much better deal than nVidia.

Can someone explain the difference between thermal design power and total board power?

Thermal design power is an optimistic guess on heat dissipation under reasonable high load (specially designed burn tests can push it higher)
Total board power is a pessimistic guess on maximum ever possible power consumption.

Yea amd cheats more on tdp than nvidia

>M-MUH UNDERVOLT
>MUH MODS
>Vega 56 cheats by 30-40W at stock

>Listening to anything said by a literal con artist NEET who makes shit up for Patreon bux.
(lol

Why not give the regular 5700 the same treatment if it's an all-around improvement?

Attached: 1555172019054.png (494x685, 482K)

This but moreso then that navi is bad at the arch level and will end up being dumped or mutated just like gcn 1.0

hardware vs software scheduler.

>not much, it's hardware SC
>If you add hardware scheduler to nvidia it will go to 400w
chu mean?

Sony has sold almost a hundred million ps4s globally... consoles are here to stay for another 20 years minimum

Buy amd gpus because theyre a better value. Otherwise you should be giving nvidia $10000 for the 3080ti SUPER titan. My 580 does vr no prob, only the most fruity epic gaymers really need any more performance than that. Amd if ur running at 4k, vega 64 and 5700xt exist for a rasin

Yea, but FORTY compute units!!

FOURTY! Thats FOUR ZERO
40!
WHOA

Go read up on asynchronous computing in GPUs user. This was a really big deal back a few years ago. There's too much to put into a post but in a nutshell Nvidia cards are castrated with a software scheduler to keep power consumption low. AMD cards use a hardware scheduler to to get the most out of their hardware - and AMD cards are more powerful in a broad sense, but the result is much higher power draw.

That makes no sense. You need at least one "prerendered frame" to display anything. It's called double-buffering.

7nm does bring returns on improving power efficiency the problem is that returns have been diminishing ever since Nvidia/AMD RTG moved beyond 45nm.

Nvidia GPUs aren't really that better at energy efficiency. They just don't overvolt/clock their SKUs to the breaking point on stock settings. 2080Ti consumes more power than Radeon VII when fully loaded (using RT cores).

Wrong, G-Sync 1.0 is garbage-tier. It is bandwidth limited if you go 4K and beyond. That's why Nvidia is slowly abandoning it and going with VESA's adaptive Sync spec.

power improvement in comparisson to their products, not in comparisson to nvidia's

>hardware scheduler
Aka firmware aka software scheduler that runs on the device, not the main CPU

WRONG.

RDNA is a entire new architecture.

GCN is the instruction set still being used.