More detailed AMD GPU roadmap for 2016 to 2018 published

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

It depends on the task and inefficiencies of the underlying chip. AMD stood to gain more than nVidia anyway since their mem compression was a bit behind and they seem to be having to up the bandwidth on big parts to compete (see 290X etx. having 512bit interfaces vs the 256bit on the 980).

But the Fury range of chips which remove the bottleneck, aren't completely knock out of the park kind of increases, but it did seem to allow AMD to scale up the rest of the chip. So rather than being a boost by itself, HBM seems to allow for chip expansion without hitting a bottleneck.

There are other, mostly power, related gains for HBM too - which in turn helps you turn up the wick on the rest of the chip.

Another thing is HBM has a physically smaller memory controller,which means AMD saved die area and transistors which could be used towards more shaders.

Edit!!

GTX1070 and GTX1080 pricing leaked:

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/sh...postcount=3578

They are targetting GTX980 and GTX980TI level pricing.

[kalniel]

Another thing is HBM has a physically smaller memory controller,which means AMD saved die area and transistors which could be used towards more shaders.

Edit!!

GTX1070 and GTX1080 pricing leaked:

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/sh...postcount=3578

They are targetting GTX980 and GTX980TI level pricing.

Hoho.. well, kind of them to leave AMD all that room for profit margin. If that turns out to be the case then I expect they don't have all that much inventory so won't have a problem shifting what they do have until they can make more.

[jigger]

Nvidia will have to offer a lot of performance for that kind of money.

I was hoping this node shrink would allow Nvidia to finally become competitive with AMD cards.

[mapesdhs]

"I was hoping this node shrink would allow Nvidia to finally become competitive with AMD cards. "

NVIDIA has been the market leader for several years now, eg. they've sold more 970s than most AMD cards combined.

And competitive in what sense anyway? Even if they were faster, AMD needs to really get its act together to have more reliable drivers.

[stevie lee]

Not more typo propagation! That should be NextGen, not to be confused with NexGen

who would do such a thing? who would make up theories based on a typo on a screenshot

This is something I have been wondering. I haven't kept up with tech news, but it seems like there isn't a single graphic card related thread where someone doesn't mention HBM2. Judging by the amount of time it is mentioned, I would expect it to be something that solve some major bottleneck in current graphic cards. Does it? Are we so memory bandwidth limited right now that we could expect a more significant boost from HBM2 than simply having a faster GPU?

I think we are all hoping that HBM2 memory will finally be the breakthrough graphics cards need, to be able to play Crysis!

we keep asking 'will it run?' we may finally be getting towards the answer we all so desperately crave.

we need to know !

Will it run Crysis?

[jigger]

"I was hoping this node shrink would allow Nvidia to finally become competitive with AMD cards. "

NVIDIA has been the market leader for several years now, eg. they've sold more 970s than most AMD cards combined.

And competitive in what sense anyway? Even if they were faster, AMD needs to really get its act together to have more reliable drivers.

In the sense that Nvidia can offer cards that I would pick over the AMD offering.

[QuorTek]

For starters look at the price tags and that they already have experience with HBM... 1 year test run with the Fury X... yes it might not actually beat 980gtx/titan cards completely but it is up there and still performing very well and at a lower price

But this round isn't going to be HBM at all - that's the following round.

and in general have a better hardware base compared to nvidia which is way more dependent on the software side...

That's a very good point - DX12 may help a bit, but I don't see anything else that's really saying that nVidia won't be ahead on the software side again, especially for non-close to metal coded titles.

Also efficiency, AMD with the new stuff seem to according to some rumors out there that they can get better gains with lesser power, meaning you can probably clock them up better as well and maybe even go nuts with a good water block on them also keep in mind that AMD may have been the underdog for quite a while and that they are using 14nm and not 16nm meaning they can put it all down on a smaller die or make it the size of nvidias and put more transistors onto it, alot of people likewise is getting slightly annoyed with Nvidia and mostly on the front of greed and this and that not working or being activated and living with watered down chips that could have had much more potential if it was not hard locked in a figure of speech.

Keep in mind that AMD also is behind what is inside majority of consoles when speaking of CPU/GPU and with more and more games also being released to consoles if not consoles to begin with it grant them an edge on the game front and likewise have better experience in that compared to Nvidia to make good hardware.

Again I am not a fanboy... but I have not found a reason yet to upgrade to nvidias 700 and 900 series and am still running perfectly well on a Nvidia 690 GTX, it even play most games fairly well on high quality in 1080p, keep in mind I did not say ultra... so I have skipped 2 generations and am looking at what them companies can grant me... and yes I am one of those guys that go all out when I upgrade 5FPS difference is not going to get me to buy a card that is 200 bucks more expensive when would get pretty much the same result otherwise, used to 100 or 200 FPS on average you would technically barely be able to see a difference at all due to the human eye would not be able to register it anyway.