The Navi 5700 XT is apparently 9.75 Teraflops, PS5 and Scarlett probably will be as well

[DynamiteCop 2,085]

I think this is the first architecture in a long time that we really need to rethink AMD's Teraflop calculation, with 1.25x PPC increase that puts it at Vega's equivilent of 12.18 Teraflops which is essentially the Vega 64. 

 

These coming consoles may indeed be around 10 Teraflops, interesting. I can see them pushing more compute units at lower clocks.

 

 

Edited June 14, 2019 by DynamiteCop!

[DynamiteCop 2,085]

I just wanted to add to this, how exactly are these console supposed to be affordable?

[Teh_Diplomat 2,054]

8 minutes ago, DynamiteCop! said:

I just wanted to add to this, how exactly are these console supposed to be affordable?

Well, according to your 2019 lineup you'll have a lot of free time to ponder on this.

Edited June 14, 2019 by Teh_Diplomat
wrong ben :ben:

[DynamiteCop 2,085]

5 minutes ago, Teh_Diplomat said:

Well, according to your 2019 lineup you'll have a lot of free time to ponder on this. I heard Jimbo like's brainstorming.

My 2019 lineup is...

 

• Shenmue III (PS4)
• Death Stranding (PS4)
• Gears 5 (Xbox)
• Luigi's Mansion 3 (Switch)
• Control (Xbox)
• Doom Eternal (PC)
• Call of Duty: Modern Warfare (possibly, I want to see more) (PC)

 

I won't have a lot of free time. 

Edited June 14, 2019 by DynamiteCop!

[The Mother Fucker 26]

45 minutes ago, DynamiteCop! said:

I just wanted to add to this, how exactly are these console supposed to be affordable?

Why are you people still buying consoles?  Good gracious, is it the monthly online subscription you like paying that keep you on?   

 

If Halo Infinite is coming to PC then there is no reason to keep clinging to consoles.  

 

My last Xbox One game purchase was WWE 2K17.   In Hindsight, I wish I had bought it on PC.  I probably would play it more. 

[DynamiteCop 2,085]

Just now, The Mother Fucker said:

Why are you people still buying consoles?  Good gracious, is it the monthly online subscription you like paying that keep you on?   

 

If Halo Infinite is coming to PC then there is no reason to keep clinging to consoles.  

 

My last Xbox One game purchase was WWE 2K17.   In Hindsight, I wish I had bought it on PC.  I probably would play it more. 

Because I like having both, and can afford to. I make descriminatory purchases for what I feel would best serve me for the particular game.

 

Why do I own four cars? Do I need them? No, but I like having options for a different experience. 

[The Mother Fucker 26]

1 minute ago, DynamiteCop! said:

Because I like having both, and can afford to. I make descriminatory purchases for what I feel would best serve me for the particular game.

 

Why do I own four cars? Do I need them? No, but I like having options for a different experience. 

Well there was nothing serving about Xbox One for me. 

Can't even play Free Gold games without having a Gold Subscription,

Backwards Compatibility is shit. 

and the whole user experience is rather drab and boring.   

[DynamiteCop 2,085]

Just now, The Mother Fucker said:

Well there was nothing serving about Xbox One for me. 

Can't even play Free Gold games without having a Gold Subscription,

Backwards Compatibility is shit. 

and the whole user experience is rather drab and boring.   

Well that's you. 

[lynux3 2,052]

That would be 12.2TF compared to GCN. 

[Remij 4,670]

3 minutes ago, lynux3 said:

That would be 12.2TF compared to GCN. 

Except not really.  AMD's way of marketing this really has everyone misguided.  25% increase in "instructions per clock" does not translate to 25% more performance per clock.

 

It would if it was a CPU... but GPUs aren't CPUs.  Depending on the type of work the GPU is doing, it could be *up to* that much..but that doesn't translate to 25% more performance in all scenarios.  And I won't take that away from them... but the reason why they're getting a lot of the performance they are is the increase in clock speed as well.  Which I'm presuming will be a bit lower on consoles.

 

So basically what I'm saying is that it's different enough that I wouldn't even bother comparing them to GCN like that.  Who knows what the final TF number will be.. and who really cares?  Even if they are 9.75TF, they are going to be beastly machines.

[lynux3 2,052]

Just now, Remij_ said:

Except not really.  AMD's way of marketing this really has everyone misguided.  25% increase in "instructions per clock" does not translate to 25% more performance per clock.

 

It would if it was a CPU... but GPUs aren't CPUs.  Depending on the type of work the GPU is doing, it could be *up to* that much..but that doesn't translate to 25% more performance in all scenarios.  And I won't take that away from them... but the reason why they're getting a lot of the performance they are is the increase in clock speed as well.  Which I'm presuming will be a bit lower on consoles.

 

So basically what I'm saying is that it's different enough that I wouldn't even bother comparing them to GCN like that.  Who knows what the final TF number will be.. and who really cares?  Even if they are 9.75TF, they are going to be beastly machines.

Yeah I think consoles aren't going to be any higher than ~1200MHz, but yeah obviously 1.25x increase isn't exact. Whatever metric they were using they obviously found the maximum they could and went with that. In a closed box this should be good enough. E3 2020 is going to be sick.

[Sergio Perez SP11 173]

There’s still potential for more performance

 

More Compute Units and Slightly Less Clocks gives better performance per watt.  

[The Mother Fucker 26]

11 hours ago, DynamiteCop! said:

I think this is the first architecture in a long time that we really need to rethink AMD's Teraflop calculation, with 1.25x PPC increase that puts it at Vega's equivilent of 12.18 Teraflops which is essentially the Vega 64. 

 

These coming consoles may indeed be around 10 Teraflops, interesting. I can see them pushing more compute units at lower clocks.

 

 

If you compare those specs to VEGA 56 and VEGA 64 you will see that these specs are actually lower than those cards.   VEGA was AMD's high end.  These NAVI cards are the new Mid-tier.    The previous Mid-Tier were RX 570, RX 580. 

It makes a whole lot of sense to to upgrade to a Radeon 5700 or Radeon 5700 XT if you still have a 400 or 500 Series GPU.  

 

 

[Playstation Tablet 1,725]

I was expecting Vega56 performance. Looks like we are getting 64 performance.

 

Question is if the RT acceleration will be usable in real world games.

[Playstation Tablet 1,725]

10 hours ago, DynamiteCop! said:

My 2019 lineup is...

 

• Shenmue III (PS4)
• Death Stranding (PS4)
• Gears 5 (Xbox)
• Luigi's Mansion 3 (Switch)
• Control (Xbox)
• Doom Eternal (PC)
• Call of Duty: Modern Warfare (possibly, I want to see more) (PC)

 

I won't have a lot of free time. 

Luigi's mansion over Astral Chain and Zelda

[Sergio Perez SP11 173]

March 2012: 7870 Ghz  (GCN 1st Gen)

1280 Shaders

1000 MHz 

212mm

2.56 TF

175w TDP

 

 

November 2012:  7870 XT (GCN 1st Gen)

1536 Shaders

975 MHz 

352mm

3 TF

185w TDP

 

 

Thats a 18% performance jump with a 6% power draw jump.  Both 1st gen GCN  and just 8 months apart.

 

Next gen consoles are rumored to be RDNA+ or some shit like that 

 

10TF is minimum what next gen consoles will be.

 

im on team 12 TF

 

56 CU (3584 Shaders) @ 1675 MHz 

[-GD-X★ 7,729]

Science fiction talk 

[Sergio Perez SP11 173]

13 minutes ago, -GD- said:

Science fiction talk 

Fucking hate you 

[-GD-X★ 7,729]

55 minutes ago, Carlos Vela said:

Fucking hate you 

Thanks bb. Love you