41–50 of 208 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is important to note that it is 50% performance improvement per watt, not absolute performance.
In at least datacenter settings, performance-per-watt is just as important as performance-per-dollar, since watts are continuous OpEx.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure - but waiting to announce (and hopefully release) for over a month after your competitor is SHIPPING is a sure way to lose sales. At the very least they need to leak potential pricing and performance in the mean time.
Is October 8th really a month after Nvidia is shipping? I'm not sure how many units Nvidia is really going to move before then...
https://www.techradar.com/news/rtx-3080
So yes, October 28th is more than a month after September 17th. Maybe read the article next time before you downvote.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The last time I owned an AMD video card was more than a decade ago. At the time their video card drivers needed work and could blue screen your box. There was a lot of back and forth on the internet about which driver version to load to get the most stable experience. Fast forward to 2020 and the perception about AMD's video driver quality seems to be in a similar place: https://www.pcgamesn.com/amd/radeon-big-navi-d…
> Fast forward to 2020 and the perception about AMD's video driver quality seems to be in a similar place Maybe for Windows, but the same cannot be said of Linux or macOS, where AMD's choice to open-source their drivers has led to these OSes having great support; while Nvidia, having to support their own closed-source drivers, seemingly hasn't had the bandwidth to get their drivers for these OSes up to par.
Rumor has it AMD has a competitive GPU but will not pursue the high-end market mostly because of their limited TSMC slots, they can make much more money from a CPU wafer than a GPU one ( due to area size and yield ) But I really hope I'm wrong and they kick Nvidia ass since they become such intolerable arrogant anti-competitive pricks in the last +10 years.
The last time I owned an AMD video card was more than a decade ago. At the time their video card drivers needed work and could blue screen your box. There was a lot of back and forth on the internet about which driver version to load to get the most stable experience. Fast forward to 2020 and the perception about AMD's video driver quality seems to be in a similar place: https://www.pcgamesn.com/amd/radeon-big-navi-d…
It was already a dire situation running a Mac with eGPU or a Hackintosh even before the RTX 30-series announcement, and much more dire after that. The likeliness of Apple allowing NVIDIA to produce Mac drivers again is close to zero. It’d be nice for AMD to be able to compete with GPUs again.
Apple Silicon will contain an Apple-designed GPU, so it might soon be irrelevant for Mac users what AMD has to offer.
My MBP has the intel integrated graphics, and AMD discrete graphics. I imagine as Apple moves to Apple silicon it will be the same arrangement at tiers that currently have discrete graphics, with the intel integrated just being swapped out for Apple integrated, leveraging the discrete graphics when appropriate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's their CUDA competitor this year? Are they pushing out client libs for Vulkan or are we sticking with trying to make ROCm work?
The industry at large is moving to SYCL, which can be implemented on top of OpenCL / CPUs / FPGAs.
CUDA's single-source environment is very good compared to SYCL or OpenCL. OpenMP still has single-source (just #pragma target), and is already adopted by the HPC crowd for multithreaded programming. NVidia and AMD support seems to be growing, especially because OpenMP is important to the supercomputer folks. (Summit and Frontier)
ROCm is CUDA-like and mostly works. The main issue is that CUDA will always remain a few steps ahead as AMD is forced to play "catchup". (ex: Cooperative groups are useful but unimplemented for now in ROCm). ROCm's main issue is being stuck in Linux, they need some Windows support if they want ROCm to really take off.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The information available around Big Navi (The GPUs expected to launch next month) put them at a +50% performance jump from the last generation and likely able to compete with the Nvidia flagship 3080: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-big_navi-rdna2-all-we-... I'd really urge anyone wanting to opine on these issues to watch the official analyst day videos and read through the releases AMD has put out so far in t…
But nVidia was substantially ahead the last generation and are promising a greater performance delta than that. AMD often has very high FLOPS but fails to translate that in to FPS in games, due to architecture inefficiency, drivers, or developers simply optimizing primarily for GeForce. I would in turn urge you to take all of these figures with a large grain of salt until the third party benchmarks hit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's their CUDA competitor this year? Are they pushing out client libs for Vulkan or are we sticking with trying to make ROCm work?
The industry at large is moving to SYCL, which can be implemented on top of OpenCL / CPUs / FPGAs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's their CUDA competitor this year? Are they pushing out client libs for Vulkan or are we sticking with trying to make ROCm work?
ROCm and HIP - https://github.com/ROCm-Developer-Tools/HIP , as it has been for the last 3-4 years
Though maybe I'm stuck in the past a bit thinking that single threaded performance is even still important for games.