371–380 of 392 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Remember that in the US you have to factor in the upcoming 25% import tariff.
Which has nothing to do with the prices in Europe.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> it is way too expensive for regular gamers Gamers arent kids anymore. Amongst my friends that game, most are nearly 30 working excellent jobs in software.
Doesn't matter if they aren't "kids" anymore or not, there's a reason AMD focused hard on the $200-300 range for graphics cards - because that's where most buyers budgets are. There are people who spend more, but even many enthusiasts are shopping in the $400-500 segment for a card to support high-refresh-rate gaming or higher resolutions like 1440P, the number of people who blow $800+ on a GPU like a 1080 Ti are few…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I mean... that's at the point where just the graphics card is more than one of the 4K consoles Microsoft or Sony is putting out. The console might output 4K but that doesn't mean the GPU inside can handle higher settings than a 1060. The $600 GPU is irrelevant to that comparison.
> The console might output 4K but that doesn't mean the GPU inside can handle higher settings than a 1060 Which is kinda irrelevant too, since console games are highly optimized for exactly 1 graphic card & rest of the setup. You get all the details hardware is capable of smoothly, nothing more or less. No fiddling with tons of settings that most have no clue about. I don't get this often used argument - my games loo…
> Of course if one pours 5x the amount of money into PC that would be spent on console, there needs to be some inner justification.
You can get a prettier and smoother experience if you do that and don't put the settings on super-ultra.
But also, if you're already going to have a computer, popping in a better-than-console GPU is cheaper than a console.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There’s a huge difference between saying “we will have something in the future” (duh) and saying “we have absolutely nothing for the next year and a half.” The latter gives your competitor the freedom to ask any price the market will accept without having to worry about a competitor undercutting this price in some near future.
When did they say the latter? It's more of just not giving out the codenames anymore.
At CES, AMD said that they'd only have Vega 20 coming up and it was only for the datacenter and AI. And that Navi would be for 2019.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/12233/amd-tech-day-at-ces-201...
That's like giving a blank check to your competitor, saying "Feel free to set prices anyway you want, you're not going to be bothered by us."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh yes it’s the developer’s fault for not “tuning” something the right way. Sure. You can “tune” something all you want, you’re always going to have a lower quality representation if you want better performance. The hardware should give the developers the possibility of getting better quality graphics at higher resolutions. We can play the original doom at 4 and probably even 8K without much problems. But that doesn’…
I think the point is that with PCs they make less effort to eek performance out of hardware. When you've got a console, you know exactly what you'll be optimising for and work really hard to get the most out of it. With a PC release I think Devs tend to make far less effort and simply up the requirements
Also, console games aren't that optimized, they just run at pretty mediocre settings. Both the xbone and the ps4 dedicate cores and ram to running the OS in the background which is a huge waste of resources.
I really hope that the next generation of AMD Radeon have a good performance and their efforts to port TensorFlow and others works. AMD need to put on NVIDIA on the same heat that Intel got with the Zen architecture. NVIDIA is too comfortable, with a very high price and crazy demands ( you can´t use Customer cards on Data centers)
What effort to port tensorflow?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where are you getting a 70-90% price increase? 1080s are ~$450, will now be $799. 1070s are ~$400, will now be $599. (I'm going off the top hits on Newegg)
For the 1080, by your numbers, $799/$450 represents a ~78% price increase.
The prices are absolutely insane. I was prepared to pay £599 for the 2080, but £749 for a non-Ti card is a joke. It feels to me like Nvidia knows there's no competition from AMD so they can ask for literally any price and people will pay it.
Just because something seems expensive to you doesn’t mean it looks that way to others.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whether it's substantially better for deep learning depends on whether they chose to neuter fp16 like they did in all other consumer GPUs. The main bottleneck is not actually the size of the model per se (sizes of the models have been mostly going _down_ as of late), it's the size of the batch during training. Both batch size and model size determine the size of the main memory hog: activations that you need to keep…
If it's data size in GPU RAM you are concerned about, couldn't you store fp16 and cast into fp32 just in the kernel? In OpenCL, you would do this with vload_halfN and vstore_halfN to convert during load and store. You won't get double throughput compared to fp32, but you shouldn't fall back to some terribly slow path either.