Slashdot Mirror
AMD Radeon Fury and Fury X Specs Leaked, HBM-Powered Graphics On the Way
MojoKid writes: A fresh alleged leak of next AMD Fiji graphics info has just hit the web and there's an abundance of supposedly confirmed specifications for what will be AMD's most powerful graphics card to date. Fiji will initially be available in both Pro and XT variants with the Fiji Pro dubbed "Fury" and Fiji XT being dubbed "Fury X." The garden variety Fury touts single-precision floating point (SPFP) performance of 7.2 TFLOPS compared to 5.6 TFLOPS for a bone stock Radeon R9 290X. That's a roughly 29-percent performance improvement. The Fury X with its 4096 stream processors, 64 compute units, and 256 texture mapping units manages to deliver 8.6 TFLOPS, or a 54-percent increase over a Radeon R9 290X. The star of the show, however, will be AMD's High Bandwidth Memory (HBM) interface. Unlike traditional GDDR5 memory, HBM is stacked vertically, decreasing the PCB footprint required. It's also integrated directly into the same package as the GPU/SoC, leading to further efficiencies, reduced latency and a blistering 100GB/sec of bandwidth per stack (4 stacks per card). On average HBM is said to deliver three times the performance-per-watt of GDDR5 memory. With that being said, the specs listed are by no means confirmed by AMD, yet. We shall find out soon enough during AMD's E3 press conference scheduled for June 16.
I thought HBM was supposed to bring cards up to the 1TB/sec level.
3-way 4K gaming is going to be where the next level of performance is at.
YAY for the new chip and memory. I just hope the TDP isn't so power sucking as the R9 series.
Don't be apathetic. Procrastinate!
In November 2001, one of the Fury X cards would beat the worlds top supercomputer on raw FLOPS.
"performance of 7.2 FLOPS compared to 5.6 TFLOPS"
I think I would stick with the faster card...
Why not XT and XTR?
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
Anyone who has been following the news on the next generation of AMD cards will have seen this information reheated, rehashed and otherwise warmed over by videocardzdotcom and WCCFTech, both sources of incredibly dubious merit.
The only confirmed information in regards to these new cards is that we'll know what they can do only when *real* reviewers get their hands on samples. This is unlikely to happen for a good few more days.
Will their drivers be up to the task?
If only their hardware came with a driver that's comparable in quality with NVIDIA's offering (especially under linux)...
The specs are "leaked".
AMD has been hyping the card for weeks already.
"We mustn't be caught by surprise by our own advancing technology" -- Aldous Huxley
I'm curious to know how they solved this problem...
They aren't stacked directly on top they are stacked to the side of the GPU .... sort of like how intel puts a GPU on the same processor package beside it's CPU ... just in this case there is an interposer that allows a much more massive number of interconnects than previously practical.
It probably makes things easier to cool than before since the memory now gets cooling it would not have previously gotten... and Memory is really the most important part of the GPU.
There's some screenshots sitting around on /r/pcmasterrace showing the 980ti, the ram chips are hitting 100C, so yeah using HBM to deal with not only heat but transfer speed is going to make a huge difference.
Om, nomnomnom...
As part of AMD's QA process they first submit their driver and sample hardware to the FSF and debian for rigorous testing.
Once approved it will be submitted to Linus for inclusion in the official kernel.
Only when all parties are satisfied the product is stable and efficient and all 3 major OSS's will QA sign off on release of the product.
Oh wait, no, that isnt the plan at all.
Made up specs posted days ago and rehashed without even attributing the original made up source. News?
If you only need 7 operations per second, a discrete board seem overkill. Most CPUs can handle that easily.
I just ordered a nVidia 980 Ti for my man dev box. While I would love to root for the underdog we need to be realistic and compare _actual_ silicon as opposed to theoretical paper specs of AMD hardware.
How many MH/s will this new card mine for Script and other hash currencies?
The HBM memories run at a much lower clockspeed than the GDDR5, but compensate it by using a very, VERY wide bus, so they're probably a lot colder.
Hey, get a clue, don't start your comment in the subject line. That's not what it's for. If you're going to do that just asdfjkl;.
Wait & see .. compared to 980 Ti ?
I just ordered a nVidia 980 Ti for my man dev box. While I would love to root for the underdog we need to be realistic and compare _actual_ silicon as opposed to theoretical paper specs of AMD hardware.
If you were as clever as you think you are, you would have waited for the next AMD card to hit the streets... and the price of the nVidia cards to drop, let alone for benchmarks to happen.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
This sounds like a great competitor to nVidia's Maxwell architecture, but is there an estimate about when AMD is going to release low-end/low-cost Fury-based cards to compete with the GTX 750, which AFAIK is the best power/watt card at the moment. I haven't followed GPU news for over a year though, so maybe there's already something better in the 100-150$ range?
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
So, it's slightly slower than the Titan X in games, but the Maxwell architecture suffers poor double precision performance and that could be where AMD make their money. The Firepro version of this card would smoke anything Nvidia has to offer.
Stock fan profile is garbage on nvidia reference boards. Never gets up over 40% fan speed. Throttles card instead of speeding up the fan, to keep the "ouch my ears" crowd happy.
The limitation of the consumer nVidia cards is double precision floating point. He may not need that. There are plenty of problems that need only single precision math, the extra precision is wasted. In that case, you don't see much benefit going to the pro cards, certainly not enough to justify the price.
Cool, finally a card that can run practically all entries in ShaderToy in real-time :-)
-- Did you try Tao3D? http://tao3d.sourceforge.net
This is the first article that mentions reduced latency.
I'm a CUDA developer and I can tell you that if you run an algorithm on it that does coalesced reads and writes, then the cards are very fast, but with random reads and writes, performance drops like a brick. I do not have experience with AMD cards in combination with OpenCL, but a wide bus at lower speeds than GDDR5, I'm not entirely sure if the latency will be lower compared to non-HBM cards. I hope someone will actually test this.
The 980 TI and TitanX cards don't have a backplate and don't have sensors on the back. So yes the cards can run at 80-100C but software won't know. Nvidia knows most people are not smart enough to figure it out and as long as they promise 1000Mhz clock what's the problem? The card will die faster but who keeps GPUs for more than a year to 18 months?
And the reason why GDDR5 runs at a much higher clock rate is? You should know the answer, it's because of the distance from the GPU to the chips themselves. HBM is stacked at the GPU, in turn speed isn't as much of an issue.
Om, nomnomnom...
I think the key feature wasn't so much the reduction in heat, but the reduction of the amount of power required to run them, which of course has the positive side effect of a reduction of heat...