Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

AMD Launches Higher Performance Radeon RX 580 and RX 570 Polaris Graphics Cards (hothardware.com)

Posted by msmash on from the more-choices dept.

Reader MojoKid writes: In preparation for the impending launch of AMD's next-generation Vega GPU architecture, which will eventually reside at the top of the company's graphics product stack, the company unveiled a refresh of its mainstream graphics card line-up with more-powerful Polaris-based GPUs. The new AMD Radeon RX 580 and RX 570 are built around AMD's Polaris 20 GPU, which is an updated revision of Polaris 10. The Radeon RX 580 features 36 Compute Units, with a total of 2,304 shader processors and boost / base GPU clocks of 1340MHz and 1257MHz, respectively, along with 8GB of GDDR5 over a 256-bit interface. The Radeon RX 580 offers up a total of 6.17 TFLOPs of compute performance with up to 256GB/s of peak memory bandwidth. Though based on the same chip, the Radeon RX 570 has only 32 active CUs and 2048 shader processors. Boost and base reference clocks are 1244MHz and 1168MHz, respectively with 4GB of GDDR5 memory also connected over a 256-bit interface. At reference clocks, the peak compute performance of the Radeon RX 570 is 5.1TFLOPs with 224GB/s of memory bandwidth. In the benchmarks, the AMD Radeon RX 580 clearly outpaced AMD's previous gen Radeon RX 480, and was faster than an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Founder's Edition card more often than not. It was more evenly matched with factory-overclocked OEM GeForce GTX 1060 cards, however. Expected retail price points are around $245 and $175 for 8GB Radeon RX 580 and 4GB RX 570s cards, though more affordable options will also be available.

93 comments

  1. I'll end up buying several because fuck Nvidia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can't in good conscience support a major brand-power that spends so much money crippling games and gouging customers as often as possible. Fuck Nvidia.

    1. Re:I'll end up buying several because fuck Nvidia by spire3661 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Performance > Ethics

      --
      Good-bye
    2. Re:I'll end up buying several because fuck Nvidia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      I'll gladly take a performance hit up front so as not to appease Hitler, sorry. Maybe my ethics are just worth more money?

    3. Re:I'll end up buying several because fuck Nvidia by N3wsByt3 · · Score: 1

      They aren't, trust me.

      --
      --- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---
    4. Re:I'll end up buying several because fuck Nvidia by OneHundredAndTen · · Score: 0

      I would too. It is just that, try as I may, installing the AMD driver for their cards under Linux is something I have yet to pull off. With NVidia, on the other hand, the correspnding task is a breeze.

    5. Re:I'll end up buying several because fuck Nvidia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Your wife agrees ;)

    6. Re:I'll end up buying several because fuck Nvidia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So is this guy a genius or... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj0oND69is0

    7. Re:I'll end up buying several because fuck Nvidia by hairyfeet · · Score: 2

      I know you are being funny but if you don't want to buy a new card every other year? You are better off buying AMD as they age a LOT better than Nvidia cards, and that isn't even counting how more often Nvidia cards seem to cook than AMD from what I've seen at the shop. Gamers have even come up with a name for AMD aging better, they call it AMD Fine Wine Technology and having gone through countless cards at the shop? I can see the difference, the AMD cards seem to be able to play mainstream games for longer than Nvidia cards.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    8. Re:I'll end up buying several because fuck Nvidia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Funny, I have the opposite experience...
      Nvidia drivers break on kernel updates, and sometimes simply will never work again (nvidia-legacy, but still), and last I checked required a /tmp that wasn't mounted noexec...
        AMD in-tree OSS drivers are simply hassle free.

    9. Re:I'll end up buying several because fuck Nvidia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Virtue signaling = $0

    10. Re:I'll end up buying several because fuck Nvidia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and slow as hell compared to their closed drivers (assuming the latter even works at all).

    11. Re:I'll end up buying several because fuck Nvidia by gravewax · · Score: 1

      mostly, however at the moment the performance difference is albeit unnoticeable except in very high end configurations.

    12. Re:I'll end up buying several because fuck Nvidia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. And with AMD really mobilizing opensource drivers team now, a pair of these are going in my FreeBSD box just as soon as they hit the shelves.

    13. Re:I'll end up buying several because fuck Nvidia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See here for OSS AMD vs proprietary nVidia.
      Yes they are perhaps slower, but not slow as hell, and depending on your usage still fast enough. But YMMV.
      For me personally, OSS AMD worked fine.
      Now I have nVidia, but their OSS drivers are unusable, so I need proprietary.
      nVidia proprietary gives me screen tearing during videos, a LibreOffice bug, unable to change refresh rate thru xrandr, no highres text mode, no KMS.
      See also the famous Torvalds statement.

    14. Re:I'll end up buying several because fuck Nvidia by tailgunner_050 · · Score: 1

      You haven't met Intel.

    15. Re:I'll end up buying several because fuck Nvidia by LostMyBeaver · · Score: 1

      To be fair, NVidia sells quite a few more discrete cards than AMD does. AMD's core graphics business is discrete=marketing, integrated = profits. They both make excellent products, but hardware failure rates are generally consistent. The chips themselves don't generally blow out, but more often than not, it's support circuitry. Also, there's a weird thing I've noticed, people who consciously attempt to differentiate between the two vendors tend to have entirely different patterns to how they treat their hardware and use it as well. To this day, ATI (I know they're not called that anymore) users are very much more like Apple users where nVidia users are generally much more oriented towards disposable computing.

      Also consider that people who are willing to spend more than $150 on graphics cards are generally not the types of people making a 10 year investment. Those cards are supposed to be replaced every other year. So why bother making them good enough to last more. But either way, neither nVidia or AMD actually make cards, they make chip sets and the other companies make the cards. And no... they all pretty much suck. Zotac, MSI, eVGA, etc... they are NOT designing for durability. They design for performance and bling.

      I know there are counter-websites picking on AMD the same way. It's like Norwegian and Swedish joke books. They are the exact same book, they just switch the roles.

      If you're hoping to make a business out of "aging graphics cards", I have a few S3's in a box somewhere if you want them. They still run flawlessly.

      Oh... and here's the thing, if your performance needs stay constant and you can still play all the games which interest you on the older cards, you should upgrade for the sake of lower power silicon if nothing else. My daughter and I play Overwatch... at the same resolution on almost identical computers. She has a GTX 1050 and I have a GTX 970. Her computer uses about 25% less power than mine. That may not sound like much, but it easily pays for the cost of the card each year.

  2. Forget the graphic cards... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 0

    Does the new Ryzen processors outperform the FX-8300 processor? If so, how much of a big boost are we talking about here?

    1. Re:Forget the graphic cards... by governorx · · Score: 1

      Youtube.. so many tech tubers have benchmarked this.

    2. Re:Forget the graphic cards... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Youtube.. so many tech tubers have benchmarked this.

      For AMD vs. Intel. I've yet to see one for AMD vs. AMD.

    3. Re:Forget the graphic cards... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really?
      https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=1825&cmp[]=2970

    4. Re: Forget the graphic cards... by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      40% faster.

    5. Re:Forget the graphic cards... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Really?
      https://www.cpubenchmark.net/c...

      And the date on that is... today! The Ryzen 1700 has better performance but the FX-8300 still has a better price/performance ratio.

    6. Re: Forget the graphic cards... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 0

      40% faster.

      Not at current prices. Paying $500 for a 40% performance increase isn't that great of a deal. Especially since I updated my components last year because Ryzen didn't come out soon enough.

    7. Re:Forget the graphic cards... by blackomegax · · Score: 1

      How is that ratio modified by the electrical costs of running an 8 core FX chip? They consume like twice the power that zen does for like half the performance.

    8. Re: Forget the graphic cards... by Highdude702 · · Score: 0

      This. You ask a question as bait to try to get your chance to be a prick. This is why everybody thinks you're a worthless moron. Go ahead tell us how they would never use AMD at Microsoft or any of the other tech giants you claim to have worked at intermittently.

    9. Re:Forget the graphic cards... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      They consume like twice the power that zen does for like half the performance.

      Only if all eight cores are maxed out. I got a 25W quad-core AM1 system that draws 27W when its not doing anything and 35W when the cores are maxed out..

    10. Re: Forget the graphic cards... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 0

      This. You ask a question as bait to try to get your chance to be a prick. This is why everybody thinks you're a worthless moron.

      Hello, troll. Can't find anyone us to play with?

      Go ahead tell us how they would never use AMD [...]

      Why?

      [...] at Microsoft or any of the other tech giants you claim to have worked at intermittently.

      I only interviewed at Microsoft.

    11. Re:Forget the graphic cards... by dj245 · · Score: 2

      How is that ratio modified by the electrical costs of running an 8 core FX chip? They consume like twice the power that zen does for like half the performance.

      The Ryzen 1700 is a 65W chip, the FX-8300 is a 95W chip. Assuming you are running the machine at 100% load 24/7, and these ratings are accurate, the FX-8300 will cost you $1.75 extra per month at $0.08/kW-hr. If you want to consider the added AC load, you can round up to $2.50 per month. Given the price difference between the chips (currently ~$310+ vs ~$120), it would take more than 6 years to get to the electricity cost breakeven point.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    12. Re: Forget the graphic cards... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      (Re: FX-8300)
      > I updated my components last year because Ryzen didn't come out soon enough
      (Re: Hillary)
      > Hillary started off 268 electoral votes
      (Re: Trump)
      > Trump had to perform better than McCain in 2008 and Romney in 2012 to have a chance at winning. Like everything else in this election, he blew that off too and will lose in a landslide.

      Good grief your 2016 was a trainwreck of terrible calls. Here's to 2017, hopefully you can at least swing a good processor later in the year- I have less faith in your political prescience improving any.

    13. Re: Forget the graphic cards... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      (Re: FX-8300)
      > I updated my components last year because Ryzen didn't come out soon enough

      My Vista-compatible motherboard was nine-years-old. Ryzen was originally slated for Q3/Q4 2016. When I updated the motherboard and memory, I got the FX-8300 to replace the seven-year-old quad core processor.

      (Re: Hillary)
      > Hillary started off 268 electoral votes

      Based on available polling data.

      (Re: Trump)
      > Trump had to perform better than McCain in 2008 and Romney in 2012 to have a chance at winning. Like everything else in this election, he blew that off too and will lose in a landslide.

      Based on available polling data, Hillary had a 95% chance and Trump had 5%. Now obviously something was wrong with the polling data. Hillary won the popular vote, Trump won the electoral college.

      Good grief your 2016 was a trainwreck of terrible calls. Here's to 2017, hopefully you can at least swing a good processor later in the year- I have less faith in your political prescience improving any.

      I based my decisions on available data, as all good decisions should be based on. If I was perfect, I would be Jewish. If I was God, you would be in trouble.

    14. Re:Forget the graphic cards... by blackomegax · · Score: 1

      That's also a glorified netbook chip that has jack-all real performance. Compare it to the newest 35w i3

    15. Re:Forget the graphic cards... by blackomegax · · Score: 1

      At that rate i'd rather have the vastly higher performance over 6 years.

    16. Re:Forget the graphic cards... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      That's also a glorified netbook chip that has jack-all real performance. Compare it to the newest 35w i3

      I built the AM1 system when the processor and motherboard were $25 each. The ECS KAM1-I motherboard had two built-in serial ports and a header for two additional serial ports. This is nice little system for running Red Hat Linux and connecting to four console ports on my Cisco certification rack.

    17. Re:Forget the graphic cards... by rl117 · · Score: 1

      It really depends on what your priorities are. My current system is an FX-8350, and the new stuff does look like a really nice upgrade. It's definitely faster, and definitely more power efficient. But I do need to factor the cost of a new mainboard, CPU, RAM against keeping what I have. I'll pay more for the ongoing running cost in electricity usage for sure, but that usage is dwarfed by the replacement cost of all that hardware--it will take many years to break even. So I'll probably hold off for a year or so, and the cost of all the parts will be even cheaper by that point. I'd be in more of a rush to upgrade if what I had was noticeably bad, but the 8350 is a fine processor for everything I do, from gaming to compiling and running multi-threaded analysis code. While the new stuff would be nice for all these things, it's not sufficiently compelling to replace the hardware today.

    18. Re: Forget the graphic cards... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I went from 8120 to 1700. You have to jump to ddr4 too, not just am4. It's not much faster, but it can do twice as much at the same time while on half the power. So its quieter and tolerates a smaller case. It didn't make economic sense for some, but I was moving and the smaller case let me carry it on a flight.

    19. Re: Forget the graphic cards... by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Nothing wrong with the FX series, as long as you remember programs compiled with the Intel Cripple Compiler will be slower (but that is true of Ryzen as well) but if you look at benches made with GCC instead of ICC you see exactly what you would expect, the FX-8 sits between an i5 and an i7 depending on how multi-threaded the program is. I personally see absolutely no reason to upgrade from my FX-8320e as I'm getting better than 60fps on all my games (most better than 90fps) and even on heavy workloads like multitrack audio DSP processing it frankly works faster than I can.

      As for Hillary? Anybody who could read the numbers knew she would lose a good year before the election. When she announced her candidacy her approval rating? 15%. After nearly a year and a half of the DNC rigging primaries for her, the MSM practically falling over themselves to kiss her ass and even running stories by her for approval? Her approval rating was...14%. Nobody in history has EVER won the POTUS with numbers that low so no shit she lost, she was about the worst possible candidate the DNC could possibly run, a rich influence peddling Wall Street insider that Wikileaks showed was getting her ass kissed by the MSM and cashing big fat checks from nasty dictators like the Saudi princes and if that wasn't enough? Her team pushing a narrative that she deserved it because she had a vag instead of anything she had actually done and that it was owed to her ("Its her turn" which they hung up on giant signs at all her rallies) just made her look even more arrogant and condescending.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    20. Re:Forget the graphic cards... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FX-8300 has been completely and utterly owned.

      A 4c/8t Ryzen will outperform Piledriver at the same clockspeed by around 53% before taking into account the module penalty for Piledriver (which can make it even worse in certain MT workloads than the 4c/8t Ryzen). Now consider the fact that an 8c/16t Ryzen can (and will) handle twice as many threads as Piledriver.

      The R7 1700 is a steal. It completely annihilates anything Piledriver in performance.

    21. Re: Forget the graphic cards... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Anybody who could read the numbers knew she would lose a good year before the election. When she announced her candidacy her approval rating? 15%.

      Her approval rating was...14%

      I've never seen polls with those numbers. Got a link?

    22. Re:Forget the graphic cards... by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      I have an FX-8320e and on stock clocks when I'm just web surfing and watching vids? It pulls between 14w-39w according to the built on power monitoring on my Asus board, that is with 4 cores parked BTW, and when playing games? I average between 59w-75w which again depends on whether Windows has any cores parked which with most games rarely using more than 4 threads? I usually have at least 2 if not 4 parked, in fact the only time I see all 8 cores running is when I'm doing video transcodes and multitrack audio DSP renders.

      So yeah running an FX-8? Really not expensive and I have numbers to back it up which as you can see it would take over a decade to make up the difference in cost between an AMD FX and an Intel, the same numbers would hold true for Ryzen.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    23. Re: Forget the graphic cards... by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      So are you lying now or on the post where you said you worked at Microsoft for 3 or 6 months whatever it was.

    24. Re: Forget the graphic cards... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      So are you lying now or on the post where you said you worked at Microsoft for 3 or 6 months whatever it was.

      Nope. Never worked for Microsoft. Five recruiters led me around the nose for Microsoft positions in 2005. I interviewed on the Silicon Valley Microsoft Campus for a technology spinoff in 2014.

      Feel free to post the URL to where I said I worked for Microsoft.

    25. Re: Forget the graphic cards... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      So are you lying now or on the post where you said you worked at Microsoft for 3 or 6 months whatever it was.

      I believe you were referring to this post when I was at Fujitsu for six months.

      When I worked at Fujitsu in 1997, our virtual world division got a temporary vice president from Japan for three monhts. This VP was in charged of mainframes. He always asked the same question in broken English, "Are you a mainframe programmer?" He was disappointed that no one in our division was a mainframe programmer. For years since then I've always heard that mainframe programmers were in high demand. The catch, of course, is having previously worked on mainframes. Seems like no one wants to hire an inexperienced person as a mainframe programmer.

      http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=10471307&cid=54207521

    26. Re:Forget the graphic cards... by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      look it up you lazy chunk of shit

    27. Re: Forget the graphic cards... by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      I can't give you an exact link as I don't have time to go through the video archive but I CAN give you the place to search...H.A. Goodman's YouTube channel which is where I originally saw the numbers. He is pretty good about backing up his vids with links to the exact figures and he covered the election from the very first primaries all the way through to the end so if you need a source for 2016 election figures? He's your man.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    28. Re: Forget the graphic cards... by epine · · Score: 1

      Now obviously something was wrong with the polling data.

      Because why? Because popular opinion has guaranteed monotonic convergence? At a guaranteed quadratic convergence rate?

      Just what part of "moving target" is so hard for people to understand?

      Candidate A shits her pants at the front of the boat. Everybody rushes to the back of the boat.

      Candidate B begins barfing up a taco bowl. Everybody rushes back to the front of the boat.

      Blather. Foam. Repeat.

      The only reason Trump won is because on the day of the election, there were more disgusted voters headed to the back of the boat than the front of the boat.

      Polls, especially rolling meta polls, have an intrinsic lag of two to four days. I clearly saw on the 538 graphics momentum building toward the rear bulkhead as we rounded into election day. After I extrapolated the trend a few days forward to compensate for polling lag, I was not surprised by the final outcome.

      There was more than enough disgust in both directions to support either outcome. Another Billy Bush tape in the final week could easily have turned the tide. This was not a normal election where the polls were tracking a slow convergence of the undecideds. The polls were tracking a mad (and futile) scramble for the voters to distance themselves from whichever paragon of disgust was recently the most salient.

      Moving target. The polls were no less instantaneously accurate than they've ever been. They just don't work very well when neither candidate has a redeeming feature, and the electorate goes into orbit around a positive pole in the complex plain.

      How is this even remotely difficult to comprehend?

      From where I sit, it's all bog-standard Electoral Engineering for Dummies, 101.

    29. Re: Forget the graphic cards... by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      I honestly cant remember exact details, the name will explain that. But i do recall on several occasions you speaking about working at microsoft(maybe im wrong and you said you had just applied, but pretty sure im not wrong) along with several short stints at companies. I have only worked for 4 companies in my 16 years as an electrician. only one for 3 months, so when i hear stories like yours it makes me think youre not any good at what you do. Because those of us who are good at what we do stay at companies long term. Maybe tech is different and if so glad i didnt go into it. way more fun as a hobby.

    30. Re: Forget the graphic cards... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I based my decisions on available data

      No, you based decisions on the data that fit your filter. You wanted a new computer then, and you told yourself that you couldn't wait. Any AMD fan should have held out for Ryzen, as we kinda see now, but if you weren't so computer starved you would have seen that at the time. Your political issues are similar- you saw what you wanted to see, and you went and attacked everyone who disagreed with you. If you weren't so starved for not having to deal with a Republican in office, you would have seen, if not the result, then at least the contention.

    31. Re: Forget the graphic cards... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Because those of us who are good at what we do stay at companies long term.

      As an IT support contractor, I take whatever work comes my way. Sometimes the assignment is for four hours on short notice, days, weeks, months or years. I'm currently half-way through a five-year contract. My LinkedIn profile has connections to 800+ recruiters from a 20+ year career. Tech workers who stay at one company often make less money than those who moved around. It's easy to say that I'm no good. But I do the jobs that other people won't do, especially if they need a miracle worker.

    32. Re: Forget the graphic cards... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      No, you based decisions on the data that fit your filter.

      My filter is... I'm not a purist. If an alternative solution presents itself because my preferred solution wasn't available at the time, I would go with that and evaluate alternatives later.

    33. Re: Forget the graphic cards... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you work for peanuts? Something ridiculously low for where and what you do?

    34. Re: Forget the graphic cards... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Don't you work for peanuts? Something ridiculously low for where and what you do?

      I make $50K+ per year in Silicon Valley. That makes me the highest wage earner in my blue collar familiy. For the people who drop $3K per night on wine, I make peanuts.

    35. Re: Forget the graphic cards... by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      Wow, i dont make much less than you, and im just an Electrician/Low Voltage tech.. i will probably catch and surpass your pay in the next 2 years or so.. Glad i decided not to go into tech.

  3. Competition is a beautiful thing by cloud.pt · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...for the consumer. Pumping 60fps+ @1080p, graphics ticket to the max on a 175$ card, even in a 2013-era CPU is gonna make 'em consoles up their game next gen... Or at least lower their prices.

    1. Re:Competition is a beautiful thing by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      VR is pushing the specs up more than anything else. Project Scorpio is pretty much built for VR. The current graphics floor is 1080×1200x2@90FPS. We need 40 TFlops NOW.

      --
      Good-bye
    2. Re: Competition is a beautiful thing by Type44Q · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Project Scorpio is pretty much built for VR.

      So you're not that informed about Scorpio...

    3. Re:Competition is a beautiful thing by Moof123 · · Score: 1

      What's VR?

    4. Re:Competition is a beautiful thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Video Recording. Those youtube videos won't publish themselves!

    5. Re: Competition is a beautiful thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Scorpio is terrible for VR. You are close we actually need 48 TFLOPS for usable VR or AR. Scorpio delivers 6 at best. We will never have usable VR headsets. Useable VR needs dual 5K displays rolling at never-less-than 120 FPS. Assuming a 2x 5K display can even be invented, we need a graphics card that card do 48 TFLOPS .. something everyone agrees is impossible because Moores law is ending soon.

    6. Re:Competition is a beautiful thing by sirber · · Score: 1

      Variable Rate, used when you turn vsycn off.

      --
      Be or ben't
    7. Re:Competition is a beautiful thing by wbr1 · · Score: 1

      Vericose Rectum - Also known as hemmorhoids.

      --
      Silence is a state of mime.
    8. Re:Competition is a beautiful thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, this is the type of VR experience anyone buying microsoft products has?

      http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/File:Head_up_ass.jpg

    9. Re: Competition is a beautiful thing by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Hardware-wise, it is oh so VR capable! How will the console be marketed?? That's another question entirely, and might not have VR at all.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    10. Re:Competition is a beautiful thing by Nemyst · · Score: 1

      Project Scorpio is so far ahead on VR that they haven't made a compatible VR headset yet!

    11. Re: Competition is a beautiful thing by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      Hardware-wise, it is oh so VR capable!

      And... incorrect.

    12. Re: Competition is a beautiful thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah right. The ps4 now is already VR capable, Scorpio is significantly more powerful than that so yes it is easily VR capable.

    13. Re: Competition is a beautiful thing by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      Hint: it's not just about horsepower. Now before you keep arguing out of your asshole (it's undignified), why don't you run along and actually read about the damn thing?

    14. Re: Competition is a beautiful thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      perhaps you should follow your own advise and instead of talking out your arse actually go and read about the recently announced specs. Scorpio is not only easily powerful enough it has the memory and architecture that will comfortably support it.

    15. Re:Competition is a beautiful thing by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      How about another use-case. I want a silent/quiet card for 4k desktop. My old 7870 ramps the fan up when scrolling web pages and the scrolling isn't that smooth.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    16. Re: Competition is a beautiful thing by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Actually, yes, it is about cycles and how efficient you are with them. In the case of Project Scorpio, it's really damn efficient; to the point of the GPU having Direct12 baked into the silicon more than a normal programmable GPU would. In many ways, having it closer to ASIC makes it move custom in many regards to how SGI workstations were in some levels, but now with modern technology.

      "Roll call instructions on the CPU that would typically require thousands of instructions are now reduced to just 11" -Leadbetter

      "not only can Project Scorpio hit native 4K 60FPS in original Xbox One games, but it can do so with GPU power to spare. Furthermore the stress test apparently only used 66% of the early kit's 5GB of memory, and the final Project Scorpio hardware will have 12GB of unified GDDR5 memory with a 326GB/sec bandwidth.

      VR, easily capable. I mean, really really fucking got that shit down with cycles-to-spare capable!!!

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    17. Re:Competition is a beautiful thing by cloud.pt · · Score: 1

      Ahahaha! Funnily enough I have the same card and I have no idea what the hell you're talking about, but I don't do 4k "desktoping". I'm guessing you're on Linux - likely Chrome under Ubuntu. You probably got something running on software rendering, either because of Chrome defaults or lacking drivers. But this is speculation, I have yet to test 4k on a daily basis.

      Even so, that card, especially in the 2GB or more variant should be OK as long as it stays out of 4k gaming or recent games' higher settings. I doubt you need to spend 175$ to browse at 4k and not stirring up the fans. I would first advise on a better PC case, more/better/silent-er coolers and a bit of research on your case airflow intake and extraction. There are also soundproof cases, some actually helping airflow because they restrict the passage of air from entrance to exit better, if your system isn't too exotic of course. 100usd will also get you a dedicated closed liquid loop that supports your graphics cards I bet, but well, liquid loops can be more noisy and perhaps less effective depending on conditions, so I digress.

    18. Re: Competition is a beautiful thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another clueless idiot that doesn't understand anything. Present technology available today disagrees with you entirely.

    19. Re:Competition is a beautiful thing by cloud.pt · · Score: 1

      Well there's nothing VR announced for the XBOX market that I know off, and even the PS4 Pro makes use of the extra CPU add-on from the PSVR for actually processing the VR experience. Scorpio and the Pro are mostly 1080p60 or 4k30 machines, and even then they struggle. But for VR, it's not only the TFlops though - there's a lot of optimization required software-side for consistent 60fps experience. The real problem of VR is the "dual-monitors" combined with the need for 60FPS on both of them while current gen is mostly prepared for optimal 1080p30. In theory, you need at least 4x the processing power of current gen to achieve 2x 1080p60, and it's just not feasible commercially yet. And I will be honest: I have tried 1080p60 vr and I don't think it's enough for a decent experience - closeness to the eye hampers both pixel-perfect, 3D perception and fluidity a lot. I think VR will only take off mainstream when we get something like 2 or 3k at 90fps, and by rough moore's law standards, that is a good 6-10y from now. Which is good, considering we still need other advancements to make it more ergonomic, more engaging, more responsive. I have no doubt though that in most millenial life-span, we will get or get very close to a seamless VR experience, maybe even a "neural-laced" one. Fingers crossed!

    20. Re:Competition is a beautiful thing by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, no one can be told what Virtual Reality is. You have to see it for yourself.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    21. Re:Competition is a beautiful thing by GonzoPhysicist · · Score: 1

      My 7850 work just fine for a 4k desktop and most older games too (downscale to 1080 if I want 60fps in more modern games)

      --
      horror vacui
    22. Re:Competition is a beautiful thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      4K destop should be trivial for a fairly modern card.

      If you want a silent 4K gaming card, they're out there, but you need to study GPU reviews for reported dB under load.

      Or, as a fun weekend project, buy a beefy 4K-capable card and replace the stock heatsink with an AIO (all-in-one) CPU watercooler. I bought a used corsair 240mm AIO off ebay for $60 and slapped in on my 980ti. Youll need to figure out a way tighten the cooler to the core adequately and uniformly (home depot is your friend; there're also official brackets/adapters you can buy specifically for putting a CPU AIO on a GPU, provided the CPU AIO is compatible). How to you cool the VRAM and mosfets is up to you.

      End product is superior cooling under load (so more OC headroom + no clock throttling) and much quieter operation.

    23. Re:Competition is a beautiful thing by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      I dont see a reason why Scorpio cant run Oculus Rift, right out of the box. It has the GPU power, the inputs, and the interface for it (Windows Holographic)

      --
      Good-bye
    24. Re:Competition is a beautiful thing by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Maybe i need to change the stock cooler, or at least replace the thermal paste and clean it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    25. Re:Competition is a beautiful thing by cloud.pt · · Score: 1

      I didn't say it couldn't run them, I said there don't seem to be plans for it since I know of no marketing associations, other than the fact an XBOX controller can be used with the Rift, and that you can stream Xbox One games to the Rift, both of these scenarios using a PC. I don't see MS partnering up with a now Facebook owned company that serves absolutely no commercial purpose, especially when Microsoft itself has it's own AR/VR stuff coming (e.g. Hololens).

      In any case, my personal opinion is it won't have enough power to play VR in what I, once again, personally consider to be a consistent, enjoyable VR experience (2k per eye at 60hz, rendering separately to achieve consistent 3D). This is also why I won't own any current market option: no matter the hardware they still don't output close to this.

      I previously mentioned 1080p as goal, and that was misleading, just like the 3 devices market themselves across the board: a consistent, pixel perfect experience on googles should be something I predict close to the pixel count of actual 16/9 FHD, or 1920x1080, per eye, in whatever comfortable aspect ratio for maximum FOV. With the current standard of 960-1200 x 1080 I see pixels everywhere, at least the 2 devices I tried (PSVR and Samsung VR on an S6). And the 3D effect kept losing "depth" but I won't blame performance or frequency directly as it might simply be bad placement on my head or lack of my eye/brain adjustment to it.

  4. It does not you should now use by future+assassin · · Score: 1

    Cyrix CPU's.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
    1. Re:It does not you should now use by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Cyrix CPU's.

      I loved my Cyrix 6x86 CPU back in the late 1990's. It ran Linux flawlessly for my file server.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrix_6x86

    2. Re:It does not you should now use by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      I remember those. Owned several. And then one day I've bought a K6 just to test it - after all it was a socket 7 CPU as well, so no new motherboard or memory was needed. After that test I swore that I won't ever buy Cyrix crap again.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    3. Re:It does not you should now use by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      After that test I swore that I won't ever buy Cyrix crap again.

      That's not a fair comparison. The Cyrix was a contemporary of the K5. I had both. Cyrix had better Linux support (IIRC, you had to compile the kernel with the feature enabled) and the K5 ran DOS /Windows just fine. The K6-2 400MHz (overclocked to 500MHz) was my favorite processor from the Socket 7 days.

    4. Re:It does not you should now use by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      It is a fair comparison because Cyrix 6x86MX was released two months after K6.
      My last Socket 7 CPU was a K6-3 450 and it was so good that I had it for almost two years instead of bying a new CPU every three months like I did previously.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    5. Re:It does not you should now use by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      It is a fair comparison because Cyrix 6x86MX was released two months after K6.

      That was probably the Mark II. The Mark I came out in 1996, a year after the K5 and year before the K6. Mine was a Mark I.

    6. Re:It does not you should now use by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      Nope, not MII, that one was released in 1998 and ran against K6-2.
      MX was the as the first 6x86, but with the added MMX instruction set.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    7. Re:It does not you should now use by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      True that! but you were better off with an Intel non MMX, since it had faster x87 and that was useful.
      Low clocked original 6x86 was good at integer code ; S3 Virge was cheap and had very high 2D performance. So, for everything 320x200 under MS-DOS it was a monster that chewed through everything. Ran your old 3D games at a solid 70 fps (after all those years, I learned that 320x200 mode was at 70Hz), stuff like Dark Forces, all that used integer / fixed point. Tomb Raider ran well and was a 320x200 DOS game.
      Quake was a bit slow as I found out years later (even Intel P133 was much faster) although we tried for one of the many weird resolutions rather than stay in ugly 320x200.
      Screamer 2's demo was 320x200 in 65536 colors!

      Too bad PCs lacked an easy, standard way to plug Playstation-like two controllers. The low res looked pixellated even back then, but actually late DOS games like that looked much like what the PC did, only the PC used a fast CPU and fast dumb graphics buffer. You could run with no driver whatsoever loaded if keyboard-only was good to go for the game.

      In the 640x480 and 3D accelerated Windows 95 era, Cyrix was instantly obsolete.

    8. Re:It does not you should now use by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      *late DOS games like that looked much like what the Playstation did

  5. Out of money? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In preparation for launch of product X, company refreshes product W ...

    So are they fundraising here? Or just milking a non related press release to advertse next product? How is this in any way preparation?

  6. I buy nVidia by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    because I just don't have the time to deal with the crashes. I keep hearing bad things about AMD's stability, especially on very new and very old games. If you're just playing the big titles (Overwatch, DOTA, WOW, Call of Duty) it's not so bad. But even GTAV was pretty buggered up at launch.

    I can't complain too much about gouging either. I got a Gigabyte 6gb 1060 for $215 shipped using deals from Jet.com. Those aren't even that common. That's not bad for a card that runs everything at 60+ FPS /1080p.

    That said I miss my 1650x's super nice image quality. And I don't like nVidia's habbit of sabotaging competitors ( tessellation anyone?)

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:I buy nVidia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I run both AMD and Nvidia, I get far more crashes from Nvidia driver failures than I do from AMD ones. Neither are great but NVidia are abysmal in quality.

    2. Re:I buy nVidia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like you're lying, but that's no shock. Just like Hillary supporters, you'll say anything to try to justify your bad decisions.

  7. Xeon by LostMyBeaver · · Score: 1

    It costs far less to buy a 16 core Xeon system from eBay with 32-64GB of RAM then to buy a Ryzen or Core i7. If you're concerned about performance per buck, eBay a real system. And... oh, the bars I got on consumer benchmark software was double or triple when I was using my 20 core Xeon server as a gaming PC for a few days.

    On the other hand, I find that a good notebook does everything I need most of the time. Who really cares about the high end of consumer processors? They cost too much and the motherboards are made like shit.