• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

AMD Unveils World's First 7 nm GPUs - Radeon Instinct MI60, Instinct MI50

Conveniently, their comparisons are marketing material worthy.

Conveniently, tensor ops do not come by default when running software, it has to be specifically programmed that way. It's also not as scalable as Nvidia makes it out to be. As far as out-of-the-box performance metrics go, it's a fair comparison.
 
team overpriced green fan got bh over your comment.

So saddening AMD needs 331mm² 7nm 300W chip to take on 300W 815mm2 12nm chip.

Needing 300W for 331 mm² card does not sound optimal clocks for the arch. Without competition this would be some ~200W card at ~6.66TFlops of fp64 compute power. Now they are running it at too high clock that arch can give them just to be "top" on fp64 power on pcie. Vega itself can be very high efficient if not pushed too far. Granted this will give them some design wins on HPC market(All ready got few). So in that pov it's not the bad product.

Really I hate the "First PCIe 4.0 7Tflop bla bla bla" if it weren't for the PCIE 4.0 they couldn't say that, and PCIe 4.0 is currently unsupported in reality and isn't going to be supported before this card hits the market, so the spin on this proves they very carefully worded it and I would rather just see the numbers, is it going to take less than the 300W the Nvidia uses to get the same 7Tflop performance? Is it going to do some other fancy faster math? Is it going to do something more or the same at a lower cost.

AMD is trying really hard in the server market, but I don't think 2018 will be their year to take any crown, and neither will 2019. Maybe 2020 if they keep up with Zen2 and Navi is impressive. But that will also require thousands of hours to write the tools to make their supposed cards faster, or to make the same speed cards as fast and easy to use, which if Lisa is in the know she will already have people working on, but if not we will know the reason why they fail. Given AMD's vaporware issues, where they build hardware for software that isn't ready, or software that has great implementation of either ease of use, speed, or functionality, and you can only choose one......

I think AMD is playing their cards right for the midsize guys where a few IT guys run the show and want to save thousands to put into software development for long life peak performance, they will survive and their prosumer, gaming and server business will work out in the end, they will never be as big as Nvidia or Intel though. The same reason the Ford F-150 sells so many shitty trucks, its the king, its the classic standard of equal to the neighbors. AMD is the ful featured but still slightly odd Holden, the loud and hot Corvette versus the supercars, its second dog to the CPU and GPU business mostly due to mismanagement, Im just glad they are here to keep us from paying thousands more that Intel and Nvidia would charge if they could.

Well epyc2 will have pcie 4.0. Nvidia Xavier(Just for jokes) has one and IBM Power9(i.e. Raptor Talos II) though I don't know if amd have any drivers for arm or power machines.
 
Correct me if i'm wrong but, like other PCIe versions, PCIe 4.0 is backwards compatible, right?

If so, then it can be used with any current PCIe 3.0 solutions but the full benefit will only come with boards that are PCIe 4.0 capable, much like current 2700X CPU runs on a B350 / X370 board but runs better on a B450 / X470 board (PBO and stuff like that).
 
Correct me if i'm wrong but, like other PCIe versions, PCIe 4.0 is backwards compatible, right?

If so, then it can be used with any current PCIe 3.0 solutions but the full benefit will only come with boards that are PCIe 4.0 capable, much like current 2700X CPU runs on a B350 / X370 board but runs better on a B450 / X470 board (PBO and stuff like that).
In case of AMD the motherboard is mainly just for show, all the major functions are within the chip since it's a full SoC. The PCIe 4.0 Zen2 will work just fine with current boards, like Zen 1 & x370 but the additional lanes from the motherboard will be limited by the chipset. I can't say how the (CPU) lanes will be routed though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HTC
Correct me if i'm wrong but, like other PCIe versions, PCIe 4.0 is backwards compatible, right?

If so, then it can be used with any current PCIe 3.0 solutions but the full benefit will only come with boards that are PCIe 4.0 capable, much like current 2700X CPU runs on a B350 / X370 board but runs better on a B450 / X470 board (PBO and stuff like that).

Yup, that's true. I'm not sure if ZEN2 Desktop Ryzens and i.e. Navi cards would run at pcie 4.0 on current am4 board. They will probably just work as pcie 3.0 on those and for pcie 4.0 new chipset and motherboards are needed.
 
Current boards are unlikely to support PCI-e 4.0. CPU and cards will just fall back to PCI-e 3.0
 
Current boards are unlikely to support PCI-e 4.0. CPU and cards will just fall back to PCI-e 3.0
Current boards just route the PCIe lanes, at least for Zen don't they? The GPU or storage will need to be PCIe 4.0 compliant though.
On November 29, 2011, PCI-SIG preliminarily announced PCI Express 4.0, providing a 16 GT/s bit rate that doubles the bandwidth provided by PCI Express 3.0, while maintaining backward and forward compatibility in both software support and used mechanical interface.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCI_Express#PCI_Express_4.0
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: HTC
That wiki quote sounds optimistic. The PCI-SIG FAQ it links to as source does say cards are compatible both ways.
There have been comments from manufacturers that boards for PCI-e 4.0 (and 5.0) will need to be built with tighter tolerances and possibly additional components.
 
That wiki quote sounds optimistic. The PCI-SIG FAQ it links to as source does say cards are compatible both ways.
There have been comments from manufacturers that boards for PCI-e 4.0 (and 5.0) will need to be built with tighter tolerances and possibly additional components.

That mechanical interface probably just means the port sizes will be the same(x16, x8, x4, x1). There's nothing about electrical compatibility on wikipedia.
 
That wiki quote sounds optimistic. The PCI-SIG FAQ it links to as source does say cards are compatible both ways.
There have been comments from manufacturers that boards for PCI-e 4.0 (and 5.0) will need to be built with tighter tolerances and possibly additional components.
Those are electrical characteristics which need to be adhered to, so for instance just because every Z370 or Z390 board support 9900k, it doesn't imply that every board will support say 125W (or more) power consumption with all cores loaded. Some boards will, while others will not.
 
my experience with amd can be summarized like this,
-they don't have a proper software,
-they consume a lot of power,
-they heat too much that can melt the fan's cables,
-they draw too much power from motherboard,
-they lack several features that has been used in video/photo editing for years,
-they never deliver the performance they claim,
and they always fail within a year.
 
how about fixsing broken economy and trade?
i hope its not Made to spy everyone.
 
What's your sample size on this?

-they don't have a proper software,
Actually this has improved significantly over the years. That might have been true back when CCC was the control panel but not now.
-they consume a lot of power,
Yes they do consume more power than their equivalent performing Nvidia counterparts.
-they heat too much that can melt the fan's cables,
I've yet to see that happen on any card. It's pretty impossible actually. It would mean heatsink itself has to be over 100c on the card.
-they draw too much power from motherboard,
This was the case with RX480 when it came out. It was fixed.
-they lack several features that has been used in video/photo editing for years,
Such as?
-they never deliver the performance they claim,
Example?
and they always fail within a year.
Again, sample size?
 
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volta_(microarchitecture)

Shows Dec 2017 release date, there were some benchmarks I found that used engineering samples in late 2017, and the white paper for V100 from Nvidia was released June 2018.

Well the specs were announced in summer, like these cards are announced now availability is market later on. December was a release date for Titan V. First Tesla V100 were sold September 2017 in DGX systems.
a03c099459da8a990d4f498f48a3c8729dacbffc5b9317a0c2b4de49647327bc.jpg
 
Nvidia Tesla T4 (Tu100) Turning architecture on 12nm now

https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/data-center/tesla-t4/

Can't emphasize enough with Nvidia future 7nm replacement.

Why are people trying to compare with old Volta (V100) architecture?

Tesla T4 is 70W tdp version of cut down tu104. There's no full fp64 capability version of Turing architecture.

So full fp64 card for full fp64 card. Turing might get full fp64 compute capability due to die shrink, but current Nvidia's HPC arch is Volta. Sure in Datacenter/ML/DL/AI these card has to compete with current Turings too. And Nvidia will probably release T40 from tu102 chip too, which is more line of datacenter use with Mi60/50 than T4.
 
my experience with amd can be summarized like this,
-they don't have a proper software,
-they consume a lot of power,
-they heat too much that can melt the fan's cables,
-they draw too much power from motherboard,
-they lack several features that has been used in video/photo editing for years,
-they never deliver the performance they claim,
and they always fail within a year.

Troll much ?
 
Who cares ? Don't care about cores, don't care about nm .... might as well say my piza will now get delivered in a different size box
 
Back
Top