• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

No AMD Radeon "Navi" Before October: Report

Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
42 (0.04/day)
With Navi still being GCN it is probably wont be much of a challenger to current nvidia anyway.
This is the new "AMD drivers suck" myth, propagated by ignoramus or actual Nvidia shillboys.

FIRST AND FOREMOST, GCN 1 to GCN 4 is a COMPLETELY different architecture. Vega is a completely new architecture to top it off as well, internally they never even called Vega GCN, they always called in Vega, as a codename and later as official monkier.

Nvidia's latest Turning architecture is basically their old GTX 400 architecture on steroids. Even their GTX 400 architecture was an evolution from their GTX 200 architecture, which was Nvidia's foray into unified shaders. What has happened is that Nvidia has been continually been improving their GTX 200 architecture and over the last 12 years reached the current architecture called Turing, which is in essence their 12 years old architecture from their GTX 200 series.

Just because Nvidia have been giving different code names to their architectures, doesn't mean its a new architecture. And alternatively AMD giving the same GCN name doesn't mean its the same architecture.

So this garbage that has been propagated how GCN is the same architecture, while Nvidia magically creates brand new 100% different architecture every two years is a mega ton of horse manure. Nvidia's current architecture dates back to their GTX 200 series. That is 12 years! Is it fair to call it the same architecture? Well according to Nvidishillboys then yes, Turing the GTX 200 arch is exactly the same.

If anything AMD have been reinventing their architectures a lot more, which is part of the problem. They've never stuck long term like Nvidia to an arch and improved it over time, reiterative process over 12 years. They've done a lot more clean states.
 

eidairaman1

The Exiled Airman
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
28,366 (6.24/day)
Location
Republic of Texas (True Patriot)
System Name PCGOD
Processor AMD FX 8350@ 5.0GHz
Motherboard Asus TUF 990FX Sabertooth R2 2901 Bios
Cooling Scythe Ashura, 2×BitFenix 230mm Spectre Pro LED (Blue,Green), 2x BitFenix 140mm Spectre Pro LED
Memory 16 GB Gskill Ripjaws X 2133 (2400 OC, 10-10-12-20-20, 1T, 1.65V)
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon 290 Sapphire Vapor-X
Storage Samsung 840 Pro 256GB, WD Velociraptor 1TB
Display(s) NEC Multisync LCD 1700V (Display Port Adapter)
Case AeroCool Xpredator Evil Blue Edition
Audio Device(s) Creative Labs Sound Blaster ZxR
Power Supply Seasonic 1250 XM2 Series (XP3)
Mouse Roccat Kone XTD
Keyboard Roccat Ryos MK Pro
Software Windows 7 Pro 64
This is the new "AMD drivers suck" myth, propagated by ignoramus or actual Nvidia shillboys.

FIRST AND FOREMOST, GCN 1 to GCN 4 is a COMPLETELY different architecture. Vega is a completely new architecture to top it off as well, internally they never even called Vega GCN, they always called in Vega, as a codename and later as official monkier.

Nvidia's latest Turning architecture is basically their old GTX 400 architecture on steroids. Even their GTX 400 architecture was an evolution from their GTX 200 architecture, which was Nvidia's foray into unified shaders. What has happened is that Nvidia has been continually been improving their GTX 200 architecture and over the last 12 years reached the current architecture called Turing, which is in essence their 12 years old architecture from their GTX 200 series.

Just because Nvidia have been giving different code names to their architectures, doesn't mean its a new architecture. And alternatively AMD giving the same GCN name doesn't mean its the same architecture.

So this garbage that has been propagated how GCN is the same architecture, while Nvidia magically creates brand new 100% different architecture every two years is a mega ton of horse manure. Nvidia's current architecture dates back to their GTX 200 series. That is 12 years! Is it fair to call it the same architecture? Well according to Nvidishillboys then yes, Turing the GTX 200 arch is exactly the same.

If anything AMD have been reinventing their architectures a lot more, which is part of the problem. They've never stuck long term like Nvidia to an arch and improved it over time, reiterative process over 12 years. They've done a lot more clean states.
GCN is the only 1 so far with revisions.
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
25,564 (6.27/day)
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2015
Processor Intel Core i7-6700K (4 x 4.00 GHz) w/ HT and Turbo on
Motherboard MSI Z170A GAMING M7
Cooling Scythe Kotetsu
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-2133 8 GiB
Storage Crucial MX300 275 GB, Seagate Exos X12 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster T240 24" LCD (1920x1200 HDMI) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW 19" LCD (1440x900 VGA)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1150, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse SteelSeries Sensei RAW
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
Joined
Jun 28, 2016
Messages
2,877 (2.28/day)
And lastly, how accurate is this? Found it on Wccftech by a poster lol,
Possibly not very much given the weird naming and too small differences between models.
Remember Navi was meant to be a mainstream gaming platform, not high-end.

And another question one could ask: how interesting it this? Not much.
On the graph you've shown "Navi 12" performs like a Vega 64, while "Navi 10" would be a Radeon VII. "Navi 8" could be a polished 7nm GCN, but it's also now far from successful Radeon VII overclocks.

Performance is not a problem. AMD has that.

What would actually be interesting is these 3 bars being not FPS but peak Watts.
Nvidia's bars are actually pretty close to TPU results...
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
25,564 (6.27/day)
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2015
Processor Intel Core i7-6700K (4 x 4.00 GHz) w/ HT and Turbo on
Motherboard MSI Z170A GAMING M7
Cooling Scythe Kotetsu
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-2133 8 GiB
Storage Crucial MX300 275 GB, Seagate Exos X12 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster T240 24" LCD (1920x1200 HDMI) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW 19" LCD (1440x900 VGA)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1150, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse SteelSeries Sensei RAW
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
What would actually be interesting is these 3 bars being not FPS but peak Watts.
Nvidia's bars are actually pretty close to TPU results...
That makes a lot more sense.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2016
Messages
2,877 (2.28/day)
That makes a lot more sense.
Assuming it is [W], it still makes no sense why "Navi 12" would draw less than Navi 8 - unless AMD changed naming (bigger die, smaller number - like Nvidia does).

200W is more or less the limit Sony is going to accept for "big" PS5 (PS5 Pro?).
Assuming they'll dump optical drive, PS5 could be half the size of PS4 Pro. I'm sure they'll go this route - users are complaining about size of current consoles.
ASRock DeskMini GTX is 2.7l (compared to PS4's 5.3l) and can come with a GTX 1080.
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
25,564 (6.27/day)
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2015
Processor Intel Core i7-6700K (4 x 4.00 GHz) w/ HT and Turbo on
Motherboard MSI Z170A GAMING M7
Cooling Scythe Kotetsu
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-2133 8 GiB
Storage Crucial MX300 275 GB, Seagate Exos X12 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster T240 24" LCD (1920x1200 HDMI) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW 19" LCD (1440x900 VGA)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1150, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse SteelSeries Sensei RAW
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
Polaris 20 = RX 580/RX 570
Polaris 21 = RX 560

AMD tends to start with the biggest chip first so, yeah, the numbering makes sense in that context (lower number = bigger chip = more power).

I don't put much faith in the Navi # they provide though.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 15, 2016
Messages
317 (0.28/day)
System Name Sillicon Nightmares
Processor Intel i5 4690K (4.7GHZ 1.372vcore, 4.0GHZ 1.192vring, VCCIN 1.84v)
Motherboard Asrock Fatal1ty Z97X Killer BIOS P2.40
Cooling DEEPCOOL Gamer Storm CAPTAIN 360
Memory 2x4GB G.Skill Ripjaws V 2400mhz 10-14-13-32 2T, vDIMM 1.775v
Video Card(s) ASUS GTX 1060 Strix 6GB OC, Core: 2190mhz, Vcore: 1.075v, Mem: 4909mhz (Sillicon Lottery Jackpot)
Storage Samsung 840 EVO 1TB SSD, WD Blue 1TB
Display(s) BenQ XL2430 1080p 144HZ + (2) Samsung SyncMaster 913v 1280x1024 75HZ + A Shitty TV For Movies
Case Deepcool Genome ROG Edition
Audio Device(s) Bunta Sniff Speakers From The Tip Edition
Power Supply Corsair CX430M + CableMod Cables
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Shitty Dell Office Keyboard
Software Windows 7 Ultimate 64 Bit
Benchmark Scores 12 101 Firestrike (3rd for my hardware)
Navi gonna give you up
Navi gonna let you down
Navi gonna run around and desert you
Navi gonna make you cry
Navi gonna say goodbye
Navi gonna tell a lie and hurt you
 
Joined
Nov 21, 2010
Messages
1,305 (0.39/day)
Location
Right where I want to be
System Name Ratchet
Processor Ryzen 3800X
Motherboard Asus Crosshair VII Formula
Cooling Ek Velocity
Memory F4-3600C16Q-32GTZNC
Video Card(s) SAPPHIRE NITRO+ Radeon RX 5700 XT
Storage 1TB WD M.2 SSD/ 2T WD SN750
Display(s) DELL AW3420DW / HP ZR24w
Case Lian Li O11 Dynamic XL
Audio Device(s) EVGA Nu Audio
Power Supply Seasonic Prime Gold 1000W
Mouse Corsair Scimitar/Glorious Model O-
Keyboard Corsair K95 Platinum
Software Windows 10 Pro
Just realized this article was wrong by nearly 2Qs. Who crystal balled this one? So I could relegate them to trash tier.
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2005
Messages
3,413 (0.63/day)
Location
Ancient Greece, Acropolis (Time Lord)
System Name RiseEN Gaming PC
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 1700X @ stock
Motherboard ASRock Fatal1ty X370 GAMING X AM4
Cooling Corsair H115i PRO RGB, 280mm Radiator, Dual 140mm ML Series PWM Fans
Memory G.Skill TridentZ 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 3200
Video Card(s) Sapphire Radeon RX 580 8GB Nitro+ SE
Storage Corsair Force MP500 480GB M.2 (OS) + Force MP510 480GB M.2 (Steam/Games)
Display(s) Asus 27" (MG278Q) 144Hz WQHD 1440p + 1 x Asus 24" (VG245H) FHD 75Hz 1080p
Case Corsair Obsidian Series 450D Gaming Case
Audio Device(s) SteelSeries 5Hv2 w/ ASUS Xonar DGX PCI-E GX2.5 Audio Engine Sound Card
Power Supply Corsair TX750W Power Supply
Mouse Razer DeathAdder PC Gaming Mouse - Ergonomic Left Hand Edition
Keyboard Logitech G15 Classic Gaming Keyboard
Software Windows 10 Pro - 64-Bit Edition
Benchmark Scores I'm the Doctor.
Just realized this article was wrong by nearly 2Qs. Who crystal balled this one? So I could relegate them to trash tier.
Well we all now know Navi is designed for PC Gaming. AMD did a brilliant job with it. Just don't like the Blower Style Coolers.
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
25,564 (6.27/day)
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2015
Processor Intel Core i7-6700K (4 x 4.00 GHz) w/ HT and Turbo on
Motherboard MSI Z170A GAMING M7
Cooling Scythe Kotetsu
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-2133 8 GiB
Storage Crucial MX300 275 GB, Seagate Exos X12 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster T240 24" LCD (1920x1200 HDMI) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW 19" LCD (1440x900 VGA)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1150, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse SteelSeries Sensei RAW
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
Top