AMD Unveils Its New GPU Architecture, Polaris

People start going down the electricity costs route when talking about GPUs but in reality a lower wattage GPU is really benefiting how future proof other parts in your build are, not your power bill. Lemme explain..

You got one of these all Team Red guys out there that built a mid range budget rig 3 years ago. They used an FX 6300 and a 7870 like my buddy did. Now a few years later the CPU is a bottleneck issue and the 7870 isn't cutting it anymore. He decides to overclock the CPU and upgrade the GPU to an r9 390. Welp guess what he had to spend $30 on a GPU cooler and now has to upgrade his 500 watt PSU because the 390 uses almost 300 watts on load alone and the CPU overclock added on about 40-50 watts on load effectively bringing the power draw to over 90% of the PSUs max power output. (we used a kill a watt) If you know anything about system building you know that you always want some extra reserve power in your PSU to keep it healthy. No one wants a PSU meltdown.. trust me. There are plenty of horror stories out there.

Not to mention the little overclock he was able to get didn't help much. The 390 isn't hitting it's performance ceiling. So now a new AM3+ motherboard with better OC'ing capabilities and an upgrade to an FX 8350 sometime in the next few months. He's now spending more money than I did on my rig just to keep up with the times while I'm still humming along.

Point is AMD is budget friendly NOW, but not further down the road. A decent midrange Intel/Nvidia rig will outlast an AMD rig by a good margin WITHOUT having to upgrade parts for future upgrades if need be. I plan on sticking a Pascal GPU in my rig when they release and I don't have to upgrade a damn thing. Had I an AMD rig I'd need to upgrade the CPU because they're a bottleneck which means I'd have to upgrade my motherboard and PSU too just like my buddy did.

No thanks.

I'm still rocking my i5 2500k at 4.4 GHz that 4 years later is still keeping up with current gen CPUs and a GTX 680 that still plays most games admirably with the exception being the Witcher 3 that I have to run at high settings.

That being said I hope AMD has something truly worthy with Polaris. Nvidia has been crippling it's GPUs for a few gens now because AMD just isn't up to snuff. AMD is now like Intel was in the early 2000's. Just adding on more and more MHz every year using the same architecture over and over again. As an ex AMD guy (I had a Barton 3200+ and a 9800 Pro :D back 12 years ago or so ) I hope AMD gets back on their game. Competition is better for all of us in the end.

It's probably the same sort of bullshit as mantle was, after bf4 success the whole idea was dropped and forgotten and of icily abandoned, will Polaris meet mantle,s fate?

time to ADD AMD cards to my HEAD,,,,

I am all for AMD making a push for greatness. We need more competition, which in turn will drive prices to competitive levels for us, the consumer. It's only a good thing.

It's good to see AMD is finally catching up and playing at Nvidia's level.

Here's hoping the AMD technologies are widely adopted, instead of the usual nVidia monopoly attempts.

I have gotten fine results from my own amd desktop gaming pcs and have gotten great performance per dollar from AMD GPUs and CPUs. Yes their cards run HOT and HUNGRY but you do get alot of performance for the price comparatively. This next generation of GPU architecture will be good news for everyone wanting good performance at low prices, and also means mobile tablets/laptops will get this boost in power also.

I still love Nvidia but their costs can be higher then paying for the extra electricity.

That is genuinely amazing.

I would gladly switch to AMD cards if their drivers didn't suck. They're technically better than Nvidia but the software kills it.

I might be interested if I decide to go with a low-draw home theater setup that still has a bit of muscle in it for casual couch gaming. We'll see how things stack up when the time comes.

Wake me when the new GeForce cards come out.

I like AMD CPU's, but their GPU's have compatibility issues.

Competition is always good and I do not want to see neither AMD or Nvidia get a monopoly.

"...fine print pins the latter rig's power draw at 140 watts"

Nothing like using fine print to allow you to lie about the difference between your product and the competition X-O

wanted to link to a clip of Tim Taylor saying "needs more power" but couldn't find one

Launch the Polaris

The end doesn't scare us

-Megadeth

While this is great news - I'm wondering if AMD is planning to do something about Nvidia's exclusive solutions - GameWorks. They really need to step up their cooperative with developers and software side of the whole equation, speed up drivers' updates (promised, but let not hold breath until we see it happening), make some use of their TressFX and other tech they (might) have but is mostly sitting dormant.

I have been using AMD GPUs for my desktop in last two refreshes - 6870 and 280x - but for next upgrade, power consumption be damned, I'm looking at Nvidia right now. I don't care much about how much power my desktop rig burns. I'd probably be looking at 14nm parts if I was on market for for light laptop with good battery life that can be used for light gaming on the go as well, but for desktop, it is really down to real-life performance and features.

So it's an eco friendly GPU then. That's about as much sense it means to me.

Other than the size means they can fit more into a tight space.

My question is: will the die size be capable of going past medium settings without stuttering (depending on the card it's installed in), or is that gonna take a further generation or two of development? A company can promise anything it wants; making it happen is another matter.

We need CPU's from AMD not more GPU's!!! FFS!