Imsochobo so amd is making theirs more advanced and nvidia simplify...



anyways, 1536 with 1000 mhz on 195W tdp is abit hard on my brain, not saying it's impossible.

either they are giving up tesla or making a diffrent gpu tree for that if it's true is my guess then.

AMD made one other major change to improve efficiency for Barts: they’re using Redwood’s memory controller. In the past we’ve talked about the inherent complexities of driving GDDR5 at high speeds, but until now we’ve never known just how complex it is. It turns out that Cypress’s memory controller is nearly twice as big as Redwood’s! By reducing their desired memory speeds from 4.8GHz to 4.2GHz, AMD was able to reduce the size of their memory controller by nearly 50%.

Well I don't know if fake or not, but they are not so hard to believe if you think about what is really going on. I bet you are thinking 1536 @ ~1000 Mhz vs 512 @ ~800 Mhz, but that is not the case. It's 1536 @ ~1000 Mhz (not all the time, dynamic clocks) vs 512 @. Needing to clock only to 1000+ Mhz instead of 1600++ Mhz posibly allows for much smaller, simpler and cooler SPs.I always use the same example and I know it's not about SPs, but it's one of the most clear ones I can find in recent history, and everything applies to electronics to some extent:"By reducing their desired shader speeds from 1.6 Ghz to 1 Ghz, Nvidia was able to reduce the size of their shader processors by nearly 50%" sounds alien in the light of the above fact? Not to me at least and with (active) die size reduction comes a hefty power reduction too, not to mention the inherent lower power consumption derived from being run at 1 Ghz instead of 1.6 Ghz, remember exponential power curves.