RDNA2 / Big Navi

[xx005fs]

Originally Posted by tServo

I finally found a reviewer that bothered to include compute stats in their results and the results are just so-so. The 6800xt performs even with the rtx 2080 ti and rtx 3070 but far behind the rtx 3080 and 3090.

https://www.legitreviews.com/amd-rad...view_223774/13

Sadly they used aggregated result, if only they listed the specific results for each scientific compute category (like GEMM, FFT, and N-Body) because it is well known that Ampere has good FP32 performance and have tensor core acceleration for GEMM. They also used FP32 in this case so it won't be representative of PRP.

[tServo]

Originally Posted by moebius

Do you work at Nvidia? This may even be true in certain computer games or maybe TF, but i'm more concerned with PRP performance and there are e.g. GA102 and Navi 10 XT graphics cards just on par.

No I do not nor have I ever work for Nvidia. I am retired. Nor am I an Nvidia fanboy because besides their cards, I have several Radeon Viis that run GPUOWL
My opinions were based on past performance of similar cards.

Of course "the proof is in the pudding" and we must wait for a GIMPster to enlighten us and anything before then is conjecture.
I really do hope the Big Navi cards come thru because Radeon VIIs are almost impossible to get, at least at a reasonable price, and it would be great to have another option.
I suspect that there will not be any card from Nvidia that will be good at running PRPs; even a high priced one like the Titan V.

[moebius]

Originally Posted by tServo

I am retired. Nor am I an Nvidia fanboy because besides their cards, I have several Radeon Viis that run GPUOWL

I'm also not a fan of any particular manufacturer. The scientific cards from Nvidia: A100, Tesla V100 and even the Titan V (at least with one instance running) are faster with gpuowl than the Radeon VII. Unfortunately, they cannot fully utilize their potential FP64 (DP) performance. No offense, I am creating the timing list for gpuOwl, that I have already posted in this thread, so that the gpuowl users have an approximate indication of which card is suitable for their budget.

[Mark Rose]

I'm hoping AMD released a cut-down CDMA card as a Radeon VII replacement.

[tServo]

Originally Posted by Mark Rose

I'm hoping AMD released a cut-down CDMA card as a Radeon VII replacement.

That would be great, but wouldn't it directly compete with the Radeon Pro Vii ?

[Mark Rose]

Originally Posted by tServo

That would be great, but wouldn't it directly compete with the Radeon Pro Vii ?

The Radeon VII was discontinued in June 2019. They only made them for 5 months.

But surely AMD has seen their prices in the used market, so there's definitely demand for a replacement.

[Xyzzy]

He is talking about the "pro" version.

https://www.amd.com/en/products/prof...radeon-pro-vii

[axn]

Originally Posted by Mark Rose

The Radeon VII was discontinued in June 2019. They only made them for 5 months.

But surely AMD has seen their prices in the used market, so there's definitely demand for a replacement.

Radeon VII is not the same as Radeon Pro VII. The former was marketed as gaming card (LOL). The latter is workstation -- I don't think that one is meant to be a limited run.

CDNA, by definition, will not come to consumer space; at best, we can hope to see workstation cards (like replacement for R Pro VII)

[Mark Rose]

I missed the Pro part

[moebius]

Originally Posted by tServo

That would be great, but wouldn't it directly compete with the Radeon Pro Vii ?

A question. Don't you think of proofs, are you using an older version of gpuowl? Saves a lot of computing time if we no longer have to do conventional double checks. I use gpuowl version v6.11-380-g79ea0cc on Ubuntu.

[tServo]

Originally Posted by moebius

A question. Don't you think of proofs, are you using an older version of gpuowl? Saves a lot of computing time if we no longer have to do conventional double checks. I use gpuowl version v6.11-380-g79ea0cc on Ubuntu.

I see that I was not precise in my terminology wrt 'compete'. I meant competition in the economic sense in that the Radeon Pro VII might be too close in performance to the card that Mark Rose proposed, the "cut-down CDMA card". This would confuse the marketplace if AMD had 2 cards that were quite close in specs.

I realize what proofs are for. What I'm unsure of is whether they are solving a problem that simply doesn't exist. With the advent of GEC, we may have a virtually error free primality test. I would be interested to know how many PRP tests that used GEC were found to be bad.
There may not have been enough double checking of these PRPs to know yet. Is PRP unfairly suffering from the same dark cloud of bad residues that hung over LL tests?
Or is the concern that some moron might just submit a bunch of fabricated completed PRP results with random residues?