The ROP’s are where it all comes together to be put togather and rendered and that’s Nvidia’s strong point in that Nvidia uses more ROPs and keeps some base GPU die designs in the hold to bring out for gaming usage if AMD’s offerings start getting a little bit too close in gaming performance.ĪMD has only one base die design for Desktop and Porfessional compute with the Vega 10 die/blueprints so AMD has one and Nvidia has many and AMD’s Vega 10 has no extra ROPs to speak of. The GPUs micro-arch do not play much of any role in the matter as it’s the execution resources on the Shaders and ROP’s, TMUs and any other hardware functionality tuned for graphics, raster and geometry and trigonometry, workloads. GP102/GV100 dies have the most ROPs available with the GP104/GV104 dies starting out the gaming focused SKUs with their Shader counts really trimed back on down to the GP106-108/GV106-108 SKUs that even have less resources and much narrower busses.
Fp64 graphics professional#
Nvidia has all of its many base GPU designs/blueprints with GP100/GV100 being more compute heavy and GP102/GV102 likewise but with a little less shader resources for professional graphcs workloads. And really it’s that more ROPs figure that is most responsible for Nvidia’s Better FPS Metrics relative to AMD’s current Vega 10 base die design/blueprints. I’m suspecting that both AMD’s and Nvidia’s ROP technology does not change much “Generation” to “Generation” and that its mostly the shader to ROP to TMU unit ratios that are what is giving the better gaming performance and that AMD just needs to take The Vega Micro-Arch base die design and refactor the Shader to TMU to ROP ratios more towards gaming workloads. And the GPU makers need to stop treating their ROP/TMU units as magic black boxes and start providing more information. So most of Volta’s performance gains in gaming can be attributed to process node shrink/tweaks and Volta/GV100’s larger L2 cache etc. Let's not drag this along – I know you are hungry for results! (Thanks to Ken for running most of these tests for us!!)īut Volta has the on that 12nm process the same number of ROPs(1) as the GP102 based top end variants 96 and ROPs.
Fp64 graphics software#
Our testing setup remains the same from our gaming tests, but obviously the software stack is quite different. The current AMD Radeon RX Vega 64, and the Vega Frontier Edition, all ship with a 1:16 FP64 ratio, giving us the equivalent of 256 DP cores per card. That is a HUGE leap over the GP102 GPU used on the Titan Xp that uses a 1:32 ratio, giving us just 120 FP64 cores equivalent. The Volta GV100 GPU offers 1:2 double precision performance, equating to 2560 FP64 cores. And though $3000 is still a lot of money, keep in mind that the NVIDIA Quadro GP100, the most recent part with full-performance double precision compute from the Pascal chip, is still selling for well over $6000 today. In that case, $2999 for the Titan V is simply an investment that needs to show value in select workloads. Developers, coders, engineers, and professionals that use GPU hardware for research, for profit, or for both.
What the Titan V is meant for in reality is the compute space.
But with that $3000 price tag, the Titan V isn't going to win any enthusiasts over.
Our conclusions were more or less what we expected – the card was on average ~20% faster than the Titan Xp and about ~80% faster than the GeForce GTX 1080. This is a multi-part story for the NVIDIA Titan V:Įarlier this week we dove into the new NVIDIA Titan V graphics card and looked at its performacne from a gaming perspective. Looking Towards the Professionals We now dive into the compute performance side of the TITAN V, where it real shines. Workstation Applications and Cryptocurrency Mining.We now dive into the compute performance side of the TITAN V, where it real shines.
0 kommentar(er)
