Support us on Patreon
PayPalAMD came out of the gates swinging wildly at Computex 2021 with new chips, new tech and lots more new including: AMD 3D chiplet technology, AMD Ryzen 5000 G-Series desktop APUs, next-gen gaming laptops with their new AMD Radeon 6000M Series Mobile Graphics and their DLSS competitor in FidelityFX Super Resolution.
There's quite a lot to unpack here and we're still going through it, so we will update the article if we missed anything vital. The big one is no doubt the FidelityFX Super Resolution, an open source spatial upscaling technology that can be compared with NVIDIA DLSS (which is coming to Proton!). Being open source is quite exciting though! Although not yet, AMD said "in due course" it will be under the GPUOpen branch and under the MIT license.
With the FidelityFX Super Resolution tech AMD are betting big, with it clearly firing shots at NVIDIA with it being fully cross-platform across DirectX 11 & 12, Vulkan, and even NVIDIA GPUs too. AMD say when it's released "FSR can be ported onto multiple platforms without restriction.".
Direct Link
AMD continue pushing the boundaries of their processor tech, with the introduction of AMD 3D chiplet technology. What could be a real breakthrough in packaging technology combines AMD's innovative chiplet architecture with 3D stacking they claim "provides over 200 times the interconnect density of 2D chiplets and more than 15 times the density compared to existing 3D packaging solutions" which they've been collaborating on with TSMC. They showed it in a real-world application too as they did this 3D bonding with a 5000 Series processor prototype. AMD claim they're going to begin production with these 3D chiplets by the end of this year.
We're finally seeing AMD bring their next-generation APUs to the desktop for system builders too with the AMD Ryzen 5000 G-Series desktop APUs. They've split them between consumer models and business models, here's the consumer models that we care about (click to enlarge each image):
The AMD Ryzen 5000 G-Series desktop APUs will be available "later this year".
On top of that AMD also announced the new AMD Radeon 6000M Series Mobile Graphics, based on RDNA2 they say it gives "up to 1.5x" higher performance or "up to 43 percent" lower power at the same performance as the RDNA architecture. It also brings over their AMD Infinity Cache and Ray Tracing to next-gen laptops.
|
Model |
Compute Units & Ray Accelerators |
GDDR6 |
Game Clock9 (MHz) |
Memory Interface |
Infinity Cache |
|
AMD Radeon RX 6800M
|
40 |
12 GB |
2300Mhz @ 145W |
192-bit |
96 MB |
|
AMD Radeon RX 6700M
|
36 |
10 GB |
2300Mhz @ 135W |
160-bit |
80 MB |
|
AMD Radeon RX 6600M
|
28 |
8 GB |
2177Mhz @ 100W |
128-bit
|
32 MB |
"At Computex, we highlighted the growing adoption of our high-performance computing and graphics technologies as AMD continues setting the pace of innovation for the industry," said Dr. Su. "With the launches of our new Ryzen and Radeon processors and the first wave of AMD Advantage notebooks, we continue expanding the ecosystem of leadership AMD products and technologies for gamers and enthusiasts. The next frontier of innovation in our industry is taking chip design into the third dimension. Our first application of 3D chiplet technology at Computex demonstrates our commitment to continue pushing the envelope in high-performance computing to significantly enhance user experiences. We are proud of the deep partnerships we have cultivated across the ecosystem to power the products and services that are essential to our daily lives."
If you want to catch the whole thing, you can watch it in the below video:
Direct Link
Quoting: GuestSo, basically, your position is that if someone says bad things about a technology you support, you are within your rights to diss them personally, because those are both the same. You are wrong and your arguments for it being the case are transparently mistaken. While you are no doubt an expert on certain technologies, I do not get the impression that you are particularly knowledgeable about ethical philosophy or the analysis of discourse. I do know something about these things, so by your standards (which amount to an extension of the "argument from authority" logical fallacy) perhaps you should be taking my word that you are wrong.Quoting: Purple Library GuyQuoting: GuestQuoting: Purple Library GuyQuoting: GuestYeah. You said "a partially emotional response was justified and expected" but you didn't give a rationale for why that should be the case. "You work in the field" is not the same as "You are individually under attack when anyone says anything about that field". I have a good friend who works for an oil company; he doesn't get defensive any time someone worries about pipeline spills--in fact, he's the first to point out that all pipelines leak.Quoting: Purple Library GuyQuoting: GuestDo you not draw a distinction between dismissing a technology and dismissing a person? If you are the literal personification of Machine Learning, such that an attack on it is an attack on you, I'm sure we all apologize, and I for one would like to express my starstruck feelings at finally meeting an actual Platonic Ideal.Quoting: scaineI've liked your detailed responses that follow this post, because they explain how DLSS works. Thank you.Don't you think it's also very condescending and sassy to dismiss innovative technology as "something over-specialized and good-as-dead"?
But this initial response was you dismissing other people's opinions snarkily. I've no time for that attitude. The air of superiority and mocking of other people's comments is infuriating. And you continue to do so. Language like "the other user" (they have a name), "Tried to pretend" , "gimme a break", etc. So condescending.
Have you read the rest of my comment? If you did, then you have my answer.
And you said "It's not my job to educate the layman". Well, nice of you to go above and beyond, and condescend to correct the unwashed, I suppose.
It's not about "dismissing a technology" and then "dismissing a person"
Yes it is. The standards for how it's OK to talk about technologies and about persons are fundamentally different ... There is no victim there because technologies are not persons.
That technology was created by brilliant engineers. When someone cusses their creation because of unrelated prejudice, those engineers become the victims(it has social and monetary effects) - and also this forum's users because Fear + Uncertainty + Doubt is a just a shady tactic and being the victim of this misinformation-warfare is bad for every layman because it might affect their daily lives. You seem to be very concerned about what the individual in question feels despite the fact that the individual dismissed the feelings and concerns of the experts. I didn't call out that user's opinion because they were not interested in a piece of technology but because their comment was made with prejudice - it was just the cherry on top that he didn't even understand the tech(same happened when they mentioned CUDA). This case is not like rightfully criticizing the oil pipelines from your example, but much closer to calling a new linux feature shit/DOA because you're an ms investor and use windows. Hiding behind the pretense that you're only attacking a piece of technology and you're not actively hurting anyone is nonsense. It wasn't constructive criticism created from professional insight - it was just propaganda and this is what I responded with:
Quoting: GuestThis sounds like it was written by someone who doesn't understand either of these features. Hardware-assisted AI/ML being "limited" to specific use cases while an upscaling tech being "general purpose"? Give me a break...
As you can see, I didn't call anyone stupid but correctly inferred(in an annoyed tone!) that the individual doesn't understand the tech and just posted a hot-take. Later, they had the chance to explain themselves but they doubled-down on this antagonistic behavior by attacking CUDA instead. If the user's goal was just to post their opinion(despite not being an expert) then they had the chance to do a bit of "research" and acquire knowledge. But as you all can see, it turned into something else: you all took offense instead and the user doubled-down. I don't know if the user changed their mind and it's not like I expect them to start to publicly appreciate the tech but none of the experts want to be the indirect victims of such foul campaigns. If you don't like certain business strategies of a company then you can call those out explicitly, no need to attack the others.
Similarly, when you and another user misunderstood our AI tech as "something less than instinct" you were technically incorrect and just fell to the trap of the common "true-AI" misconception simply because of your incorrect ideas about artificial "intelligence" and "instinct" - you were actively dismissing our work and achievements but I understood that you're doing it as some short of generic self-defense from this world's endless marketing garbage(still not a good justification) and not because you've an actual motive. I've tried to correct you but with a different tone.
There are also standards about what is OK in a healthy/rational community when it comes to information-sharing - as I said, if you want to completely give up impartiality and be totally OK with becoming something shallow - like the phoronix.com or the r/PS5 forums - then it's your choice but the experience of the many is above the whims of the individual. If you start sharing your opinion about things you've no experience with and dismiss the struggle of the experts then that forum will quickly reach facebook-levels of anti-intellectualism and soon, the experts will think about that forum as a cesspool - which in turn will hurt everyone who likes to lurk there.
I predict this mistaken attitude is going to get you into a lot of fights. Indeed, no doubt it already has.
Edit: and they deleted their account so this comment might look a bit odd.
Last edited by Liam Dawe on 6 June 2021 at 1:46 pm UTC
See more from me