Nobody said anything about that, its just a comparison to showcase Navis increased efficiency
That's like saying Turing 10TF matches Vega 14TF
- No company uses two different architectures for cost reasons. Which is why Nvidia uses same architecture for gaming, pro-work and even industry things like AI
Intel does it all the time with its HEDT lineup.
In AMDs case its a cost saving approach to exploit Vega (it still a very good compute card) until its no longer profitable.
why would a navi TF be more powerful than a vega TF?
ya but Tflops is the output power of a gpu so why would one be more powerful that the other? isn't that the measuring stick we compare gpus?
TF count its a peak theoritical number, the goal is to get as close to it as possible (full utilization).
Due to arch bottlenecks GNC CUs spend alot of time iddle, they big suspected change for Navi is the 8SEs (previously 4) that will help distribute load better another suspected change is redisigned CUs that can work more independently similar to how nvidia does it
Navi is supposed to be 1.25 times more efficiant, so people are taking it as 1.25 times more Terraflops compared to Vega. It doesnt really work like that.
Its just a comparison to showcase Navis increased efficiency over Vega in gaming.