Bitcoin Forum
December 15, 2017, 03:13:32 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: YES/NO QUESTION: are all renamed radeon hashrate exactly same as not?  (Read 990 times)
gpucoolingmethod
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70


View Profile
February 28, 2014, 09:48:32 PM
 #1

Ive just found that AMD renamed its 7770 to R7 250 and its selling it as another product.

Update Ive found that all Rx are rebranded except R9 290 series.(Source http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r7-250x-graphics-card-review,3747.html . I guess thats why these arent on hashrate lists online)

Am I correct to expect exact same hashrates as from the original not renamed versions?
1513350812
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513350812

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513350812
Reply with quote  #2

1513350812
Report to moderator
1513350812
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513350812

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513350812
Reply with quote  #2

1513350812
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1513350812
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513350812

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513350812
Reply with quote  #2

1513350812
Report to moderator
Wipeout2097
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280


View Profile
February 28, 2014, 09:58:37 PM
 #2

The R7-260 series aren't rebranded either. They have an new audio system and processor.

I've read that many cards come with faster Ram and worse power block (low cost VRMs, capacitors and  so on...)

They will tend to hash better, but failure rate may also be higher. For example, most 7870's have an hard time to reach 400 Kh/s while the Gigabyte and Sapphire R9-270 can touch 500


 
 
           ▄████▄
         ▄████████▄
       ▄████████████▄
     ▄████████████████▄
    ████████████████████      ▄█▄                 ▄███▄                 ▄███▄                 ▄████████████████▀   ▄██████████

  ▄▄▄▀█████▀▄▄▄▄▀█████▀▄▄▄     ▀██▄             ▄██▀ ▀██▄             ▄██▀ ▀██▄             ▄██▀                   ██
▄█████▄▀▀▀▄██████▄▀▀▀▄█████▄     ▀██▄         ▄██▀     ▀██▄         ▄██▀     ▀██▄         ▄██▀        ▄█▄          ▀██████████████▄
████████████████████████████       ▀██▄     ▄██▀         ▀██▄     ▄██▀         ▀██▄     ▄██▀          ▀█▀                        ██
 ▀████████████████████████▀          ▀██▄ ▄██▀             ▀██▄ ▄██▀     ▄█▄     ▀██▄ ▄██▀                                       ██
   ▀████████████████████▀              ▀███▀                 ▀███▀       ▀█▀       ▀███▀      ▄███████████████████████████████████▀
     ▀████████████████▀
       ▀████████████▀
         ▀████████▀
           ▀████▀
║║


║║
.
.

║║
██
║║
.
.

║║
██
║║
.
║║


║║
gpucoolingmethod
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70


View Profile
February 28, 2014, 10:03:01 PM
 #3

The R7-260 series aren't rebranded either. They have an new audio system and processor.

I've read that many cards come with faster Ram and worse power block (low cost VRMs, capacitors and  so on...)

They will tend to hash better, but failure rate may also be higher. For example, most 7870's have an hard time to reach 400 Kh/s while the Gigabyte and Sapphire R9-270 can touch 500

is it only because the new cards are overclocked compared to the same/similar Huh
gpucoolingmethod
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70


View Profile
March 01, 2014, 07:59:32 AM
 #4

The R7-260 series aren't rebranded either. They have an new audio system and processor.

I've read that many cards come with faster Ram and worse power block (low cost VRMs, capacitors and  so on...)

They will tend to hash better, but failure rate may also be higher. For example, most 7870's have an hard time to reach 400 Kh/s while the Gigabyte and Sapphire R9-270 can touch 500

is it only because the new cards are overclocked compared to the same/similar Huh

YES/NO
RWatts
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 12


View Profile
March 01, 2014, 12:43:32 PM
 #5

I've found a lot of the memory to be of a different quality too. Generally the Rx cards perform much better for me. Keep in mind, at the factory a lot of the cards have IDENTICAL hardware, and then they test them at various clock speeds. Some work better than others, and that's often the deciding factor if a card gets branded as an OC model or not. Ultimately that's the result of imperfect manufacturing techniques. Same thing applies to processors and basically everything that uses today's ultra small fab processes.
gpucoolingmethod
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70


View Profile
March 01, 2014, 01:42:18 PM
 #6

I've found a lot of the memory to be of a different quality too. Generally the Rx cards perform much better for me. Keep in mind, at the factory a lot of the cards have IDENTICAL hardware, and then they test them at various clock speeds. Some work better than others, and that's often the deciding factor if a card gets branded as an OC model or not. Ultimately that's the result of imperfect manufacturing techniques. Same thing applies to processors and basically everything that uses today's ultra small fab processes.


Thats what I had in consideration i think its called binning (transistors) but I believe that they also add some safety margin just in case. Thats why you can always overclock instead of having the oveclock preapplied (notice that it wouldnt be called overclock then) AND that safety margin is the MHz that enough cards (in their opinion) work with that MHz
tom_o
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308


View Profile
March 01, 2014, 05:31:54 PM
 #7

Thats what I had in consideration i think its called binning (transistors) but I believe that they also add some safety margin just in case. Thats why you can always overclock instead of having the oveclock preapplied (notice that it wouldnt be called overclock then) AND that safety margin is the MHz that enough cards (in their opinion) work with that MHz

The new cards do get reliably higher hashrates, but only at certain special frequencies such as 1500 or 1800 RAM on 280Xs coupled with 1080 or 1160 core respectively for 750 and 780-807 khash!
gpucoolingmethod
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70


View Profile
March 01, 2014, 06:05:51 PM
 #8

Thats what I had in consideration i think its called binning (transistors) but I believe that they also add some safety margin just in case. Thats why you can always overclock instead of having the oveclock preapplied (notice that it wouldnt be called overclock then) AND that safety margin is the MHz that enough cards (in their opinion) work with that MHz

The new cards do get reliably higher hashrates, but only at certain special frequencies such as 1500 or 1800 RAM on 280Xs coupled with 1080 or 1160 core respectively for 750 and 780-807 khash!

why certain special frequenzzies?
tom_o
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308


View Profile
March 01, 2014, 06:16:50 PM
 #9

I guess it's the getting the bandwidth of the RAM maximised in a way the the GPU is smoothly and constantly fed with data. Not sure why, but anything other than 1500 or 1800+ RAM is rubbish on R280X.
gpucoolingmethod
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70


View Profile
March 01, 2014, 06:26:37 PM
 #10

I guess it's the getting the bandwidth of the RAM maximised in a way the the GPU is smoothly and constantly fed with data. Not sure why, but anything other than 1500 or 1800+ RAM is rubbish on R280X.

I think thats not true because either the memory or core waits for the other unless they are timed perfectly.But whatever waits doesnt make a difference if the clock rates are equivalent to what you are comparing.THE REAL REASON IS: bad memory latencies/timings. They are coded as different values for different speeds and they very often are suboptimal.

how can one find out better than that?
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!