A Bit More On Graphics Core Next 1.1

With the launch of Hawaii, AMD is finally opening up a bit more on what Graphics Core Next 1.1 entails. No, they still aren’t giving us an official name – most references to GCN 1.1 are noting that 290X (Hawaii) and 260X (Bonaire) are part of the same IP pool – but now that AMD is in a position where they have their new flagship out they’re at least willing to discuss the official feature set.

So what does it mean to be Graphics Core Next 1.1? As it turns out, the leaked “AMD Sea Islands Instruction Set Architecture” from February appears to be spot on. Naming issues with Sea Islands aside, everything AMD has discussed as being new architecture features in Hawaii (and therefore also in Bonaire) previously showed up in that document.

As such the bulk of the changes that come with GCN 1.1 are compute oriented, and clearly are intended to play into AMD’s plans for HSA by adding features that are especially useful for the style of heterogeneous computing AMD is shooting for.

The biggest change here is support for flat (generic) addressing support, which will be critical to enabling effective use of pointers within a heterogeneous compute context. Coupled with that is a subtle change to how the ACEs (compute queues) work, allowing GPUs to have more ACEs and more queues in each ACE, versus the hard limit of 2 we’ve seen in Southern Islands. The number of ACEs is not fixed – Hawaii has 8 while Bonaire only has 2 – but it means it can be scaled up for higher-end GPUs, console APUs, etc. Finally GCN 1.1 also introduces some new instructions, including a Masked Quad Sum of Absolute Differences (MQSAD) and some FP64 floor/ceiling/truncation vector functions.

Along with these architectural changes, there are a couple of other hardware features that at this time we feel are best lumped under the GCN 1.1 banner when talking about PC GPUs, as GCN 1.1 parts were the first parts to introduce this features and every GCN 1.1 part (at least thus) far has that feature. AMD’s TrueAudio would be a prime example of this, as both Hawaii and Bonaire have integrated TrueAudio hardware, with AMD setting clear expectations that we should also see TrueAudio on future GPUs and future APUs.

AMD’s Crossfire XDMA engine is another feature that is best lumped under the GCN 1.1 banner. We’ll get to the full details of its operation in a bit, but the important part is that it’s a hardware level change (specifically an addition to their display controller functionality) that’s once again present in Hawaii and Bonaire, although only Hawaii is making full use of it at this time.

Finally we’d also roll AMD’s power management changes into the general GCN 1.1 family, again for the basic reasons listed above. AMD’s new Serial VID interface (SIV2), necessary for the large number of power states Hawaii and Bonaire support and the fast switching between them, is something that only shows up starting with GCN 1.1. AMD has implemented power management a bit differently in each product from an end user perspective – Bonaire parts have the states but lack the fine grained throttling controls that Hawaii introduces – but the underlying hardware is identical.

With that in mind, that’s a short but essential summary of what’s new with GCN 1.1. As we noted way back when Bonaire launched as the 7790, the underlying architecture isn’t going through any massive changes, and as such the differences are of primarily of interest to programmers more than end users. But they are distinct differences that will play an important role as AMD gears up to launch HSA next year. Consequently what limited fracturing there is between GCN 1.0 and GCN 1.1 is primarily due to the ancillary features, which unlike the core architectural changes are going to be of importance to end users. The addition of XDMA, TrueAudio, and improved power management (SIV2) are all small features on their own, but they are features that make GCN 1.1 a more capable, more reliable, and more feature-filled design than GCN 1.0.

The AMD Radeon R9 290X Review Hawaii: Tahiti Refined
Comments Locked

396 Comments

View All Comments

  • Ryan Smith - Friday, October 25, 2013 - link

    Patch 3, which was the patch released right before the 280X, settled the major GPU problems. I can't speak for the turn sequences, which are still CPU bottlenecked, but as far as GPU reviews go it's good for use.
  • TheJian - Friday, October 25, 2013 - link

    Total War Rome2 has had at least 4 patches with the 4th on 10/13. Might be a 5th by now.
    v1.4 = v1.4.0 = v1.00.7573 = #7573.461942 last one
    But site shows:
    https://help.sega.com/entries/22535104-Total-War-R...
    So new on 18th says post date. 5 patches to date.
  • Arbie - Thursday, October 24, 2013 - link


    Thanks for the Crysis Warhead benchmark. The game still leads in some ways and I still enjoy playing it. But more relevant here is that we can see the progression of GPU power over a long time span. Given the slower pace of PC graphics now, some of us haven't replaced our cards in quite a while. With this benchmark I can compare apples-to-apples with anything I own.

    The 290X looks great fundamentally, but 93 deg C at full load is too hot and will lead to a short card lifetime. This will probably be addressed by vendor cooling designs, and I'd wait for that.
  • polaco - Thursday, October 24, 2013 - link

    this remmembers me the ATI4850. from factory settings it reached almost 100%. I tuned the bios to adjust the fan throttling hysteresis and max rpms or something like that, that turned my card to 80°C. So I wouldn't be surprised if just tunning this card settings a bit will take you lower temps, powertune allows for much cool things that wasn't available at the 4850 moment. Vendor cooling solutions probably do better as you stated. :)
  • TheJian - Friday, October 25, 2013 - link

    Warhead is played by ZERO people on servers. How do you play alone? Servers I checked were empty ages ago and still just a month ago. They need to be using the games with the most users active, or highest sales (which might include games we can't tell active users if they're not server based like single player etc). Warhead is played by nobody, so it shows nothing. It's the same as firing up Doom 1. Nobody cares.
  • NeonFlak - Thursday, October 24, 2013 - link

    So the review is released but unfinished? I'm getting work in progress for a couple pages.
  • WeaselITB - Thursday, October 24, 2013 - link

    This is a really poor showing on AnandTech's part. I don't come to AT because of the speed that your reviews are posted, I come because of the quality and depth of the commentary that makes up the reviews. Charts are meaningless without the commentary surrounding them.

    Please, in the future, throw up a one-page benchmark chart with a paragraph stating "preliminary results" or something, and come back with an actual full-fledged review. This "[work in progress]" crap is just that -- crap -- especially now that I'm reading this at 10:20am Central and still seeing a half-article. I know you guys are capable of better.
  • lamovnik - Thursday, October 24, 2013 - link

    Here is 290x fan noise test http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5MbOGoEMDY
  • Notmyusualid - Thursday, October 24, 2013 - link

    P1SSED MYSELF laughing!

    And I only came by to smile at the fan boi-ish comments.

    Well done.
  • Kutark - Thursday, October 24, 2013 - link

    Honestly, no. The fanboism is rampant in these comments. And i don't know what they're smoking about it being faster than a titan, in most cases its barely equaling and usually slightly slower. Now, is that impressive for a card thats $600? Yes, absolutely. Am i impressed? No, not in the slightest. Titan was released in FEBRUARY. That was 8 months ago. And though i am pissed at nvidia for making it so expensive, and subsequently the 780/770's so expensive. The ONLY reason they were able to pull that kind of crap is because AMD was nowhere to be found. AMD literally couldn't compete until almost a year later? I'm sorry im just not impressed. I am glad they're finally stepping up their game, because one company having no real competition is never a good thing for the consumer.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now