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

  • Bloodcalibur - Thursday, October 24, 2013 - link

    Your dumb ass paid $350 extra for computing performance when all you do is game LOL!
  • eddieveenstra - Sunday, October 27, 2013 - link

    +10
  • blau808 - Thursday, October 24, 2013 - link

    The 780ti will easily beat the 290 for price/performance
  • Black Obsidian - Thursday, October 24, 2013 - link

    So you're anticipating greater than Titan performance for less than 290X pricing?

    If so, you might be interested in this bridge I have for sale. It's in Brooklyn. In good shape, available real cheap.
  • Bloodcalibur - Thursday, October 24, 2013 - link

    Titan is a gaming/workstation hybrid. That's why it costs $350 more than 780 with only a small gaming performance increase. You sounded really ignorant there lolol.
  • erple2 - Thursday, October 24, 2013 - link

    Too easy. Too easy. You need to actually read the post Above you before commenting on the price comparison.
  • rituraj - Thursday, October 24, 2013 - link

    No.
  • Naxirian - Thursday, October 24, 2013 - link

    Lol.... except it loses to the 780 in a bunch of benchmarks, a card that has already been on the market for 6 months and costs exactly the same as the R9 290X does. Not to mention the 780 Ti is due out next month, and from the looks of these benchmarks, will probably murder the 290X whilst being in the same price range. AMD are late to the party yet again. Wonder what they'll do when Nvidia launch the 800 series next year lol. Probably wait 9 months and then launch another out-dated gen like this time.
  • extide - Thursday, October 24, 2013 - link

    What planet are you on? The 290x is $100 cheaper, NOT the same price. AMD also had the 7970 out before nVidia had any 28nm cards out, so they weren't behind. Right now the 290x is the best bang/buck card period, and if you game in 4K it is THE best card. Facts are facts man....
  • QuantumPion - Thursday, October 24, 2013 - link

    According to the benchmarks it is only faster than the Titan at 4k resolution (probably due to its 4 gb ram and higher memory bandwidth). At normal resolutions it is about on par with the 780 depending on the game. So it is about on par with the 780 and ~$50 cheaper - we've yet to see what the 780 Ti can do though. Why the article claims the 290X is faster than the Titan and only $550 makes it seem like it was written before the actual benchmarks were performed.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now