Template talk:AMD Radeon Rx 400

Fill Rates

There appears to be a discrepancy in fill rates between the citations and the formula defined and used here. The formula here uses the base clock rate to calculate fill rates, essentially giving a minimum. But equally valid are the published fill rates, which appear to be calculated using the boost clock. It seems to me that as it is against Wikipedia's policy to include Original Research, we should use the published fill rates. Dbsseven (talk) 14:57, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The NVidia GPU lists on Wikipedia use base clock for fill rates - I think it's a fair assumption as long as the figure isn't called "maximum" or "boost" fill rate. If you want to include a rate based on the turbo clock, you can add it in parentheses. e.g., "Fill Rate (Boost): 1234 (1432)". --Vossanova ^o< 21:09, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have amended the table to include both base and boost derived values to avoid an edit-war. Dbsseven (talk) 15:35, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal for a more straightforward table layout

Hey, I designed a slightly modified and more straightforward (IMHO) version of this table here:
https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Template_talk:GPU_Chipset_Table
which I would like to use instead of this table and also for future GPU chipset tables.

Please check-it out, read the talk page for the rationale and the steps taken and leave comments.
Thanks! --Wikiinger (talk) 00:59, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Looks very nice to me Dbsseven (talk) 16:45, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, cool. I also posted it now on the talk page of the main article. Let's see if we can gather some more opinions. --Wikiinger (talk) 19:58, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New design adopted. Progress tracking here: Template_talk:GPU_Chipset_Table#tables --Wikiinger (talk) 12:58, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed Changes

Please see this talk section since Wikiinger wants to change all of the AMD GPU tables. #FF9600 talk 22:06, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]