New Upcoming ATI/AMD GPU's Thread: Leaks, Hopes & Aftermarket GPU's

VEGA equals or is close to GTX 1080 performance
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/6o0kku/vega_equals_or_is_close_to_gtx_1080_performance/

 

Or something like that since adaptive sync and no FPS counters

 

Yeah, same performance as the FE.

 

If it's priced right it will be decent for consumers - I just can't see it being good for AMD. The margins on it have to be low and it's competing against products that have been out for over a year now.

Hopefully the move to 7nm next year will bring up the perf/w "sweet spot" - it's pretty clear with all the undervolting news that AMD is running this thing beyond it's optimal frequency.

 

If it's performing about the same as a FE, it's probably the XT, and not the XTX.

 

They didn't show the framerates, they just compared it to a 1080 in a blind test. It looks roughly the same performance wise but it's freesync so.. Also if the difference between the XT and XTX is anything like the FE and FE WC, it's only 10%.. which basically makes it win in a few more titles against the 1080, still a far cry from the Ti.

Judging by their $300 comment, they are relying on the cost of Freesync as a selling point. They are also assuming that Nvidia isn't just going to lower 1080 prices, which is nearly 200mm2 smaller than the Vega.

 

Polaris should have been 1,100Mhz boost but they bumped it up last second looks like. Which would explain the 150W board design reference. IIRC Vega was going to be 1,400Mhz originally.

 

This AMD "gen" does not look good... thats for sure.

 

No it doesn't. And it could only get worse in early 2018. Damn it, I was so hoping Vega would mirror the RyZen release.

 

It may have could happing if it had 4096 memory bandwidth but any case we have wait and see as you could be right it not looking good

 

I just wanna know where is the constant optimism by AMD (fans) coming from.
AMD has been at least half gen behind Nvidia ever since the 750/Ti (Maxwell) launch. Now that's a fact, regardless if it looked really like that in the direct products comparison.
When you have perf/mm2 advantage on top of having better efficiency, you can do sh1t with one arm tied behind your back; sh1t that your competition can only dream off:

• you can leave 30% of OC on the table just like that (980Ti), and instead:
• you make your AIB partners happy by letting them go crazy
• you don't even bother to respond to Grenada/Tonga XT launch.
• you don't have to use the ****ing water to cool your frying pans.
• you can get away by using cheap, regular from time immemorial DDR ram.
• you win notebook market without even trying

And yet we have people on this very forum arguing untill very recently that actually it's NV who is late, and will be vulnerable to Vega at least until Volta launch, and then it's anyones game (LOL!)
Christ... like how much blind faith is needed to have delusions like that, when every single indicator is telling you... oh boi Team Red is in trouble.

Ever since Hawaii it has been the same story: "This is the first GPU with Raja in total control; watch out for this baby is gonna be a total game changer."
AMD is like a chess player who only thinks about HIS moves. Like Nvidia is just going to stand still and wait for AMD to catch up, like Nvidia has anything other than GPUs to worry about.

This AMD's Vega roadtrip with no fps counter is by far the single worst piece of news about Vega so far. And they actually have people on the payroll who came up with this master plan?!
"Poor Volta" and running comparison tests without FPS counter with their Vega behemoth vs peasantly 1080, seriously you can't make up this ****.

 

People are allowed to be optimistic, and while I feel it's awful treatment of consumers the fact so many are used to performance improvements post launch, it has a definetly an optimistic thing to cling to.
If what we read is to be believed then there has been a miscalculation along the way.

I know some on here believe AMD have good margins, but I don't think they are good enough to help recoup the expenses incurred beforehand, and if they have to sell this cheap then it's only making Nvidia stronger.

I'm not convinced it will be that cheap anyway, and i really hope it's not.

 

:kiss: ^^ We all need a Group Hug ^^ :mhp:

PS.

Spoiler

I do not want to be on Fury until Navi lol :bang:

 

As soon as AMD launched Polaris it wasn't hard to predict Vega performance.
400w to match a 180w card is pathetic.
Also, I think AMD can't even compete in price range because they are using expensive hardware and HBM2 is not available at high quantities.

 

Don't be onnA, you should buy it anyway even if it's not the fastest or even that cheap.

Navi could well be influenced by poor sales of Vega, if people choose to have a team then support it.

 

Well if Vega costs same/less then 1080 and offers more performance I could buy it. If it offers similar performance I see no reason to upgrade

 

Some people are hardcore fans of one side.

I was meaning they are the people who should be looking at getting RX Vega.

 

AMD Radeon RX Vega Lands in Budapest – Shows Performance Close To a GTX 1080, Launching in 2 Weeks

In Budapest, AMD partnered up with ASUS to showcase the gaming performance on the Radeon RX Vega graphics cards along with other ASUS and AMD products. There wasn’t anything new to see at the booth except the Radeon RX Vega graphics card which wasn’t actually shown to public but attendees were able to check out the performance of the graphics card for the first time on-hands. AMD will also be going to other places in the coming days as mentioned by them earlier:


# Budapest, Hungary July 18 at the Akvárium Klub from 2 to 7 CET.
# Portland, USA, PDXLAN in, July 21 to 23
# Los Angeles, USA, SIGGRAPH 2017, July 30

The AMD Radeon RX Vega was tested on a Ryzen 7 system inside a closed PC. People were not able to see the graphics card at all and play through only one gaming title. The title selected was DICE’s Battlefield 1 and was running on a resolution of 3440×1440.
The graphics card was compared to a second PC that was running a NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (reference card). This was confirmed by a AMD representative who said that they were using a GTX 1080 (Non Ti) against the Radeon RX Vega graphics card.

Both systems were running a curved display, one had G-Sync and one had Freesync so it’s obvious that the G-Sync system had GeForce installed and the Freesync system had Radeon Installed.
How ever, there was no indication which system was using the Freesync + Radeon setup and which had the G-Sync + GeForce setup. Both monitors were fully covered so even the specific models weren’t mentioned.
Anyways, moving onward, there was one system that faced a little hiccup and was performing worse. There’s no way to tell which system that was but we know that a single GeForce GTX 1080 does over 60 FPS (average) on 4K resolution with Ultra settings.
The tested resolution is not high compared to 4K so it’s possible that the GTX 1080 was performing even better. Plus, AMD not publicly showing any FPS counter and restricting max FPS with syncing showcases that there was possibly a problem with the Radeon RX Vega system against the GeForce part.


# The AMD rep guy was asked and he said it’s a GTX 1080 non Ti against the RX VEGA
# We were given 2 systems with an RX and a GTX to play BF1 on.
# They do use free- and g-sync and yes there were no fps counters. From my experience there were no fps drops on any of the systems.
# There was a little hiccup, but they resolved it in an instant and from my experience and many others the difference was unnoticeable. Mind you we were not told and are not going to be told which setup is which. Via Szunyogg Reddit

-> rest on WCCF/VideoCardz

 

The really sad part about this post, is that it is so true.

 

@OnnA

If there was a "hiccup" ad they fixed it you damn well know it was the Vega machine.