• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Poll: ** The AMD VEGA Thread **

On or off the hype train?

  • (off) Train has derailed

    Votes: 207 39.2%

  • (on) Overcrowding, standing room only

    Votes: 100 18.9%

  • (never ever got on) Chinese escalator

    Votes: 221 41.9%
  • Total voters
    528
Status
Not open for further replies.
Wrinkly said:
It is very likely as no gaming part has been released that the current drivers do not utilise Vega's new features. The card benchmarked by Ryan may indeed be running in some form of compatibility mode. It is still too early to test performance and an organization such as PCPer should have had some disclaimer up indicating this.
Click to expand...

Mtom said:
This is actually the case.
Tiled rasterization not active, primitive shaders need driver update, etc.
Click to expand...

We don't know that. It may very well be that "This is Vega - period".

We'll find out at SIGGRAPH I guess.
 
Considering the RX version is supposed to be faster. How do the disappointed feel about an RX Vega that is consistently as fast or faster than a 1080?

If they are getting some of that through maximising clock-speeds it means they are going to have to do something to lower its power draw and heat output to more manageable levels (something other than shaving off some watts by using 8GB instead of 16GB HBM). Otherwise its looking like a the full chip will have to ship with an AIO like the FuryX unless there are hardware features that can be disabled or a revised chip to reduce power.
 
eddyr said:
Considering the RX version is supposed to be faster. How do the disappointed feel about an RX Vega that is consistently as fast or faster than a 1080?

If they are getting some of that through maximising clock-speeds it means they are going to have to do something to lower its power draw and heat output to more manageable levels (something other than shaving off some watts by using 8GB instead of 16GB HBM). Otherwise its looking like a the full chip will have to ship with an AIO like the FuryX unless there are hardware features that can be disabled or a revised chip to reduce power.
Click to expand...

Well one thing for sure is that they can't sell a 500mm2 die with HBM2 that has 1080 performance at 1080 price, it will have to be priced higher
 
Wrinkly said:
It is very likely as no gaming part has been released that the current drivers do not utilise Vega's new features. The card benchmarked by Ryan may indeed be running in some form of compatibility mode. It is still too early to test performance and an organization such as PCPer should have had some disclaimer up indicating this.
Click to expand...
Hang on a second, PCper purchased it retail just as you and I would. AMD should not have released it if it isn't finished or is incomplete. A disclaimer should have been included in the box or when you download the drivers.

PCper said they asked AMD if it was running as it should and they confirmed it was.
 
WeSbO said:
Well one thing for sure is that they can't sell a 500mm2 die with HBM2 that has 1080 performance at 1080 price, it will have to be higher.
Click to expand...

Yup, they'll need to squeeze 20% more performance out of it and charge £600 for it just to break even. Otherwise it's a dead duck.

We only have the (manic) miners to thank for AMD making any money on the gfx front this year!
 
Something is off...And there maybe is some truth in this whole design flaw theory...

One thing that caught my attention is that when rayn was live streaming lots of peeps inc myself where asking for Doom to be benchmarked ..he kept saying too much trouble and its well optimized all ready ect seems a strange thing to state...
....by running doom vulkan api it would have given us an indication of how this card compares to the results we saw 6+ months ago at that show .....

just seems strange he did not run that...

280 watt for just above 1070 speeds is not good
 
five8five said:
Hang on a second, PCper purchased it retail just as you and I would. AMD should not have released it if it isn't finished or is incomplete. A disclaimer should have been included in the box or when you download the drivers.

PCper said they asked AMD if it was running as it should and they confirmed it was.
Click to expand...

You don't get a disclaimer that a salvaged die is not the complete full chip or that the gaming cards do not come with professional and HPC features enabled. They have already said this is not a gaming focused card and that such a card would be coming later, for cheaper and will be faster. That is warning enough to purchasers of FE Vega.
 
WeSbO said:
Well one thing for sure is that they can't sell a 500mm2 die with HBM2 that has 1080 performance at 1080 price, it will have to be priced higher
Click to expand...

If Vega is to be a new workstation card then they might not have a hard time amortising the r&d cost over its lifetime.
 
Chuk_Chuk said:
Doesn't that make it slower than when it was running doom earlier in the year, with fury drivers and a debugging layer?
Click to expand...

That is why in the live stream a load of us where spamming the chat asking ryan to test doom but he would not.....maybe the doom results 6 months ago where not even running on a prototype VEGA ...also the recent Pray demo running on two vega gpus seems strange to me ....

some thing is not right here ...
 
old gamer said:
so whats the verdict 1080 performance, thats pretty much what i was expecting anyway
Click to expand...
Yeah but using, what, 50% more power? Not to mention the extra heat and noise that goes with it.

It is still possible for (a) big driver improvements, or (b) new steppings to fix performance-crushing bugs with the current batch, but I personally don't think the chance of either of those happening before RX Vega is released is very high.
 
eddyr said:
If Vega is to be a new workstation card then they might not have a hard time amortising the r&d cost over its lifetime.
Click to expand...

Well in it's current state it's a good 16gb productivity card, but that is only providing you don't need certification, ECC memory nor FP64, that is a lot of conditions that don't meet what "real" professionals want, that is the (only) problem it has at the moment to be a real workstation card. But yeah sure if you don't need all that and the 16gbs of vram will serve you, it's a great card. But then they should have sold it as such and never mention the word Gaming once, and if asked they should have stook* to their guns and say "this is not a gaming card", but they didn't

Edit : Spelling of stuck lolz...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom