Poll: ** The AMD VEGA Thread **

[nashathedog]

They don't. But FS2 needs AMD certification.

If there are none to compliment Vega.....

What do you think's going to be different with regards to Freesync between a good Freesync monitor and a Freesync 2 monitor?

From what I've read there's nothing different so a Freesync monitor such as a 2560x1440 model with a 144hz panel and Freesync working from 30-144 with LFC will have exactly the same Freesync capabilities as a Freesync 2 model.
There's been talk about HDR being included as a part of the Freesync2 requirements but that doesn't really make sense as HDR has nothing to do with adaptive sync, It's completely unrelated so if you want a monitor with HDR and you find one with the full range LFC supporting Freesync 1 the experience will be identical to a Freesync 2 monitor.
This is all unless there's new data been released on Freesync 2 that I haven't seen, If that is the case can you give me a link to it please.

 

[five8five]

When is gaming Vega due, is it end of July?

The launch date is 30th July, the release date at the moment is unknown.

 

[nashathedog]

What if between now and the RX release AMD add/enable all the features that seem to be disabled in FE, and performance goes up dramatically? It doesn't change what AMD said, nor make it untrue or inaccurate at the time the statement was made.

"Is this the best you have now?"
"Yes."
"Will it be the same in a month?"
"Yes, except for anything we change or add between now and then."

Doesn't really rule anything in or out, does it?

What seems to be disabled? Can I have a source link to read what's disabled please.

 

[FoxEye]

Let's not forget that AMD had a very clear picture of where the competition was at. They've know what the 1080 performance is for over a year. Same thing for the Titan X that was launched last August.

What I have a hard time believing is that they knew all this and said "let's make a card that performs like the 1080, and release it a year later". I am pretty sure they would have aimed higher than that.

Either something has gone horribly wrong (if this is all the card can achieve) on the hardware side, OR there is a lot of untapped potential due to the drivers not using any of the new tech.

This is the only thing that makes me think we will get a nice bump (as in 20%) for RX Vega, with perhaps more added later as they keep working on these drivers.

Or it's Bulldozer Mk II. A product aiming to change the way developers use the hardware. A bit like Sony's PS3 chip (what was it called... ah yes, Cell). A product which ultimately doesn't work very well if people don't specifically code for its features/strengths.

AMD seem to have form for doing this. Either trying to force a change with a new product, or anticipating a change which never really happens, or happens later than expected.

It's hard to see how they could have created something that's worse than Fiji clock for clock, unless they're trying something very different to what's come before. They can't be so bad at this to take a card and make its successor worse.

 

[nashathedog]

The launch date is 30th July, the release date at the moment is unknown.

Let's hope they are in stock soon after that.

 

[Steampunk]

What seems to be disabled? Can I have a source link to read what's disabled please.

Check back through the thread, dude!

 

[melmac]

Thats it, 'I Just Game', which to me means (and no doubt to everyone else too by the looks of it), im just a gamer, its all i do, so can i just use the FE card for that, instead of the professional stuff, and they say yes, where as if you remember after the event that they showed it off at, Raja said, that if you did 'just Game', then not to buy it, he said to wait for the gaming one, the RX, which they were launching at Siggraph.

Yes, but nowhere does it say it's a gaming card. If you read the whole product page and think it's a gaming card from that one line, then there is something sadly wrong with your intelligence level. I read it that after a hard day's work and you just want to play some games then "I just want to game" for a while.

Which do you honestly think it is? that after their comments about waiting for RX Vega if you are a gamer and the Vega FE product page mostly about professional work, that that one line means they are saying it's a gaming card?

 

[five8five]

Let's hope they are in stock soon after that.

Yeah! I expect there will be some leaks for this card before the launch just like a normal GPU release

 

[WeSbO]

Or it's Bulldozer Mk II. A product aiming to change the way developers use the hardware. A bit like Sony's PS3 chip (what was it called... ah yes, Cell). A product which ultimately doesn't work very well if people don't specifically code for its features/strengths.

I don't believe so, because it's not a brand new architecture from ground up like Bulldozer was and what Ryzen is, it's a refined GCN so a bit different but not fundamentally different, so I don't really see that as being the case.

Apples to Apples: Fury X vs. Vega FE at same clock rates

Radeon R9 Fury X - clock rates 1050/500 MHz (Stock) - Superposition 1080P Extreme 3322

Radeon Vega FE - clocked at 1050/1000 MHz - Superposition 1080P Extreme 2794

https://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=11419198

https://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=11419302

I find that quite reassuring actually, they have access to the same benches as everyone else and would have realized early on that it was a step back, points to another problem, that's an almost 16% IPC decrease !

EDIT : The only problem is that with the VRAM at 1000mhz the bandwidth was only 256 gb/s as opposed to Fury Xs 512

 

[five8five]

Yes, but nowhere does it say it's a gaming card. If you read the whole product page and think it's a gaming card from that one line, then there is something sadly wrong with your intelligence level. I read it that after a hard day's work and you just want to play some games then "I just want to game" for a while.

Which do you honestly think it is? that after their comments about waiting for RX Vega if you are a gamer and the Vega FE product page mostly about professional work, that that one line means they are saying it's a gaming card?

As I've said it before they released it showing a demo of Sniper Elite 4 to advertise it's gaming ability.

True Pro cards aren't released using game demos, they use application demos to show off the power of the cards.

 

[bru]

So why didn't they release the water cooled FE edition first to at least show it in the best light possible. absolute madness.

 

[five8five]

So why didn't they release the water cooled FE edition first to at least show it in the best light possible. absolute madness.

Not sure. Production delays?

I've seen 15th July quoted for the release. It will certainly be interesting to see how it performs. There might be a new set of drivers as well

 

[LoadsaMoney]

Yes, but nowhere does it say it's a gaming card. If you read the whole product page and think it's a gaming card from that one line, then there is something sadly wrong with your intelligence level. I read it that after a hard day's work and you just want to play some games then "I just want to game" for a while.

Which do you honestly think it is? that after their comments about waiting for RX Vega if you are a gamer and the Vega FE product page mostly about professional work, that that one line means they are saying it's a gaming card?

I know it doesn't actually say that anywhere, but saying yes, grab the drivers from here, and switch to 'Gaming Mode', to 'I Just Game', is saying, you can just use it purely as a 'Gaming Card'.

 

[chaosophy]

What do you think's going to be different with regards to Freesync between a good Freesync monitor and a Freesync 2 monitor?

From what I've read there's nothing different so a Freesync monitor such as a 2560x1440 model with a 144hz panel and Freesync working from 30-144 with LFC will have exactly the same Freesync capabilities as a Freesync 2 model.
There's been talk about HDR being included as a part of the Freesync2 requirements but that doesn't really make sense as HDR has nothing to do with adaptive sync, It's completely unrelated so if you want a monitor with HDR and you find one with the full range LFC supporting Freesync 1 the experience will be identical to a Freesync 2 monitor.
This is all unless there's new data been released on Freesync 2 that I haven't seen, If that is the case can you give me a link to it please.

From what I remember FS2 just does some extra processing for HDR before it hits the monitor.
The card+FS2 does some extra work for the HDR image (something to do with colour mapping) that means that the monitor is doing less to the image than say how a normal HDR TV does it.
So basically reduces the time it takes the monitor to display the image, there by reducing overall input lag.

 

[Gerard]

Let's not forget that AMD had a very clear picture of where the competition was at. They've know what the 1080 performance is for over a year. Same thing for the Titan X that was launched last August.

What I have a hard time believing is that they knew all this and said "let's make a card that performs like the 1080, and release it a year later". I am pretty sure they would have aimed higher than that.

Either something has gone horribly wrong (if this is all the card can achieve) on the hardware side, OR there is a lot of untapped potential due to the drivers not using any of the new tech.

This is the only thing that makes me think we will get a nice bump (as in 20%) for RX Vega, with perhaps more added later as they keep working on these drivers.

You do realise that these gpu's are designed several years in advance? It's all well and good knowing the competitions performance but it really depends if they can get the clock speeds they need and the driver optimisations to get it running as fast as they need, and they really only know that when they get back working silicon, simulations can only tell them so much. According to Kyle at hardocp Polaris was basically amd scraping the barrel with what the gpu had turned out to be, it was meant to clock much higher but limitations prevented that so they had to make a hoopla about it in the middle bracket when it was intended to be much more.

 

[N19h7m4r3]

Apples to Apples: Fury X vs. Vega FE at same clock rates

Radeon R9 Fury X - clock rates 1050/500 MHz (Stock) - Superposition 1080P Extreme 3322

Radeon Vega FE - clocked at 1050/1000 MHz - Superposition 1080P Extreme 2794

https://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=11419198

https://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=11419302

The Frontier Edition is running on an ancient Westmere Xeon, that's Nehalem tech; well before even Sandy Bridge.

So the FE has a CPU disadvantage there; and a pinch of salt is required.

 

[HeX]

The Frontier Edition is running on an ancient Westmere Xeon, that's Nehalem tech; well before even Sandy Bridge.

So the FE has a CPU disadvantage there; and a pinch of salt is required.

True, but the test it's performing has almost no CPU load, or very minimal at best. It wouldn't account for 16% performance drift.

 

[N19h7m4r3]

True, but the test it's performing has almost no CPU load, or very minimal at best. It wouldn't account for 16% performance drift.

I've never run that test so not too sure, but CPU IPC wise Ryzen is a significantly ahead. Why couldn't they test the FE in the same Ryzen system as the Fury X?

 

[WeSbO]

The dude testing the FE doesn't have a Fury X and the guy with the Fury X doesn't have an FE, not the same people giving the results.

 

[N19h7m4r3]

The dude testing the FE doesn't have a Fury X and the guy with the Fury X doesn't have an FE, not the same people giving the results.

Well that sucks, as without a similar CPU or system it's not too accurate. It would be like testing a FE on Ryzen vs Phenom 2.