Poll: ** The AMD VEGA Thread **

[JediFragger]

Good then all the NV trolls can **** off and go play in their own threads since they have nothing but bile to spew out here. It is what it is, if not at all interested now or later then go elsewhere.

 

[darket]

Just noticed there is a second part to that Reddit/Youtube post about Vegas performance

Not again, don't get me wrong , i'm really looking forward to the Vega reviews, but whoever is posting this is quite obviously an Amd super fan and none of it makes any sense.

If Amd could have released this with twice the performance then they would have, it really is that simple.

 

[harney]

"Goldblum, post: 31041824, member: 192608"]Just noticed there is a second part to that Reddit/Youtube post about Vegas performance, looks like its written by a dev too

The Consumer (Gaming) Drivers that will be available as part of the 17.7.3 Drivers on the 15th August, will provide up to +40% Performance over GCN 3.0 (Fiji-Based) Architecture at Identical numbers of Compute Units and Frequencies.

This was something that AMD has revealed during additional events, that are not RX VEGA / Threadripper Related but were instead Investor/OEM Events where they were discussing the AM4 7th Generation APU Release (A12 9800-Series) but were also discussing the future Ryzen-Based APU successor, which contained GCN 5.0 (Vega-Based) Architecture Graphics Component.

In the slides presented, they showed the direct comparison between the A12 9800 (4C/4T + 8CU R7 "Fiji" Graphics) Vs. AR5 2400 (4C/8T + 8CU RX "Vega" Graphics)... the former being released this week for $120, while the latter will be available in the 1st Half 2018 for $120. There will also be 4C/8T, 6C/12T and 8C/16T Ryzen-Based APU.

A general overview being that the AR5 2400 (you might've seen benchmarks of it on Futuremark and AotS) will have +50% CPU Performance, +40% GPU Performance all using 50% the Power (i.e. it's a 35w as opposed to 65w APU)

Both were clocked at 1100MHz (although the RX Graphics can boost to 1300MHz, which I've included in Brackets)

1080p
Rocket League (High, DX9) • R7G / 87 FPS • RXG / 122 FPS (135 FPS)
World of Warships (High, DX9) • R7G / 67 FPS • RXG / 94 FPS (112 FPS)
Overwatch (Medium, DX11) • R7G / 68 FPS • RXG / 96 FPS (113 FPS)
DOTA 2 (Best Looking, DX9) • R7G / 84 FPS • RXG / 118 FPS (138 FPS)
CS:GO (Ultra Settings, DX9) • R7G / 71 FPS • RXG / 100 FPS (115 FPS)
DOOM (Medium, Vulkan) • R7G / 26 FPS • RXG / 37 FPS (44 FPS)
Battlefield 1 (Medium, DX12) • R7G / 31 FPS • RXG / 44 FPS (50 FPS)

Now while these might not seem like impressive scores, remember we're talking about an 8 Core Integrated GPU at 1100/1300MHz

If you dropped down to 720p, then Doom and Battlefield; should Avg. 30+ and 60+ (on Average) what's more is the RX "Vega" Graphics supports FreeSync and is in (most) Games sitting within the FreeSync Range.

Still this post obviously isn't here to blow smoke up the Ryzen-Based APU rear-end.
Rather it's a Like-for-Like between the GCN 3.0 and 5.0 Architecture.

It provides a very good example of the sort of performance uplift that you can expect to see on the RX Vega 56/64/64-LCE Vs. as similarly clocked Fiji (i.e. FURY / FURY X) from the Day One Drivers in Popular Games.

For Reference Purposes:
RX VEGA 56 Vs. R9 FURY X = x1.765
RX VEGA 64 Vs. R9 FURY X = x2.164
RX VEGA 64L Vs. R9 FURY X = x2.348

[GTX 1080 Ti Founder's Edition] {R9 FURY X}
Battlefield 1 (2160p, Ultra, DX12) • [43 FPS] {10 FPS} 45 FPS / 56 FPS / 61 FPS
Deus Ex MD (2160p, Ultra, DX12) • [38 FPS] {21 FPS} 37 FPS / 45 FPS / 49 FPS
DOOM (2160p, Ultra, Vulkan) • [85 FPS] {55 FPS} 97 FPS / 119 FPS / 129 FPS
Fallout 4 (2160p, Ultra, DX11) • [46 FPS] {28 FPS} 49 FPS / 60 FPS / 65 FPS
Witcher 3 (2160p, Ultra, DX11) • [59 FPS] {35 FPS} 61 FPS / 75 FPS / 82 FPS

Now there is the obviously elephant there being Battlefield 1, where the FURY X numbers take a nosedive... which I think is a Memory Limitation; as both the 1080 and 1080 Ti scale almost perfectly between 1440p to 2160p at 0.52x Performance (which is about right); as such with 8GB the R9 FURY should be getting 26 FPS at 4K.

As such the Vega projected figures are taking that into account.
Now it should be noted that in some cases such-as Doom, the 1080 Ti will gain ~20% Performance Increase from 15% OC (2000MHz) ... but on average 10-17% is the average range of performance uplift that is common to see.

Now while we don't know much about the Overclocking Potential of the RX Vega, AMD themselves have gone on record to state that a minimum 1700MHz Stable Clock can be achieved on ALL Vega.

Obviously for the 64 Liquid Cooled Edition (Stock 1677MHz) ... this is a guaranteed increase of 23MHz. Yet, with this said the Polaris Architecture was guaranteed to clock to 1340MHz Stable... beyond Silicon Lottery (I won quite well, as mine will OC to 1520MHz; although I typically keep it at 1300MHz Stock/OC)

Another thing to note, is obviously I can't account for Thermal Throttling as I don't have an RX VEGA Frontier Edition to compare to and most Reviews on it are "Eh" when it comes to actually recording Min - Avg - Peak Clocks during Benchmarking.

This is important to note, because while the Liquid Cooled is almost certainly going to be able to maintain it's Clock, thus yeah THOSE are the performance numbers we can expect (£700, not looking like such a bad price now... eh)

For the Air Cooled Vega 56 and Vega 64, I almost Guarantee with Stock AMD Settings, Fan Curves and Voltage... it's going to be more power hungry than it needs to be, and it'll throttle a damn sight sooner and harder than it needs to as well.
Now I heard that the Air Cooled Frontier Edition, typically sits around it's State 4/5 while in Operation ... which makes sense as my RX 480 and WX7100 does as well; which means while peak it'll certainly hit it's Theoretical Performance Figures for it's Clock. More often than not I'm actually getting ~88% Performance due to Throttling and the Reference Coolers typically are a little more inefficient than the AIB like I have.

We can essentially say roughly x0.80 is likely to be what we can expect from actual Real-Time Performance.
i.e.

Battlefield 1 (2160p, Ultra, DX12) • [43 FPS] 36 FPS / 45 FPS / 61 FPS
Deus Ex MD (2160p, Ultra, DX12) • [38 FPS] 30 FPS / 36 FPS / 49 FPS
DOOM (2160p, Ultra, Vulkan) • [85 FPS] 77 FPS / 95 FPS / 129 FPS
Fallout 4 (2160p, Ultra, DX11) • [46 FPS] 39 FPS / 48 FPS / 65 FPS
Witcher 3 (2160p, Ultra, DX11) • [59 FPS] 49 FPS / 60 FPS / 82 FPS

In essence all games tested with the Vega 64 at 4K are within FreeSync Range... so this I'd wager heavily is why they're marketing it along side FreeSync 2.0. Now this performance is almost certainly due to Primitive Discard, which greatly reduces workloads (by about 50-90% Geometry but Workload by 20-40% on average) ... HBCC will have very little effect on performance due to nothing using > 8GB VRAM and there being more than enough Bandwidth Available to keep the GPU fed; however it will almost certainly eliminate Memory Call Latency, thus increasing Minimums (Frame Rate Jitter) to be substantially closer to the Average.

< • >

Now keep in mind this isn't using the DDR Pipelines, I mean it could be of course and just really poorly optimised ... which alright this is AMD so plausible in Release Drivers. Still given most of these gains can easily be explained by things like Primitive Discard, Tile-Based Rendering, etc. and I'm sure we might see some more performance gain from FP16 (I'm looking at you Wolfenstein New Order II)

As such there is still 2X Performance that the RX VEGA could still have available to be unleashed.
Yet there are certainly some caveats to be made concerning this that I didn't go over before.

API Support... as in Legacy APIs would almost certainly need a Driver / Developer workaround, very similar to how the R9 295X2 was (or rather often wasn't) supported. For the moment Legacy APIs are still quite prevalent; so while sure they could essentially out-perform SLI 1080 Ti with a Vega 64 (Air) this would only be in Select (primarily the most modern) Games, and very dependant upon the API.

So if for example in DirectX 11 you're seeing the 1080 Ti and Vega 64 trading blows, but then in DirectX 12; you need a second 1080 Ti to keep comparative Frame Rates; well what conclusions would you as a Gamer take away from that?
Chances are you'll be sat there thinking "Wait, if Vega can get 2X Performance from DirectX 12... why is my RX 480/580 only seeing 20% performance improvement?"

You see the problem there? As I said this is as much about Brand and Product Image as it is Performance.
AMD need to be seen as Competitive, but they can't be seen as "Top Dog" without the expectations that come with it from Consumers.
On top of this, they can't alienate their own established Consumer Base.

Now, if each Generation (GCN 5.1 in 2018... GCN 5.2 in 2019) they increase the Thread Throughput by +50%, Reduce the Clock by 15% (depending on what NVIDIA release). This would result in a natural reduction in Power Consumption, along side actual improvements in the 14nm process; and costs would continue to fall, which allows for bigger profit margins or again another drop in price that NVIDIA are forced to follow to remain competitively priced.

This would keep the RX 690 and 699 close enough to what NVIDIA will release that via Overclocking they can appear Competitive, while AMD looks like it's Edged ahead. Yet what's more important better Power Consumption, Lower Temperatures ... things that even with the RX Vega Frontier Edition, which is essentially on-par with the 1080 Ti in this respect (while being quieter); it's AMD still getting blasted for being "Power Hungry" (they list the peak, not the Common Draw) and "Hot".

Like with Ryzen Vs. Bulldozer, AMD need to dispel this Stereotype of Radeon Products.
We can see this plain as day with AMD essentially being in the Technology News 24-7 for the past Year... they're starting to drown out their competitors and that is where they're going to start winning, and winning big.

They've always had the Technology and Innovation, what they need is the Market Share for that to actually mean something and be supported by Developers.[/SIZE]

Oh no the great wall of text is back

 

[FoxEye]

Not again, don't get me wrong , i'm really looking forward to the Vega reviews, but whoever is posting this is quite obviously an Amd super fan and none of it makes any sense.

If Amd could have released this with twice the performance then they would have, it really is that simple.

The idea that they'd intentionally cripple their own cards, by 50% no less, is nonsensical.

The damage to their reputation by releasing a GTX 1080 competitor for 1080ti prices, which uses 2x the power... is very real and tangible. If they were doing that deliberately when their tech was actually much better... everybody would be scratching their heads.

AMD would be self-harming and there's no sane explanation for why they'd want to do that.

 

[Freddie1980]

Just noticed there is a second part to that Reddit/Youtube post about Vegas performance, looks like its written by a dev too

The Consumer (Gaming) Drivers that will be available as part of the 17.7.3 Drivers on the 15th August, will provide up to +40% Performance over GCN 3.0 (Fiji-Based) Architecture at Identical numbers of Compute Units and Frequencies.

40% increase in performance from a 60% increase in clock speed? Where are the GPC gains that were promised?

BTW Mr Goldblum, I really liked your performance in Jurassic Park and Independence Day.

 

[AthlonXP1800]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/6sdx8o/vega_64_prices_available_in_india/

 

[edscdk]

Best not to believe in fairy tales, tbh

I can't see how it makes any sense to have 2x 1080 perf in your product, but deliberately hold it back.

If the company has no competition to compete with it makes a lot of sence... A year after releasing and selling x you can rebrand as y bump performance by 25% and carry on selling.. And you production costs will likley be lower as you have time to iron out production issues and possibly bin a lot of extra chips for newer high performance (or low power) products

 

[harney]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/6sdx8o/vega_64_prices_available_in_india/

hahahaha

 

[FoxEye]

If the computing has othing to compete with you it makes a lot of sence... A year after releasing and selling x you can rebrand as y bump performance by 25% and carry on selling.. And you production costs will likley be lower as you have time to iron out production issues and possibly bin a lot of extra chips for newer high performance (or low power) products

¿Que?

I can't even understand your first sentence

 

[Bazzards]

I do wish people would sense check their posts.

 

[silversurfer]

The answer there is more complicated. It could perform better but the card is throttling itself so we'll never likely know as there is no perfect balance found. Maybe this rationalising of pipeline flow will be amazing, I think more of the software improvements potential that could really propel its results upwards. AMD seems that much more interesting for the hardcore overclockers and hopefully they find some ray of light. It also has to be at least reasonable card at stock because most people arent dissembling a 600 dollar card the second they get it even if labelled enthusiast

Amd could have released this with twice the performance then they would have, it really is that simple.

I think they are really behind and 'screw it we'll do it live' is the paradigm. Driver updates probably, if the card is open to development then thats great ? [I doubt +100% in any general task somehow]

 

[Shaz12]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/6sdx8o/vega_64_prices_available_in_india/

Holy cow I could buy 2 1080ti at that price. Has AMD gone completely crazy?

 

[MDPlatts]

Holy cow I could buy 2 1080ti at that price. Has AMD gone completely crazy?

The indian market is very restricted - huge import duties on foreign tech - 30/40/50% or more is common - cars can be 100% or more. Very protected market so ignore them.

 

[Lokken86]

What you're saying isn't factually incorrect, but context is important. Firstly it only applies to Polaris (RX400/500) cards, downclocking on Hawaii/Fiji/Vega will reduce Ether hashrates. Secondly it's generally more profitable to "dual mine" when mining ethereum, mining a second altcoin (I.E Decred) at the same time, and if you're doing that you will lose performance by downclocking on an RX400/500.

Cant say say I have noticed any difference mining ubiq/sia. I'll try it tonight.

Tried increasing core 200mhz. Absolutely no difference whatsoever.

 

[FoxEye]

The indian market is very restricted - huge import duties on foreign tech - 30/40/50% or more is common - cars can be 100% or more. Very protected market so ignore them.

Which could be us in a couple years time

 

[harney]

Which could be us in a couple years time

 

[AMDPower]

AMD have confused price and performance and they are back to front. It should be faster card lower price point, not slower card more expensive.

If the mining performance leak Gibbo made is correct then even at £700 AMD will sell these cards. Unfortunately their weak reason about delaying release by 2 weeks to increase inventory for us gamers is just nonsense as is their terrible marketing of bundles for liquid cooler packs. They most probably anticipate high demand for GFX cards by miners over the next year, definitely till Navi is released. They will just ride this wave, why not and they can forger about performance and competing.

That £630 1080TI is looking mighty tempting right now, since I waited this long little longer wont hurt, Never know this magic 40% driver increase malarkey might( 0.001% chance) actually become reality.

 

[kration]

AMD have confused price and performance and they are back to front. It should be faster card lower price point, not slower card more expensive.

If the mining performance leak Gibbo made is correct then even at £700 AMD will sell these cards. Unfortunately their weak reason about delaying release by 2 weeks to increase inventory for us gamers is just nonsense as is their terrible marketing of bundles for liquid cooler packs. They most probably anticipate high demand for GFX cards by miners over the next year, definitely till Navi is released. They will just ride this wave, why not and they can forger about performance and competing.

That £630 1080TI is looking mighty tempting right now, since I waited this long little longer wont hurt, Never know this magic 40% driver increase malarkey might( 0.001% chance) actually become reality.

I jumped onto the 1080ti boat a couple of months ago. At an inflated price I didn't regret it, and even now it makes more sense.

 

[nashathedog]

Which could be us in a couple years time

If that happens I'll start doing holiday upgrades, 3 or 4 weeks in Florida and this years gpu in the suitcase on the way home.

 

[Gregster]

Those prices can't be what the going rate is guys. Just wait till you can pre-order and they will be closer to the MSRP.