Both RX Vega 64 & 56 Beat GTX 1080 Ti in Forza 7 DX12 benchmarks

jigger · 14 Oct 2017 at 20:02

Brazo said:
And if nvidia dropped prices to match the AMD cards wouldn't sell.

All academic really as those cards are NOT at those prices.

Who cares. All we want is cheaper hardware. I'd even take an Nvidia DX11 card if the price was right.

Martini1991 · 14 Oct 2017 at 20:29

zophiel said:
There are a few people like martini in all the vega thread just spamming the same drivel over and over. Just ignore them and the threads read much better.

Answer me this. Is what I'm saying true? When Nvidia drops a clanger it's the same reaction.

Two sides of the same coin.

Martini1991 · 14 Oct 2017 at 20:29

jigger said:
Who cares. All we want is cheaper hardware. I'd even take an Nvidia DX11 card if the price was right.

What is the right price? Even a vega 64 at 450 is the same as 1080s are, yet I know your opinion on that

melmac · 14 Oct 2017 at 20:32

Brazo said:
And if nvidia dropped prices to match the AMD cards wouldn't sell.

All academic really as those cards are NOT at those prices.

WTF? Seriously, what's wrong with you? Again, stop with the fanboy nonsense and read my posts.

I know the cards aren't at those prices. My posts are saying that AMD should reduce price to £350 and £450 so their cards might sell, and that conversation was in response to Telecaster saying that AMD can't afford to reduce prices.

Brazo · 14 Oct 2017 at 21:13

melmac said:
WTF? Seriously, what's wrong with you? Again, stop with the fanboy nonsense and read my posts.

I know the cards aren't at those prices. My posts are saying that AMD should reduce price to £350 and £450 so their cards might sell, and that conversation was in response to Telecaster saying that AMD can't afford to reduce prices.

Lots of people think they should reduce the price. Fact is they can't. It's not going to happen. Sorry.

Martini1991 · 14 Oct 2017 at 21:26

melmac said:
WTF? Seriously, what's wrong with you? Again, stop with the fanboy nonsense and read my posts.

I know the cards aren't at those prices. My posts are saying that AMD should reduce price to £350 and £450 so their cards might sell, and that conversation was in response to Telecaster saying that AMD can't afford to reduce prices.

Nothing he says is wrong.
Nvidia could drop their price, you've bit addressed that, just given out insults

AthlonXP1800 · 15 Oct 2017 at 01:14

shankly1985 said:
Surely if HBM was that bad for AMD they would not have made more GPUs using this memory after FuryX a GPU line up that wasn't doing them very well..

AMD make enough money from other departments, the CPU is now doing very well! and do we actually know how much AMD make on the console market ? Playstation 4 sold 60+ M units sold has of June this year, Xbox One 30m. That alone is a lot of Money AMD is making. They have Xbox X coming soon that will sell millions also.

Looked back AMD financial results 3 years ago AMD probably made up to $300M revenue on consoles from Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony each quarter but AMD made very tiny profit around $5 to 10M on consoles each quarter but that changed now as Nintendo not very happy with AMD on custom design high development cost and switched to Nvidia. After AMD lost Nintendo to to Nvidia, AMD made up to $200M revenue on Xbox One and PS4 consoles each quarter so they not made lots of profit compared to 3 years ago.

I am not so sure £449 Xbox X will sell millions. Look what happened to PS4 Pro it was not very successful compared to PS4 and PS4 Slim, lots of PS4 customers not really interested in upgraded to PS4 Pro. 1/5 of PS4 consoles sold every week are PS4 Pro so that about 38,069 £379 PS4 Pro sold every week that is not sound very impressed when cheaper £229-£259 PS4 Slim sold around 190,345 units, £279 Switch sold around 188,262 units and £229-£379 Xbox One sold around 72,969 every week worldwide. That clearly showed PS4 Pro lacked demand and the sale figure are worse than Xbox One every week and Sony sold every PS4 Pro console at loss due to custom Polaris APU very high development cost and very expensive to manufactured it. Microsoft confirmed the same thing will happen to Xbox One X too, they will lose around $100 on every Xbox One X sold at loss. Accorded to sources Sony wanted PS5 to have full discrete GPU because they not wanted APU anymore due to very high development cost and very expensive to manufactured it. It look like Sony will switch to Nvidia to use cheaper powerful Volta GPU or Volta successor GPU with cheaper GDDR6 and a custom CPU from either AMD or Intel that will fit in same PS4 Pro case just like other Mini PC with Pascal GPUs such as Zotac MAGNUS EN1070, MSI Vortex G25VR and others in PS5 to compete with Xbox One X.

shankly1985 · 15 Oct 2017 at 11:10

He done other videos but before the new Nvidia driver. These are using new driver on Nvidia but not the latest for AMD 17.10.1

Edit
The GTX 10 series gain a lot more, than the 900 series.

Pleiades · 15 Oct 2017 at 12:53

AthlonXP1800 said:
Accorded to sources Sony wanted PS5 to have full discrete GPU because they not wanted APU anymore due to very high development cost and very expensive to manufactured it. It look like Sony will switch to Nvidia

Can you cite those sources please? I would've thought APUs would be cheaper to manufacture - in fact, isn't that the whole point of them? They certainly cost less to buy for PCs after all...

TheRealDeal · 15 Oct 2017 at 13:12

Pleiades said:
Can you cite those sources please? I would've thought APUs would be cheaper to manufacture - in fact, isn't that the whole point of them? They certainly cost less to buy for PCs after all...

Fanboy nonsense tbh. Most would agree it's likely Sony will again turn to AMD. I have not seen anything that would suggest Nvidia will be in the next gen. AMD can do it all and will likely be cheaper as they do need the business. Nvidia don't need to take on small margins they are already making great profits.

Chuk_Chuk · 15 Oct 2017 at 13:31

TheRealDeal said:
Fanboy nonsense tbh. Most would agree it's likely Sony will again turn to AMD. I have not seen anything that would suggest Nvidia will be in the next gen. AMD can do it all and will likely be cheaper as they do need the business. Nvidia don't need to take on small margins they are already making great profits.

I thought another one of the reasons for this was because both sony and microsoft had been burnt by Nvidia in terms of business deals.

jigger · 15 Oct 2017 at 13:38

Can't see Intel or AMD not wanting to supply APU's. Can't see Sony not buying an APU's.

The other thing is, AMD seems faster.

shankly1985 · 15 Oct 2017 at 13:41

The thing also worth noting Consoles always sell at a lost compared to the manufacturing cost.. Sony and Microsoft make most the money from Game sales and the Online Service. So using the Xbox X has a negative things because Microsoft said they sell them at a lost, this isn't new, news!

TheRealDeal · 15 Oct 2017 at 13:51

Chuk_Chuk said:
I thought another one of the reasons for this was because both sony and microsoft had been burnt by Nvidia in terms of business deals.

Yea but i guess business is business and if Nvidia were right they would most likely still jump. All is good where money is concerned mainly. I just don't see any company making more sense in the console space as AMD can do it all. Intel can't and Nvidia can't. Have to admit though the switch is a nice piece of kit for what it is but i can't see a Tegra design in a top of the range console.

shankly1985 said:
The thing also worth noting Consoles always sell at a lost compared to the manufacturing cost.. Sony and Microsoft make most the money from Game sales and the Online Service. So using the Xbox X has a negative things because Microsoft said they sell them at a lost, this isn't new, news!

I believe this was true up until ps4 and xbox one. Sony said they made profit right from the start i think.

Edit: yea seems they did say it. Makes sense though as previous Gen consoles were top of the range compared to PC's with only high end PC's surpassing them. this gen was mediocre in comparison.

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/s...-is-already-contributing-profit/1100-6419822/

melmac · 15 Oct 2017 at 13:55

Martini1991 said:
Nothing he says is wrong.
Nvidia could drop their price, you've bit addressed that, just given out insults

Here is the post you want me to address. Happy now?

Brazo said:
And if nvidia dropped prices to match the AMD cards wouldn't sell.

All academic really as those cards are NOT at those prices.

The Line about Nvidia is moot for several reasons.

1. The discussion was about whether AMD could afford to reduce prices or not.

2. When have Nvidia ever reduced prices based on AMD apart from when AMD released the 4xxx cards? Oh, you are going to say that Nvidia reduced the price of the 780 because AMD released the 290 cards? Wrong. They dropped the price of the 780 because they were releasing the 780ti, just like they dropped the price of the 980 before releasing the 980ti and just liked they dropped the price of the 1080 just before releasing the 1080ti.

The second line is also moot, because we know the prices aren't 350/450. That's what the discussion was about, AMD dropping it's prices. I mentioned the 350/450 prices because the cards were snapped up at those prices. But even the guys that bought Vega for the 350/450 prices and are happy with them, wouldn't buy them for current prices.

All in all nearly as bad a post as this one :-

Martini1991 said:
The cards are ~500/~600.

Some of the happy Vega owners are also pretty massive AMD fanboys, some whom would never touch Nvidia. Obviously there's a few neutrals whom have bought a 64/56 at their launch prices, but right now? £499 is AIB 1080 money.

Never mind that you took a section of my post completely out of context, ignoring the first part of my post which even says the words "current price" You also insulted every member of the Vega owners threads that are happy with their cards by implying that their opinion doesn't matter because some of the people who bought Vega cards would never buy Nvidia. There are massive Nvidia fanboys in the Nvidia owners threads too I guess that happy Nvidia owners opinions are invalidated as well?

nashathedog · 15 Oct 2017 at 14:42

Kaapstad said:
Looking at the benchmark as it runs different settings make little difference to image quality. This is one game where turning down the settings to get it to run will make little difference to appearance, 1080p looks almost as good as 2160p.

Having said that the actual game may differ in appearance to the benchmark image quality wise.

This is the case more often than not nowadays, I saw a Youtube video recently that was about how things have changed with the in game visual settings, It used Crysis to highlight how much, With Crysis 1 the low and max settings made a big difference but not with Crysis 3.

Telecaster said:
Considering how much they lose on each card, seems unlikely, unless they're even more self destructive than we give them credit for.

What are they losing? Do we know?

melmac said:
If AMD sold the cards at £350 for the 56, £450 for the 64, then they would sell.

They'd sell well at those prices especially if they kept AIB models close to that,
I returned my £780 Vega 64 AIO and bought an MSI 1080 Armor for £500, Just before Vega released OCUK was selling the last of the EVGA 1080 hybrid AIO's for £500,
They no longer stock them.

I almost bought one but didn't because I didn't think Vega would be such a kick in the teeth price wise. I think the Vega 64 AIO's should be £600 or a max of £640 but even £640 feels a bit high when everything's considered.
The Vega 64 often beats the 1080 but I think they even out as being pretty close performance wise overall, That's good but it's marred because of the price and power draw.
Most people haven't got a Vega capable psu as no-one ever considered a single gpu card needing so much power,
Nvidia lowered power consumption with Pascal so I'm not sure how things went so wrong with Vega's consumption but it means additional money spent on a psu for a lot of people and with the cards already overpriced it rules the card out as an option for many of us.

Martini1991 · 15 Oct 2017 at 14:51

melmac said:
Never mind that you took a section of my post completely out of context, ignoring the first part of my post which even says the words "current price" You also insulted every member of the Vega owners threads that are happy with their cards by implying that their opinion doesn't matter because some of the people who bought Vega cards would never buy Nvidia. There are massive Nvidia fanboys in the Nvidia owners threads too I guess that happy Nvidia owners opinions are invalidated as well?

If someone wouldn't ever contemplate buying the competitors product, regardless of performance then how can their opinion truly be valid to gauge a product? Objectively a 64 is on par with a 1080 performance wise, but everywhere else it's falling short, this coming 14 months after the former.

Also, the same could equally be said with Nvidia fanboys, I don't disagree, but it's not relevant to Vegas drawbacks.

TheRealDeal · 15 Oct 2017 at 14:53

nashathedog said:
This is the case more often than not nowadays, I saw a Youtube video recently that was about how things have changed with the in game visual settings, It used Crysis to highlight how much, With Crysis 1 the low and max settings made a big difference but not with Crysis 3.

What are they losing? Do we know?

They'd sell well at those prices especially if they kept AIB models close to that,
I returned my £780 Vega 64 AIO and bought an MSI 1080 Armor for £500, Just before Vega released OCUK was selling the last of the EVGA 1080 hybrid AIO's for £500,
They no longer stock them. I almost bought one but didn't because I didn't think Vega would be such a kick in the teeth price wise. I think the Vega 64 AIO's should be £600 or a max of £640 but even £640 feels a bit high when everything's considered.
The Vega 64 often beats the 1080 but I think they even out as being pretty close performance wise overall, That's good but it's marred because of the price and power draw.
Most people haven't got a Vega capable psu as no-one ever considered a single gpu card needing so much power,
Nvidia lowered power consumption with Pascal so I'm not sure how things went so wrong with Vega's consumption but it means additional money spent on a psu for a lot of people and with the cards already overpriced it rules the card out as an option for many of us.

Lesson is buy a decent psu. I would happily try Vega in my old Corsair tx750 which at the time was a decent psu (6 years old around now). I can push my 290 to way above what Vega requires at stock with 1.25v and it still eats it all these years later. Wouldn't touch most corsairs these days but at the time they made some great psu's. Any how Vega is a joke power wise but when i up the voltage to push hard on my 290 i am far above what Vega stock requires. Add into the mix my old I7 920 @4ghz eats power as well it goes to show that a decent choice in power supply is a must. Single cards like Vega should not be doing this though and this is mainly posted for a laugh.

silversurfer · 15 Oct 2017 at 16:14

If Vega is going to do well its not via higher volts and more heat, that seems a bit of a deadend unless your cooling solution is somehow special to you I dont like that route.
They have to make use of those new Vega features, its going to be decided by that more then brute force. In 12 months if they pulled something out of the hat unexpected I'll be happy, if the fight was still all about dx11 then not so much!

Nvidia 'wins' on dx11 and that retrospective code, Vega can only really leverage an advantage on something new and different. Hopefully the driver team look like the old Tefal adverts and they can cook up something special with the tools available

LoadsaMoney · 15 Oct 2017 at 16:39

Those Vega features will hardly get used though, if at all, just like Vulkan (when it was under them as Mantle), TressFx, True Audio etc... etc...., no one will bother with their features, as they hardly have a market share, whats the point in the devs using them, if only a couple of people can make use of them, they need to get a market first, before they start pushing all these features, said it time and time again, as without a market, they're just ******* in the wind.