Radeon VII a win or fail?

[nashathedog]

Reading stuff like this makes me feel more stupid.

DLSS renders in 1440p and uses AI algorithm to figure/ use digital imagination out how would it look in 2160p. So it increses 1440p rendering quality to make it closer to 2160p.

Like you send some artist photo and he paints image off that pgoto. But other way around.


Is that basic enough explanation how AI upscaler works ??
If anything that's how It should be called AI Upscaler nod Deep learning super sampling.


I also assume You missed part where on NV cards default You got 8bit plate selected instead of 10 bit and thats why image quality at default can look worse.


If it goes about Vega VII in 3-5 years... God help us no one including AMD will remember VEGA cards possibly worst architecture ati/amd ever made. Give us a break 7nm is worse than equaly priced 12nm cards. It could have 64gb of HBM2 still would be crap for JUST gaming.

Hi, That's a big assumption to make if you haven't owned a Vega card, or have you? I'm a gamer, My PC & adaptive sync ultrawide monitor are first and foremost for gaming, I've owned both 14nm & 7nm Vega cards, I'm still getting to know the Vega II but the Vega 64's of which I've had numerous versions are great gaming cards. As for the Vega II bringing a level of performance that's late to the market doesn't mean it's a poor gaming card just that it's late, In reality it's not even that late if it was it would be offering much lower performance than it is on today's Totem pole. Your running a Pascal Titan is that now a rubbish gaming card? From what I can tell it has similar performance to the Vega II but it cost a lot more, £300 more or less? They still sell Pascal cards so does that mean anyone that's bought a Pascal card since Turing released is buying a rubbish gaming card? They don't seem to think so and Pascal's still selling well, even the 1080ti which offers Vega II levels of performance at a higher price point has continued to sell well.
14nm Vega released in a poor state, 7nm Vega's the same, With 14nm Vega we learned how to maximise and capitalize on it's performance and as someone who's owned a non reference GTX 1080 as well as a few Vega 64's I found that a tweaked Vega is the better choice which is something none of us believed would happen on Vega's launch, (at least not those of us who could look at it objectively). As for long term viability AMD's GCN architecture has proven itself as the better product again & again. That said we are getting closer to leaving GCN based architectures behind & it will be interesting to see how well GCN products are supported after we move on.

 

[nashathedog]

All the GPU manufacturers are doing is pushing more and more users towards Consoles, which is a win for AMD lol, Nvidia are pushing some of their customers to line AMD's pockets.

Next gen consoles will be good, I have the Xbox One X and its a great bit of kit, recently added KB and Mouse support albeit devs have to implement it, and MS is pushing cross play with other platforms. So if the next round of consoles are significantly better i can see even more PC gamers switching to consoles.

The fact that for the price of a 2080ti you can buy a 55" 4K TV, Console, games, subs to services etc shows you how out of whack PC components are becoming.

For the price of one current high end PC with an Intel CPU, Nvidia or AMD GPU, Screen etc i can buy both my kids a 4K TV and a Console each and a years sub to some services.

If next gen consoles offer full keyboard & mouse support I'll definitely be grabbing one (probably both), I grabbed a PS4 & a Xim keyboard & mouse convertor last year but I'm not getting a flawless mouse & keyboard experience (delayed targetting response) which has stopped me using it a lot, I read somewhere that the next gen consoles will support the use of a keyboard and mouse which for me is a game changer as my right hand's partially paralysed making my controller skill a joke. I'll happily make the move if possible, and doing so won't mean no more PC gaming, I'm sure the hardware I have now will still let me play games 5 or 6 years from now.

 

[nashathedog]

I would grab a 2080 over a Radeon VII in truth, as it is the same price (or less) and gives a 10% performance overall in all the games TPU tested

Spoiler

Performance per dollar is the second worst card, only just behind the 2080Ti, so clearly not a good buy.

The RTX 2080 is the better overall gaming card at the moment, The only reason I went with the Vega II instead of the RTX was Freesync, I know Nvidia have told us they now support adaptive sync but they also said that out of 400 monitors they tested only 5 worked properly, then they refused to tell us which were tested and found to not work correctly leaving us with Nvidia's support being nothing more than a stab in dark which made my decision to go with the Vega II all the easier.

Ouch! I forgot about the 1080Ti and shows it is still a beast of a card, even at 2 years old.

If the 1080ti's still seen as a beast of a card how can you class a card with roughly the same performance & more ram at a similar price any different? Yes it's 2 years late but it still offers a good level of performance with only the high end Nvidia cards offering more.

 

[Gregster]

My bias? Ok, let's see techpowerup's bias. You have 13 cards and 10 cards are nvidia's.
You are missing RX 580, RX 570, RX 590... https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Radeon_VII/32.html

Fan noise can be easily controlled via Radeon Settings.
Power consumption can be easily controlled via reduction of the core voltage.

Come again with the bias plot.

The card we are discussing is Radeon VII and sure, bring the 2080 and even the 2080Ti if you like. I merely went to the link you posted and grabbed a 4K chart, which states the 2080 is 10% faster overall in conclusion with their vast game tests. Sure Radeon wins some and loses more but you can grab a 2080 for less money than a Radeon VII. It is less power hungry, quieter (using your own chart), cheaper and has more features (even if some of them still need some love).

You say Noise can easily be controlled by Radeon settings and power consumption also, which is fair enough I guess but would that make me want to buy a VII over a 2080? No chance. @Vince has bought one for very valid reasons and fair play (OpenCL has always been great with AMD).

Not sure why you are posting a link to TPU but as soon as someone goes to that link, you basically say, "nope, they are biased because I don't like the results". Can you not see the irony in that?

 

[Gregster]

Then Nvidia will continue releasing very expensive products because you'll buy them anyway. We need to make a stand!

Indeed but what alternative? "Buy secondhand" I read a couple of posts after but wouldn't that person selling be plying money back into NVidia or AMD? Buy the Radeon VII? Ermm, it is more expensive than the 2080. Don't buy and spoil your own fun?

I get very limited game time, as I am sure many of us are the same. I want to enjoy my downtime when I get the chance and whilst I don't make you wrong on pricing, I am not prepared to cut off my nose to spite my face.

 

[willhub]

The whole RTX/VII is a "failure" of sorts, RTX performance is a step up but ray tracing isn't going to run at any level tht satisfies a lot of gamers. The VII is AMD playing catch up, even then it doesn't seem brilliant, looking at the specs it's a cut down Vega 64 with higher clocks and a wider bus to make up for what would be lose and then some more.

 

[Gregster]

The RTX 2080 is the better overall gaming card at the moment, The only reason I went with the Vega II instead of the RTX was Freesync, I know Nvidia have told us they now support adaptive sync but they also said that out of 400 monitors they tested only 5 worked properly, then they refused to tell us which were tested and found to not work correctly leaving us with Nvidia's support being nothing more than a stab in dark which made my decision to go with the Vega II all the easier.




If the 1080ti's still seen as a beast of a card how can you class a card with roughly the same performance & more ram at a similar price any different? Yes it's 2 years late but it still offers a good level of performance with only the high end Nvidia cards offering more.

Nasha, I genuinely like the Radeon VII and anyone who is into PC tech, knows AMD have been hitting the CPU space hard and doing a fantastic job at it. My take on the VII is a rushed release though and I personally feel it isn't quite ready (or drivers aren't), maybe because AMD have been putting their resources to the CPU side of things? I say the same thing with NVidia and RTX. Whilst I really like the effect in BFV, I want to see it in more games and DLSS so far is a 4K thing, which I have no use for but would love to use it at 3440x1440.

Both the VII and RTX have the pluses and minuses and whilst it is great to see AMD competing, I don't quite feel they have done enough thus far.

 

[humbug]

IMO Vega II is a rush job compromise due to an unforeseen delay on Navi.

I honestly don't remember where it came from, perhaps someone can point me to it? everything was going well with Navi and it was due an announcement / Demo at CES but shortly before they found a fatal flaw with it, so its been delayed till later on in the year.

Vega II is an existing MI50 workstation card, a pretty good one but the one if you remember we were told would not not make it as a gaming card.

https://www.amd.com/en/products/professional-graphics/instinct-mi50

 

[shankly1985]

IMO Vega II is a rush job compromise due to an unforeseen delay on Navi.

I honestly don't remember where it came from, perhaps someone can point me to it? everything was going well with Navi and it was due an announcement / Demo at CES but shortly before they found a fatal flaw with it, so its been delayed till later on in the year.

Vega II is an existing MI50 workstation card, a pretty good one but the one if you remember we were told would not not make it as a gaming card.

https://www.amd.com/en/products/professional-graphics/instinct-mi50

Amd never did say it wouldn't bring Vega 7 to gamers. The Internet made that statement.

 

[Gerard]

I honestly don't remember where it came from, perhaps someone can point me to it? everything was going well with Navi and it was due an announcement / Demo at CES but shortly before they found a fatal flaw with it, so its been delayed till later on in the year.

That's from "adored tv", if you can stand to sit through one of his 30 minute waffling marathons to find it. Personally i find it unlikely that amd were about to show navi then found some supposed bug at the last minute. They would be well tested long prior to the show to make sure it was in a presentable state.

 

[CuriousTomCat]

If next gen consoles offer full keyboard & mouse support I'll definitely be grabbing one (probably both), I grabbed a PS4 & a Xim keyboard & mouse convertor last year but I'm not getting a flawless mouse & keyboard experience (delayed targetting response) which has stopped me using it a lot, I read somewhere that the next gen consoles will support the use of a keyboard and mouse which for me is a game changer as my right hand's partially paralysed making my controller skill a joke. I'll happily make the move if possible, and doing so won't mean no more PC gaming, I'm sure the hardware I have now will still let me play games 5 or 6 years from now.

Console gaming isn't that much cheaper than pc gaming, if at all.

 

[deuse]

AMD falling behind even more

 

[IT Troll]

I honestly don't remember where it came from, perhaps someone can point me to it?

It was this one from Adored TV at around the 23 min mark. The story according to one of his sources is that a fundamental flaw was discovered in Navi which required a re-tape. Radeon VII was the plan B and was one of the last projects Mike Rayfield worked on before he "retired".

 

[Scougar]

Nasha, I genuinely like the Radeon VII and anyone who is into PC tech, knows AMD have been hitting the CPU space hard and doing a fantastic job at it. My take on the VII is a rushed release though and I personally feel it isn't quite ready (or drivers aren't), maybe because AMD have been putting their resources to the CPU side of things? I say the same thing with NVidia and RTX. Whilst I really like the effect in BFV, I want to see it in more games and DLSS so far is a 4K thing, which I have no use for but would love to use it at 3440x1440.

Both the VII and RTX have the pluses and minuses and whilst it is great to see AMD competing, I don't quite feel they have done enough thus far.

Gotta say.. this is spot on.

 

[4K8KW10]

AMD falling behind even more

What matters is midrange, where AMD has the RX 590 8 GB which is faster than GTX 1060 6 GB, RX 580 8 GB which is faster than GTX 1060 3 GB, RX 570 8 GB/ 4 GB which is faster than GTX 1050 Ti.

The card we are discussing is Radeon VII and sure, bring the 2080 and even the 2080Ti if you like. I merely went to the link you posted and grabbed a 4K chart, which states the 2080 is 10% faster overall in conclusion with their vast game tests. Sure Radeon wins some and loses more but you can grab a 2080 for less money than a Radeon VII. It is less power hungry, quieter (using your own chart), cheaper and has more features (even if some of them still need some love).

You say Noise can easily be controlled by Radeon settings and power consumption also, which is fair enough I guess but would that make me want to buy a VII over a 2080? No chance. @Vince has bought one for very valid reasons and fair play (OpenCL has always been great with AMD).

Not sure why you are posting a link to TPU but as soon as someone goes to that link, you basically say, "nope, they are biased because I don't like the results". Can you not see the irony in that?

I told you that the difference is not 10% but you again fail to listen to me.
In Strange Brigade the Radeon VII 16 GB is 25% faster than 2080 8 GB, in Far Cry 5 it is 8% faster, in Battlefield V it is 7% faster, in Deux Ex it is 7% faster, in Ghost Recon Wildlands it is 2% slower, in Shadow of The Tomb Raider it is 3% slower, in Middle-Earth it is 5% slower, and so on.
The average value is 8% slower across a wide selection of games, mostly dominated by nvidia-optimised ones.

 

[4K8KW10]

Sure Radeon wins some and loses more but you can grab a 2080 for less money than a Radeon VII. It is less power hungry, quieter (using your own chart), cheaper and has more features

Again you fail to understand that Radeon provides better image quality and AMD has the readiness to unlock ray-tracing acceleration via the compute shaders of the VII 16 GB whenever they would like to do so.
DLSS forget it....... I don't count it as a feature.

 

[Brazo]

What matters is midrange, where AMD has the RX 590 8 GB which is faster than GTX 1060 6 GB, RX 580 8 GB which is faster than GTX 1060 3 GB, RX 570 8 GB/ 4 GB which is faster than GTX 1050ti

I’m not quite sure Nvidia would class a 1060 as ‘mid range’. A lower tier card from last gen yes but no way current mid range.

 

[Gregster]

Again you fail to understand that Radeon provides better image quality and AMD has the readiness to unlock ray-tracing acceleration via the compute shaders of the VII 16 GB whenever they would like to do so.
DLSS forget it....... I don't count it as a feature.

No, I provided a video with extensive testing in response to you citing this about AMD having a better IQ and it shows there really isn't. As for AMD unlocking RT acceleration via the compute shaders, why haven't they done this? I don't care for bias and even I am but you are seriously deluded.

When do you think AMD will be doing Raytracing?

 

[Scougar]

Gregster: AMD said they were looking at it. Doesn't mean soon however.

4K: DLSS is a worthy feature whether you like it or not. A lot of people put value in it.

 

[Gregster]

I told you that the difference is not 10% but you again fail to listen to me.

I suck at Math but decided to painstakingly work out the difference, as you are rather obnoxious and this is what I did.

BFV = 6.4% AMD
Civ VI = 24% NVidia
Dasrksiders 3 = 23.5% NVidia
Deus Ex = 7.1% AMD
Divinity Original Sin = 14.7 NVidia
Dragon Quest XI = 35.8% NVidia
F1 2018 = 9.7% NVidia
FarCry 5 = 8% AMD
Ghost Recon Wildlands = 2.3% NVidia
GTA V = 7.1% NVidia
Hellblade = 10% NVidia
Hitman 2 = 22.5% NVidia
Just Cause 4 = 11.61% NVidia
Monster Hunter World = 18% NVidia
Middle Earth 2 = 5% NVidia
Rainbow Six = 14.7% NVidia
Shadow of the Tomb Raider = 3% NVidia
Strange Brigade = 22% AMD
The Witcher 3 = 10.6% NVidia
Wolfenstein 2 = 12.1% NVidia
Overall = 9.5% favour of NVidia

So overall, 9.5% in favour of NVidia and if I was to have gone to the 4th decimal point, it probably works out closer to 10%. You said it was 8% or am I wrong on this?

If someone else wants to make me wrong and show me where I have gone wrong, I will listen.