• 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.

Radeon VII a win or fail?

Soldato
Joined
22 Apr 2016
Posts
3,425
It is not the architecture which is faulty, it is the software that like with CPUs where it utilises less cores, here tends to like to utilise narrower architectures with less shading performance:
Radeon VII 16 GB is about superior than RTX 2080 in EVERYTHING, only the stupid games can't understand it:

Radeon VII 16 GB: 3840 (60) | 240 | 64 | 112 Gpixels/s | 420.0 GTexels/s | 13440 GFlops | 3360 GFlops (1/4) | https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-vii.c3358
GeForce RTX 2080 8 GB: 2944 (46) | 184 | 64 | 109.4 GPixels/s | 314.6 GTexels/s | 10068 GFlops | 314.6 GFlops | https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-rtx-2080.c3224

That’s like complaining that a HGV is slower than a lotus and using the argument that a HGV has far more horse power!
 
Associate
Joined
19 Jan 2003
Posts
2,495
Location
west sussex
The VII is not a pointless release by AMD, It can trade blows with the 2080 and over time it will most likely be better once the drivers mature. its 25% faster than vega 64. if your in the red team its an upgrade with double memory 16g.
Its a great compute card as well. now if you had a 1080ti the 2080 is a pointless upgrade, you would have to go 2080ti to see more raw speed but it would cost you more than double what most paid for there 1080ti gpu's if you wanted a top notch 2080ti
it would cost you over double what a 1080ti cost.

I have had zero issues with it so far, not 1 crash and it over clocks too, I am a complete newby to AMD software and watt man, but I always start with fresh windows install. the last AMD card I had was a 7950 or something like that. yes some have trouble and some have trouble with
NV cards as well, some complete failures with more than 1 RMA. its unfortunate that AMD let it be released to reviewer's with pre release drivers, that's AMD bad judgement as these reviews are read by many.

What I don't get is all this AMD bashing because the card cant beat a 2080ti costing nearly double for the cheapest version with the first release core. So far I am happy with it, it performs well and will get better.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
21 May 2012
Posts
31,940
Location
Dalek flagship
A bit disingenuous TBH. Titan RTX isn’t really a gaming card, is it. Obviously you can game with it but the price is mental.

Not at all.

It is a bit disingenuous to say the 2080 Ti is the fastest gaming card, I was just pointing out that it was not.

As to the price, I think all Turing NVidia cards from the 2060 upwards are way too much.

NVidia's price points on cards like the 2060 and 2070 are far more mental than something like the TU102 cards as the former are used by the vast majority people.
 

HRL

HRL

Soldato
Joined
22 Nov 2005
Posts
3,025
Location
Devon
Not at all.

It is a bit disingenuous to say the 2080 Ti is the fastest gaming card, I was just pointing out that it was not.

As to the price, I think all Turing NVidia cards from the 2060 upwards are way too much.

NVidia's price points on cards like the 2060 and 2070 are far more mental than something like the TU102 cards as the former are used by the vast majority people.

Fair enough. I always thought the Titan cards were aimed above the gaming tier.

Absolutely right about the prices of all the Turing cards though. I’d set my sights on the next Ti 12 months ago and originally only anticipated spending £800 or so. I was rather reluctant to spend over £1K but performance-wise, I’ve no regrets with my Zotac.

Would I have purchased an R7 instead? No, don’t think the performance is good enough even if the price is slightly more reasonable.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
21 May 2012
Posts
31,940
Location
Dalek flagship
Fair enough. I always thought the Titan cards were aimed above the gaming tier.

Absolutely right about the prices of all the Turing cards though. I’d set my sights on the next Ti 12 months ago and originally only anticipated spending £800 or so. I was rather reluctant to spend over £1K but performance-wise, I’ve no regrets with my Zotac.

Would I have purchased an R7 instead? No, don’t think the performance is good enough even if the price is slightly more reasonable.

Where the Titan brand is aimed is a bit blurred as they have different capabilities.

The Titan V (Volta) is a beast of a card for both professional DP work and gaming which makes its high asking price a bargain even now.

The Titan Xp on the other hand is a bit of a wimp when it comes to professional work and really is no more than a slightly bigger faster 1080 Ti.

The RTX Titan is somewhere between the two cards above, it is lacking in DP ability but the 24gb memory does have uses for professional work.

For someone who wants the best value for money I would never recommend any of the Titans as there are always better options available.

I do think that when the next gen of cards launches there will be some price reductions as NVidia have really shot themselves in the foot with the RTX card prices.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
32,615
Why? The HGV is built to take heavy loads, while the other just moves fast when there is no resistance ... ?!


If the goal is to get around the race track as fast as possible the HGV fails, despite its power.

But really your whole concept is flawed. GPUs have thousands of cores. It is not up to the game to magucallybmake use ofbthem, that is the job of the driver and hardware. AMDs architecture is horribly inefficient. It goes for a brute force approach while Nvidia uses a complex and highly efficient and very balanced system to make sure the slightly lower resources are used better. AMD spends transistors on raw power, Nvidia on making the card as efficient as possible in real world gaming. Nvidia does a far better job keeping all cores busy and minimizing bottlenecks, using lossless compression to reduce bandwidth etc. AMD just throw more cores at the same GPU and hope that things scale.
 
Permabanned
Joined
2 Sep 2017
Posts
10,490
If the goal is to get around the race track as fast as possible the HGV fails, despite its power.

But really your whole concept is flawed. GPUs have thousands of cores. It is not up to the game to magucallybmake use ofbthem, that is the job of the driver and hardware. AMDs architecture is horribly inefficient. It goes for a brute force approach while Nvidia uses a complex and highly efficient and very balanced system to make sure the slightly lower resources are used better. AMD spends transistors on raw power, Nvidia on making the card as efficient as possible in real world gaming. Nvidia does a far better job keeping all cores busy and minimizing bottlenecks, using lossless compression to reduce bandwidth etc. AMD just throw more cores at the same GPU and hope that things scale.

Oh, come on with your fairy tales :D
First of all the example with cars is stupid.
Second is that when pushing pixels, you need as many cores as possible. This is why there are 4096 shaders and not 8 shaders.
nvidia just cheats with things like their TWIMTP programmes and similar, like in Crysis 2 https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/t...icially-caught-cheating-in-crysis-2.18307621/

http://techreport.com/articles.x/21404/1

Its not official, but techreport have shown where most of the ridiculous amounts of tesselation power goes, into flat objects, or water models that aren't being shown, or concrete slabs.

As techreport say, these are the most advanced flat concrete slabs in existance.

The game is FULL to the brim of things that have insanely high tesselation usage, yet offer little to no IQ increase, and it just so happens that Nvidia were behind the inclusion of it and their product can better cope with ludicrous wasteful levels of tesselation.

It hurts AMD hardware more, I would have NO issue with this if IQ quality increased due to the level of tesselation used, but it doesn't.

I would suggest that Nvidia users are also getting less performance than they should, just not as big a drop as AMD users. Nvidia is hurting their own users just to hurt AMD more, it really is pathetic.

I do apologise if this has been known for ages in other Crysis 2 threads, but the article was only published today.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Sep 2009
Posts
30,097
Location
Dormanstown.
On that Crysis 2 thing.
It worked for Nvidia because their GPU was better at tessellation performance.

I don't know how people can fanboy so hard about products to the fact they invent fantasy.
The VII isn't *better* than the 2080, end of.
 
Associate
Joined
25 Apr 2017
Posts
1,095
It's the other way round. Radeon VII performs normally in normal titles and loses in the majority that are geforce optimised.

Its getting beaten by the 1080ti in some games which is a 2 year old card. Geforce optimised or not, it should keep up with the 2080 or at the very least not get beaten by the 1080ti 2 years later. Some games its barely faster than even the 2070
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Sep 2009
Posts
30,097
Location
Dormanstown.
The VII is not a pointless release by AMD, It can trade blows with the 2080 and over time it will most likely be better once the drivers mature. its 25% faster than vega 64. if your in the red team its an upgrade with double memory 16g.

For nigh on double the price.

It'd cost me 400 pound at least to upgrade to a VII from my V64 for a meagre 25% gain.

I'd be "happy" to buy this card at £500.

But pretty much all the higher end offerings from both vendors are just taking the proverbial.
 
Permabanned
Joined
2 Sep 2017
Posts
10,490
The only one who's trolling is you. That's literally all you do.

But you just said that 2080 with 8 GB is better than the Radeon VII 16 GB which is nothing else but damn lie.

Just be a man at least once and admit that nvidia are cheaters. What else is TWIMTBP and GPP programmes? What else is the inferior image quality that gives them performance advantage, so they look better in the benchmarks?
 
Soldato
Joined
3 Oct 2013
Posts
3,602
If the goal is to get around the race track as fast as possible the HGV fails, despite its power.

It's a nice analogy however, bit floored though. I think the point that @4K8KW10 was trying to make that the hardware's not been used to it's potential as in If said HGV was racing around a track with what both are capable of pulling it would win.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Sep 2009
Posts
30,097
Location
Dormanstown.
But you just said that 2080 with 8 GB is better than the Radeon VII 16 GB which is nothing else but damn lie.

Just be a man at least once and admit that nvidia are cheaters. What else is TWIMTBP and GPP programmes? What else is the inferior image quality that gives them performance advantage, so they look better in the benchmarks?

You may want to actually look at what I said.
I said the VII isn't better than the 2080. I mean they're basically around the same ball park performance, wins either side (Although I've seen some reviews which really don't paint the VII in a positive light, but I'd still consider them to be basically at parity overall). At the same price point I'd take a VII. But as their prices stand I'd take neither.

Saying the VII's better in every single way is the only lie here.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Sep 2009
Posts
30,097
Location
Dormanstown.
It's a nice analogy however, bit floored though. I think the point that @4K8KW10 was trying to make that the hardware's not been used to it's potential as in If said HGV was racing around a track with what both are capable of pulling it would win.

Isn't there a whole thing about RTX not having its hardware used to its potential? (DLSS).

It's a none point. End of the day, you buy a card and play games, its performance is its performance.
 
Associate
Joined
19 Jan 2003
Posts
2,495
Location
west sussex
For nigh on double the price.

It'd cost me 400 pound at least to upgrade to a VII from my V64 for a meagre 25% gain.

I'd be "happy" to buy this card at £500.

But pretty much all the higher end offerings from both vendors are just taking the proverbial.

I would say more like £320 to upgrade over a new vega64 for 25% performance gain, some times more than 25% gain. which isnt to bad considering how much extra you have to pay for the same gain from a 1080 to 2080 and even more 1080ti to 2080ti
so over all £320 isnt so bad. I think it comes down to the end user and what they are prepared to pay for there next GPU. for vega 64 owners who dont wish to upgrade or pay the price needed is no diffrent to the 1080ti owners not willing to pay
over double for the 2080ti upgrade.

for me 16g of memory seems more future proof at 4k and was worth choosing the VII card, plus its compute ability's as i do more than gaming.
 
Soldato
Joined
3 Oct 2013
Posts
3,602
Isn't there a whole thing about RTX not having its hardware used to its potential? (DLSS).

Ain't it in BF5 and Tomdraider ? I know its 2 games but it's being used at least I guess

It's a none point. End of the day, you buy a card and play games, its performance is its performance.

Agreed, I was pointing out what I thought 4K8KW10 was trying to get at.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Sep 2009
Posts
30,097
Location
Dormanstown.
I would say more like £320 to upgrade over a new vega64 for 25% performance gain, some times more than 25% gain. which isnt to bad considering how much extra you have to pay for the same gain from a 1080 to 2080 and even more 1080ti to 2080ti
so over all £320 isnt so bad. I think it comes down to the end user and what they are prepared to pay for there next GPU. for vega 64 owners who dont wish to upgrade or pay the price needed is no diffrent to the 1080ti owners not willing to pay
over double for the 2080ti upgrade.

for me 16g of memory seems more future proof at 4k and was worth choosing the VII card, plus its compute ability's as i do more than gaming.

I can't sell my Vega 64 at the same price as new ones, so the upgrade price for everyone is at the second hand sale of their card taken away from the new pricing, so it's not really £320.

I vote with my wallet, so I wouldn't be buying anything above my V64 until I'm able to buy an upgrade for the same price I paid for it.
 
Back
Top Bottom