AMD VEGA confirmed for 2017 H1

[Doom112]

AMD update on VEGA launch.

Source https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4zr8co/amd_said_vega_is_coming_in_h1_of_2017_in_a/

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/amd-vega-coming-in-1h-2017.2484851/

 

[Doom112]

I'm going with the Computex 2017 rumour that was floating around 6 weeks ago or so....

Looks like Vega might be battling Volta and not Pascal then

What happens if its is a competition to Pascal and competing with GTX 1080?

 

[Doom112]

Nothing new here. They had Vega for 2017 a few months ago.

Was only wishful thinking that it might come earlier.

I think Polaris dual GPU will launch in late 2016 ,which Roy said it would be surprise.

 

[Doom112]

If they do a dual GPU, it will be a niche product, as these things usually are.

Most people rightfully dont value multi-GPU very much.

I also have no idea who 'Roy' is.

This is roy. He used to be AMD_Roy but he deleted his account due to PR mistakes.

https://twitter.com/roy_techhwood

 

[Doom112]

It could be that AMD are planning a bigger jump in performance. I don't think it was that long ago Nvidia did a similar thing, ie, seemed a bit behind, slow to get product out then suddenly they were ahead and have been since. Not sure AMD have the resources though and have wondered if they are behind with their GPU's because they're focusing on CPU's and Intel for now. Pure speculation....

There is no hidden story or conspiracy theory behind. It AMD simply lack of resources and cannot match Nvidia at this point as simple as that ,which is the reason why they hired Chinese works and shifted their whole VEGA production in china.

A good example is that Polaris 11 requires same amount of watt ,which is required for GTX 1070 on laptop and GTX 1070 is 3X faster then that card.


AMD has given up on high end because they know that they have to beat Nvidia not only with the performance but more importantly with efficiency as well ,which is the key point of success for OEM and laptops market.

Just beating Nvidia on raw performance ,however taking 2X amount of power is ultra fail product in terms of overall quality.

For example RX 480 custom models take same amount of power as GTX 1080 takes.

http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/gpu_displays/msi_rx_480_and_gtx_1060_gaming_x_review/1

 

[Doom112]

@Doom112 is not all Doom and gloom....

AMD has a lot on it's basket atm. October has to supply SONY & MS with new powerful PS4 and XBone chips. If the orders on those items are high and production capacity with it's suppliers hits the limit of course and there are going to be delays to other products.

They do not grow potatoes, but designing chips which others manufacture.

i never said Doom and gloom.

I am just saying that AMD is done in high end GPU market.

 

[Doom112]

For them I suspect its all about ZEN. If that is good it will have a big knock on effect to the rest of the company. A good ZEN will mean good top end gpus Imo. A bad ZEN and it's the end of AMD in it's current form.

Given the fact the shares have almost hit $8 from a low of $1.6 they must be gaining a bit of traction.

You are 100% right. If AMD manage a success with Zen then everything for AMD will go smoothly and if Zen is a fail then everything, that launches later is a failure no matter how much good it is.

 

[Doom112]

I dont know about all that.

If

1) Vega releases earlier in 2017 than June/July

2) Nvidia does not have Volta ready to go that year as some have rumored(which goes against Nvidia's own roadmap)

and

3) Vega actually does deliver on the promises that Polaris was to have in terms of efficiency

I think AMD could definitely still be quite relevant.

However, if any of these things dont come true, they are going to have a hard time. At the very least, we do know that Vega is an enthusiast-targeted GPU lineup, so they will at the very least be providing *some* kind of high end offerings. And I wouldn't be so quick to write them off this early. They'll have the added benefit of more development time and likely improved yields from 14nm chips, so even if it's not a Titan X-destroyer, could still provide an entirely competitive and attractive product.


Of course they would. Just because your product isn't good doesn't mean you dont still try and sell it.

I'm not saying Zen wont be good, but them advertising it is a necessity, not some sign of major confidence. They have a lot riding on Zen and cant just be silent about it.

They did same with Bulldozer and Fury X and look what it turns out be. It all most made AMD go bankrupt.

 

[Doom112]

Zen beat a 6900K at the same clock rate in Blender, Blender usually favours Intel.

wait for 3rd party reviews. AMD always over hype products in their investors call.

 

[Doom112]

But we don't care about TDP for a desktop system.

What we need to know is how well the latest GPUs and games run.

for laptops it matters more then performance.

 

[Doom112]

Thats a ##### huge uplift from last quarter, what happened to all these apparent massive GTX 1070/80 sales?

I think no. In Q3 we will see the real sales.

 

[Doom112]

The biggest problem AMD will face is efficiency issue. Even if it is 10% faster then GTX 1080 it wont matter after a year and it will be more disappointing that if it takes 50 to 60% more power to beat GTX 1080 ,which is more likely to be the case. AMD will not get enough profit from desktops only ,therefore, they require to win OEM contracts and laptops, which can only be done by beating nvidia on efficiency + performance and it is likely that wont happen.

 

[Doom112]

Efficiency has always been AMDs biggest problem and still is. However, as far as their own products are concerned they are starting to do better. If Vega is 10% faster than a 1080 then that will mean that it is 15% slower than a Titan XP.....at the right price it will sell by the bucketload even if it takes more power to do so. Again depends on the price/performance and we will not know that for a while yet. I dont think it will be 50% more power to get that 10% performance over the 1080...maybe 20-30%.

Obviously with only a 30% market share AMD will not get enough profit on desktops alone, but they do also have the console contracts and depending on Vega's price/performance that marketshare may (probably will) increase again. AMD continue to increase efficiency in their own products even though it isnt as good as Nvidia's and that is still a good thing.

Laptop profit>>>>>Console peanut profit.

 

[Doom112]

Gaming Laptops are a tiny fraction compared with consoles.

Funny thing is that all these console are equipped with laptop hardware.

 

[Doom112]

I had fury X and i felt it lacks in high end product features compare to GTX 980 Ti with better features at the same price.

AMD cards disparately need efficiency for high end GPUs due to that it will able to get good overclocking and it will be much cooler. The reason today AMD has no high end GPU market is because AMD PR and AMD management thinks only Raw power is the key feature and requirement for a successful high end product. I really hope they learned something from Fury X launch or else VEGA will follow same path as fury X.

 

[Doom112]

Read what i said above, Nvidia have the edge *Right Now* as they design their hardware for the here and now, Pascal is still a DX11 architecture, AMD gambled and built for the future.

Once Nvidia move to a proper DX12 / Vulkan architecture on their GPU's they will have to add hardware to keep the performance up, this will require more power and generate more heat.

AMD gambled on stuff like DX12 and Vulkan becoming mainstream earlier than it has, they tried to force the movement forward with Mantle and to a degree have achieved this.

Once more and more software arrives to take use of this DX12 type of architecture, unless Nvidia add similar hardware they will fall behind, drivers and software will only take you so far, the API's are designed to talk directly to the hardware, and if its not there to talk to, then how do you leverage the performance?

Like i have been saying, AMD have been paying the cost on power consumption for a long time as their GCN hardware has never been fully utilized in DX11 yet the hardware requires powering for the cards to function, this generates heat etc.

You only have to look at the 1060 vs 480, or the other AMD cards, in DX11 many of them fall behind Maxwell and Pascal etc, but in DX12 and Vulkan a lot of them punch much further above their weight, its because the software utilizes this dormant hardware.

The real question is this, will Nvidia get out DX12 hardware before it becomes mainstream? because if they do not, they will be the ones playing catchup as the AMD hardware pulls significantly ahead.

Nvidia had edge since maxwell (2014). Now on 14nm AMD only manage get on par with Nvidia while Nvidia was on 28nm. It only shows that how much years and how far AMD is behind.

 

[Doom112]

these charts beg to differ

looking at the FE v 480 stock figures.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/10540/the-geforce-gtx-1060-founders-edition-asus-strix-review/16

A custom RX 480 is drawing more power then a GTX 1080. It shows that much Nvidia has invested in their R&D department.

 

[Doom112]

Do you intentionally not read what i put above?? or are you just mentally challenged?

Nvidia have an edge because their Hardware does not have DX12 support at the Hardware level, they instead rely on Software, drivers etc and high clocks to out perform AMD.

AMD hardware carries a lot of under utilised components that still require power, hence Nvidia cards being more efficient.

AMD have not released a product as of yet that is a direct competitor to Pascal 1070, 1080 and TitanXP.

The only AMD product this cycle that competes with Pascal is their low end Polaris stuff, and as you will see in Vulkan and DX12 it makes the cards they compete against (1060 etc) look silly in comparison.

I am sure you are either just wind up merchant, or are totally oblivious, AMD are not trying to compete with Nvidias top end right now, this is what Vega is for.

You keep going on about AMD being behind and that AMD 14nm is only competing with Nvidia 28nm, Yes in DX11... in DX12 / Vulkan this is a different story with the shoe on the other foot.

I am not sure how to spell it out to you, AMD hardware was designed for the future in mind, Nvidia was designed for DX11 here and now.

DX11 = Nvidia
DX12 / Vulkan = AMD

Its really that simple, and when Nvidia actually release hardware with DX12 hardware level support, then you will see how close they are in not only performance but Power consumption.

I beg to differ but how come Nvidia is beating AMD on every DX12 and Vulkan game? Even a GTX 980 Ti is on top list of every single on DX12 benchmark in Overclock.uk benchmarks. Assumption is different from reality and reality is that right now Nvidia has 5 different card ,which beats AMD best card ,whether is DX12 or Vulkan.

 

[Doom112]

I'm curious to know what these 'high end product features' are..

overclocking, shadow play, 6GB Vram.

 

[Doom112]

In his view i bet its not A-Synchronous shading, they don't have that.

Even Async does not help Fury X to win from a OC GTX 980 Ti leave alone Pascal high end.