AMD VEGA confirmed for 2017 H1

queamin · 12 Dec 2016 at 19:55

Here we go full speed ahead

.

africanos23 · 12 Dec 2016 at 20:02

Anything under 94c will make us proud!

WOOT WOOT

Gregster · 12 Dec 2016 at 20:05

old gamer said:
Let's hope you don't need to post your train wreck gif again

I hope so too but damned that gif was funny

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 12 Dec 2016 at 20:07

Probably more a hype tram this time.

queamin · 12 Dec 2016 at 20:11

Gregster said:
I hope so too but damned that gif was funny

You better not use the same gif we need a newer model.

Davedree · 12 Dec 2016 at 20:29

bru said:
I'm sorry, what else should we be comparing the AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 with NCU too?

There is a mistake in the previous post as well, the 8GB 'confirmed' was from the card used in the Doom demo not a MI25.

It's not so much what the Mi25 should be compared to, although you're comparing a fully enabled data centre 3840 shader P40 Gp102 vs the Mi25. It's more to do with how each card works in the deep learning environment in providing different rates of fp compute. It gets very technical but basically there's a difference in the Gp100 vs the Gp102 vs the Gp104 for fp64/fp32, 2x fp16 and int8 compared to Amd's vague and unknown vega solution.

For example the Mi25 is up against 3 different Teslas
P100 (fp64;fp32:fp16/2xfp16 no int8
P40 (fp32:fp16 no 2xfp16 int8)
p4 (fp32:fp16 no2fp16 int8)

Polaris (fp32, dedicated fp16 (not sure if 2xfp16, int16
Fiji (fp32 not sure on rest as gcn's can be programmable via firmware)
VEGA (????)

Nvidia's ecosystem is to use a dedicated trainer p100 for heavy compute queues and comparator, and inferences p40/p4 for low data,quick latency queues single transfer. Amd's solution does seem to combat a similar strategy using the Polaris+Fiji for an inference and Vega for the Trainer,
but I hope you can start to see why there's a lot more involved, including things I haven't even mentioned.

itchy · 12 Dec 2016 at 20:38

https://www.techpowerup.com/228635/amd-vega-handles-doom-4k-ultra-hd-at-over-60-fps

Fingers crossed its not another lemon like the R480 was. :rolleyes:

Panos · 12 Dec 2016 at 20:39

africanos23 said:
Anything under 94c will make us proud!

WOOT WOOT

Mine going to be watercooled as soon as EK has a block out

So no issue there.

africanos23 · 12 Dec 2016 at 20:51

Panos said:
Mine going to be watercooled as soon as EK has a block out
So no issue there.

jk jk , had a bad experience with my R9-290s back in 2014 but the RX480, Fury and Fury Xs are pretty cool.

Apache14 · 12 Dec 2016 at 20:55

Looks like the vega card will be my R9-290 replacement, hope they throw out a vega based nano card .... if that comes in just under GTX1080 performance ill be one happy man

Tho I must say my R9-290 has been one of the best cards iv had in terms of longevity, I mean it can still play most things at mostly high settings at 1440p

RavenXXX2 · 12 Dec 2016 at 21:19

Another overpriced lemon on the way from AMD. Think 1080 performance in anything other than doom vulcan, AMDs only trump card lol, not surprised it's the only game they showed off.

I mean they are using expensive HBM2 that is not much faster than DDR5X on the titan. This is another furyx fail, expensive, can't conclusively beat the competition and the 1080ti will be out making it look silly.

TheRealDeal · 12 Dec 2016 at 21:23

Possibly but other reviews like techpower show the gtx1080 only getting 49.7 fps average at 4k. For Async compute to work tssaa has to be on and i assume AMD would have been using it as well. 68 fps average would put Vega way faster than the gtx1080 in Doom if AMD were running similar settings to Techpowerup.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/GTX_1070_Xtreme_Gaming/12.html

tyler_jrb · 12 Dec 2016 at 21:27

TheRealDeal said:
Possibly but other reviews like techpower show the gtx1080 only getting 49.7 fps average at 4k. For Async compute to work tssaa has to be on.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/GTX_1070_Xtreme_Gaming/12.html

This would put Vega way ahead. Also not how close Fury X is to the gtx1080 in Doom. I doubt Amd are bringing out a card that's not to much faster than Fury X unless it's the small chip.

The vast majority of benchies (recent ones) shown put the 1080 maxed out at 4k at around the 60-70fps mark under intense situations.

Still if this is AMD's smaller chip and a good chunk cheaper than the 1080. They are onto something special.

But as the above comment this is a game where AMD's A-sync shines. Really need to see some other benchmarks as well for sure.

TheRealDeal · 12 Dec 2016 at 21:32

tyler_jrb said:
The vast majority of benchies (recent ones) shown put the 1080 maxed out at 4k at around the 60-70fps mark under intense situations.

Still if this is AMD's smaller chip and a good chunk cheaper than the 1080. They are onto something special.

But as the above comment this is a game where AMD's A-sync shines. Really need to see some other benchmarks as well for sure.

Yea i think Techpower must have something else enabled that the other sites don't as they do seem to be lower than the others. Most likely the nightmare settings as they state they use the highest settings.

Yea Doom is definitely a good case Scenario for AMD cards but the Gpu could also be running much slower than a release card. To many if's and butts atm but at least it's a pretty fast card.

africanos23 · 12 Dec 2016 at 21:59

Can anyone provide the 4K settings used so I can compare to the AMD results ?

TheRealDeal · 12 Dec 2016 at 22:04

africanos23 said:
Can anyone provide the 4K settings used so I can compare to the AMD results ?

Ultra 4k Vulkan.

Seanspeed · 12 Dec 2016 at 22:22

tyler_jrb said:
The vast majority of benchies (recent ones) shown put the 1080 maxed out at 4k at around the 60-70fps mark under intense situations.

Still if this is AMD's smaller chip and a good chunk cheaper than the 1080. They are onto something special.

But as the above comment this is a game where AMD's A-sync shines. Really need to see some other benchmarks as well for sure.

I think the point is that modern AMD cards run extraordinarily better than Nvidia cards using Doom+Vulkan. It's not close to representative of the 'norm'.

That said, Raven's comments about a 'lemon' incoming are hilariously idiotic and shortsighted. Dude is insecure as hell and totally shook worrying about this new AMD lineup, you can tell.

JediFragger · 12 Dec 2016 at 22:24

I need one of these asap now that I've picked up a 38UC99

Come on AMD, get a move on!!!!

N19h7m4r3 · 12 Dec 2016 at 22:32

Seanspeed said:
I think the point is that modern AMD cards run extraordinarily better than Nvidia cards using Doom+Vulkan. It's not close to representative of the 'norm'.

That said, Raven's comments about a 'lemon' incoming are hilariously idiotic and shortsighted. Dude is insecure as hell and totally shook worrying about this new AMD lineup, you can tell.

Especially since Vega 10 is supposed to be the smaller chip, while Vega 11 is the large one.

AMD’s Vega 10 products will compete with Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 1070 and GTX 1080 graphics cards. The company is expected to provide a graphics card with two Vega 10 chips that has a power requirement of around 300 watts. AMD also plans to go after Nvidia’s updated GeForce GTX Titan X card with a product based on its Vega 11 graphics chip. Vega 11 is expected to pack a hefty 6,144 shader processors.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/amd-vega-three-versions-navi-gpus-2019/

Seanspeed · 12 Dec 2016 at 23:00

N19h7m4r3 said:
Especially since Vega 10 is supposed to be the smaller chip, while Vega 11 is the large one.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/amd-vega-three-versions-navi-gpus-2019/

That's what I'm hoping, but I'm not getting my hopes up too much on these kind of rumors.

Realistically speaking, going from OC 970-level performance(RX480) to 1080 performance(baby Vega) would leave a *gigantic* gap of performance they're not filling. They can revise the 480, but is it going to be so much better to fill that middle ground? I seriously doubt it. A GTX1080 is near enough double the performance of a GTX970. The RX480 not *that* much better.