AMD VEGA confirmed for 2017 H1

triss · 23 Dec 2016 at 13:08

LoadsaMoney said:
Surprised they're replacing Polaris already, although may just be like the 290s.

Something obviously went wrong with Polaris, as they showed it months before release (think it was last year), against that Nvidia card (which i can't remember what was now), and it was sucking way less power than it, but when it came out, it sucked as much/if not more than the 1080.

Wasnt the 480 supposed to be the main stream card for a couple of years?

nashathedog · 23 Dec 2016 at 13:12

LoadsaMoney said:
Surprised they're replacing Polaris already, although may just be like the 290s.

Something obviously went wrong with Polaris, as they showed it months before release (think it was last year), against that Nvidia card (which i can't remember what was now), and it was sucking way less power than it, but when it came out, it sucked as much/if not more than the 1080.

I remember that, I think it was being compared to a 960 or maybe the 970. Running Battlefront?

Killer7xx · 23 Dec 2016 at 13:13

It does makes sense, they can launch flagship Vega in 1H 2017 and then replace the 480/470 with the small Vega in 2H 2017 when those cards will be a year old.

That way if Nvidia have no new architecture to bring out in 2017, AMD will get the jump on them across the range. If big Vega (RX 490/590) can match 1080Ti/Titan XP and little Vega (485/580) is close to the performance of the 1070, it will be the year of AMD.

Rroff · 23 Dec 2016 at 13:18

LoadsaMoney said:
Something obviously went wrong with Polaris, as they showed it months before release (think it was last year), against that Nvidia card (which i can't remember what was now), and it was sucking way less power than it, but when it came out, it sucked as much/if not more than the 1080.

The earlier demo was of a low power, low voltage, small core situation where the 14nm process they were using held up well.

Kind of funny how adamant some people were that TSMC were 6 months behind GF

when infact its GF that was lagging behind on a fully upto speed process.

eddyr · 23 Dec 2016 at 14:09

bru said:
So the original Fudzila article says.

So there might be GDDR5X, but not guaranteed.

Seems completely daft that AMD is supposedly releasing a new Polaris 12 card to fill out the bottom end and remove the older GCN1.0 OEM parts, if they are shortly releasing a complete top to bottom new range based on Vega.

It makes sense as they need to move on completely from GCN 1.0 asap and Vega is unlikely to bring anything extra special. These small chips are primarily about driving displays with suitable hardware acceleration and connectivity available and GCN 1.0 lags far behind. (HDMI 2, DP1.4, HDR, h.265 etc and is also 28nm so higher power and heat than necessary).
Considering how late this is arriving there is also no reason why Polaris 12 cannot have an updated display/multimedia hardware equivalent to Vega's, iirc they have done updates like this within generations in the past.

D.P. · 23 Dec 2016 at 16:36

LoadsaMoney said:
Surprised they're replacing Polaris already, although may just be like the 290s.

Something obviously went wrong with Polaris, as they showed it months before release (think it was last year), against that Nvidia card (which i can't remember what was now), and it was sucking way less power than it, but when it came out, it sucked as much/if not more than the 1080.

It was just clever AMD Marketing. There were no settings provided, or performance figures. so of course AMD found something that showed their 14nm produce doing OK against Nvidias previous gen 28nm product and letting the fanboys run wild with it.

humbug · 23 Dec 2016 at 16:43

Something did go wrong with Polaris, the PCB was a 150 Watt PCB wich is why they had to draw more from the PCIe, clearly AMD did not design that card to be anything more than a maximum 150 watt card.

Later Polaris chips such as some of the recent XFX GTR 480's are using 40% less power, 85 watts core down from 135 watts.

Deathroned · 23 Dec 2016 at 16:43

LoadsaMoney said:
New AMD Polaris 12 and Vega 10 Chips Pass RRA Certification – ‘Radeon RX 490’ 4K VR Flagship Graphics Card Inbound

http://wccftech.com/polaris-12-vega-10-rra-certification-rx-490/

LoadsaHype at it again.

Deathroned · 23 Dec 2016 at 16:55

Rroff said:
Are you getting paid commission?

I have a feeling, LoadsaHype is actually Hassan Mutjaba lol.

mahius · 23 Dec 2016 at 17:03

JediFragger said:
Agreed, I even expect it now in order to keep costs reasonable

If it sits between the 1070 and 1080 and is priced accordingly it'll be a success

By priced accordingly, any price that makes it a better value for money than the 1070/1080, i.e. not just priced around what Nvidia has already put out, like they did with 300 series and the Fury/Nano. That launch was just disappointing for that one reason alone (priced according to Nvidia's cards).

LoadsaMoney · 23 Dec 2016 at 17:40

Deathroned said:
I have a feeling, LoadsaHype is actually Hassan Mutjaba lol.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 23 Dec 2016 at 18:08

Well those leaked ES results of AMD Ryzen actually look much better than expected,so lets see if the Vega hype tram actually pans out.

flopper · 23 Dec 2016 at 18:12

humbug said:
Something did go wrong with Polaris, the PCB was a 150 Watt PCB wich is why they had to draw more from the PCIe, clearly AMD did not design that card to be anything more than a maximum 150 watt card.

Later Polaris chips such as some of the recent XFX GTR 480's are using 40% less power, 85 watts core down from 135 watts.

Vega seems to have a redefined designed shader way more efficient than Polaris even.

Doom112 · 24 Dec 2016 at 02:18

flopper said:
Vega seems to have a redefined designed shader way more efficient than Polaris even.

Not way more.Max it will be only 10% more efficient or it will be same ,however, only front end will be more better than Fury X. It will be a redesign of Fury X from the bottom.

Bonjour · 24 Dec 2016 at 02:30

Doom112 said:
Not way more.Max it will be only 10% more efficient or it will be same ,however, only front end will be more better than Fury X. It will be a redesign of Fury X from the bottom.

And you know this how, exactly?

nashathedog · 24 Dec 2016 at 07:32

Bonjour said:
And you know this how, exactly?

The hue suggests corruption by the darkside

Steampunk · 24 Dec 2016 at 09:56

Doom112 said:
Not way more.Max it will be only 10% more efficient or it will be same ,however, only front end will be more better than Fury X. It will be a redesign of Fury X from the bottom.

I hope that AMD will have made big improvements here. Maybe they've finally realised there's no point in making all these powerful compute units if there's no way to keep them fully utilised in real world applications. It's such low-hanging fruit to gain performance if it's a glaring weakness, hence the improvements in the job scheduling.

maonayze · 24 Dec 2016 at 15:49

D.P. said:
It was just clever AMD Marketing.

Now there's something you don't hear every day

Kaapstad · 24 Dec 2016 at 16:25

flopper said:
Vega seems to have a redefined designed shader way more efficient than Polaris even.

People are wasting far too much time on debating specs as unless you know the full picture, taken in isolation individual specs are totally useless.

I just want to know how AMDs new CPUs and GPUs perform, I will worry about the specs later.

queamin · 24 Dec 2016 at 16:55

Kaapstad said:
People are wasting far too much time on debating specs as unless you know the full picture, taken in isolation individual specs are totally useless.

I just want to know how AMDs new CPUs and GPUs perform, I will worry about the specs later.

I agree with this.