• 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.

AMD VEGA confirmed for 2017 H1

Status
Not open for further replies.
flopper said:
Single cards offer a better gaming experience..
Click to expand...

This is true. I have 1080 SLi but just lately the latencies are killing me! Never used to bother me, so just wonder if it's down to poor support of late...

Been testing them with my LG this week and forcing Fastsync (and a load of other settings) but I just can't seem to get them as good as one card.
 
Not sure if posted already but here's DOOM@4K running on Ryzen and VEGA at CES. Filmed by HotHardware.


Appears to be averaging around 70fps 65fps.
 
Last edited:
JediFragger said:
Hopefully the Fury drivers it's running on is reallllllllllly dragging it down!! Or it's only as fast as an after-market 980Ti!! :D


edit - I love how the guy says north of 70fps and zooms in and it's running 65ish :D:D
Click to expand...

The game seems to fluctuate from 55fps to 85fps depending on amount of action on screen. I found a Portugeuse video with a bit longer playthrough and it appears to average 70fps. The cpu speed is unknown too so we don't know if the clockspeed is actually boosting to 4GHz or not. If it's locked to 3.4GHz then it is impressive I guess.

 
Rroff said:
AMD need to be delivery at the very least 30% faster than the 1070 across the board never mind the FX or they might as well not bother at this point.
Click to expand...

Depends what they charge for it, 1070 performance at a cheaper price will still sell well enough.
 
Just saw a post on Zen thread and read very interesting link.

http://techbuyersguru.com/ces-2017-amds-ryzen-and-vega-revealed?page=0

Turn over to page 2 about Vega and found something very interesting Scott Wasson, AMD head of Marketing said about Vega:

Scott made clear that this is very much a next-gen product, but that many of the cutting-edge features of Vega cannot be utilized natively by DX12, let alone DX11. For example, Vega's next-gen compute engine, called the "NCU" (replacing the "CU"), offers flexible 8-bit, 16-bit, and 32-bit operations, but that these must be coded for directly.
Click to expand...

So Vega is really not a DirectX 11 and DirectX 12 as well as Vulkan 1.0 chip but it is next gen chip designed for next gen DirectX 13 and Vulkan 2.0!

Both next gen Vega and Volta will need to wait for DirectX 13 and Vulkan 2.0 to exposed all next gen hardware features that did not existed in DirectX 11, DirectX 12 and Vulkan 1.0. Think we will see DirectX 13 and Vulkan 2.0 next year in 2018 just in time for Volta launch.
 
Last edited:
So, great for all the guys that buy to last 5 years but not so great to compare to current nVidia cards? Hell, now I'm *really* thinking approx 1080-ish performance!! :eek:

Overall probably a good thing regarding the feature-set, but will Joe Bloggs even care when the benchmarks show it not being as good as its potential??
 
AthlonXP1800 said:
So Vega is really not a DirectX 11 and DirectX 12 as well as Vulkan 1.0 chip but it is next gen chip designed for next gen DirectX 13 and Vulkan 2.0!
Click to expand...

Sounds more like what nVidia do with vendor specific extensions - more useful to compute application programmers, etc. won't necessarily be utilised by future DX, etc. though might be utilised at driver level in some games, etc.
 
flopper said:
Single cards offer a better gaming experience.
Until developers figure out dx12 multi support.

Vega is a superb card incoming brighter and better and ready for those pixels in 4k.
Click to expand...

The point of my post is we are nearing the limits of what PCI-E 3.0 can do for single cards when using less than X16 as found on non X79/X99 boards.
 
I know it is a daft question but if Vega is as quick as some people are making out why are AMD using Pascal Titans to demo their Ryzen CPU v a 6900k on BF1 ?

I can understand using the fastest GPU available to expose a CPU bottleneck on the 6900k which runs @3.2ghz compared to Ryzen @3.4ghz+.

AMD doing the above though means they are saying they have nothing close to the Pascal Titan ATM to do the job with.

http://techbuyersguru.com/ces-2017-amds-ryzen-and-vega-revealed

This could all change though very quickly if AMD have faster GPUs in the pipeline that are not quite ready yet.
 
Kaapstad said:
I know it is a daft question but if Vega is as quick as some people are making out why are AMD using Pascal Titans to demo their Ryzen CPU v a 6900k on BF1 ?

I can understand using the fastest GPU available to expose a CPU bottleneck on the 6900k which runs @3.2ghz compared to Ryzen @3.4ghz+.

AMD doing the above though means they are saying they have nothing close to the Pascal Titan ATM to do the job with.

http://techbuyersguru.com/ces-2017-amds-ryzen-and-vega-revealed

This could all change though very quickly if AMD have faster GPUs in the pipeline that are not quite ready yet.
Click to expand...

I actually asked someone something very similar once in a similar set of circumstances and the answer was that the in development GPU especially software wise was still a work in progress and the last thing you want is stuff crashing, etc. in the middle of a presentation.

EDIT: Also in some circumstances due to the way nVidia handle certain stuff (software command lists, hooking API functions, etc.) they can be heavier on the CPU than AMD's GPU drivers.
 
Last edited:
Kaapstad said:
I know it is a daft question but if Vega is as quick as some people are making out why are AMD using Pascal Titans to demo their Ryzen CPU v a 6900k on BF1 ?

I can understand using the fastest GPU available to expose a CPU bottleneck on the 6900k which runs @3.2ghz compared to Ryzen @3.4ghz+.

AMD doing the above though means they are saying they have nothing close to the Pascal Titan ATM to do the job with.

http://techbuyersguru.com/ces-2017-amds-ryzen-and-vega-revealed

This could all change though very quickly if AMD have faster GPUs in the pipeline that are not quite ready yet.
Click to expand...

I would have thought it's because Vega is not out and the Titans are the fastest card on the market. They are trying to hide Vega performance. Using them would not be beneficial to this. Whether Vega craps all over Titan or not they won't be broad casting this to Nvidia either way.
 
AthlonXP1800 said:
Just saw a post on Zen thread and read very interesting link.

http://techbuyersguru.com/ces-2017-amds-ryzen-and-vega-revealed?page=0

Turn over to page 2 about Vega and found something very interesting Scott Wasson, AMD head of Marketing said about Vega:



So Vega is really not a DirectX 11 and DirectX 12 as well as Vulkan 1.0 chip but it is next gen chip designed for next gen DirectX 13 and Vulkan 2.0!

Both next gen Vega and Volta will need to wait for DirectX 13 and Vulkan 2.0 to exposed all next gen hardware features that did not existed in DirectX 11, DirectX 12 and Vulkan 1.0. Think we will see DirectX 13 and Vulkan 2.0 next year in 2018 just in time for Volta launch.
Click to expand...


This is the operations they are talking about. Game devs will need to code for either 16bit or 32bit. I doubt 8bit will be used much if at all because of how unpredictable it will be. I can remember Sony fanboys crying over their console being 8Tflops which is only in 16bit operations. This is the same thing.
 
Kaapstad said:
I know it is a daft question but if Vega is as quick as some people are making out why are AMD using Pascal Titans to demo their Ryzen CPU v a 6900k on BF1 ?

I can understand using the fastest GPU available to expose a CPU bottleneck on the 6900k which runs @3.2ghz compared to Ryzen @3.4ghz+.

AMD doing the above though means they are saying they have nothing close to the Pascal Titan ATM to do the job with.

http://techbuyersguru.com/ces-2017-amds-ryzen-and-vega-revealed

This could all change though very quickly if AMD have faster GPUs in the pipeline that are not quite ready yet.
Click to expand...

They don't have a complete working set of drivers yet for Vega? Could potentially lead to problems running the games like bugs etc. The card which we don't know much about was running on Furyx drivers which are not optimised for Vega seen as Vega is a new arch with the most architectural changes since GCN was introduced back in the 79xx series.
 
A friend of mine said it's going to be 1070 performance for rx480 price, so far I can't see any evidence to support his claim

Is he lying to me?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom