AMD VEGA confirmed for 2017 H1

LoadsaMoney · 9 Jan 2017 at 13:23

They should stop conecentrating on the future, and do the here and now like Nvidia.

People will be buying cards on the release day, if Vega is getting whooped off the 1080 on that day, then the 1080 will be bought on that day, its no good anyone saying, but Vega whoops it in Vulkan, Dx12, when we've only got one Vulkan game, and a couple or so patched laters Dx11s, as by the time we have a good decent amount of Vulkan games, and proper Dx12 ones, both these cards will be well old, and have been surpassed by newer/better ones, the 1070/80 are already about 8 months old now, by the time Vega hits, they'll be a year+.

All this rubbish about AMD being the best for Vulkan and Dx12, as in the one game that uses Vulkan, and the couple of Dx11s patched laters to Dx12, they are showing the biggest boost, and being up with/besting Nvidias cards (bar Tombi which is a Nvidia game), is laughable, as Nvidia don't give a crap yet, they are the here and now, they ain't gona concentrate on getting a single game running better on their cards than AMDs now, or a couple of patched laters Dx11s, they'll wait until all those games are here, those APIs are properly used, and we have more than a couple or so games out using them, then they'll show us how crap they are in em compared to AMD.

Just remember the tessellation, AMD had it on their cards for years before Nvidias, and we all know what happened there

TheRealDeal · 9 Jan 2017 at 13:38

LoadsaMoney said:
Yes in Vulkans one game, which we all know, gives AMD a good boost of 20+ fps.

It gives AMD a good boost over Open Gl where they are poor. What Vulkan does is merely show the full potential of the AMD cards. Vulkan is the true potential of what AMD have on the market. It's not like the Nvidia cards are slow in this game either. If Vega is able to offer up most of it's potential in dx11 then Vulkan is showing what performance will be like in a multitude of games.

fs123 · 9 Jan 2017 at 13:48

TheRealDeal said:
It gives AMD a good boost over Open Gl where they are poor. What Vulkan does is merely show the full potential of the AMD cards. Vulkan is the true potential of what AMD have on the market. It's not like the Nvidia cards are slow in this game either. If Vega is able to offer up most of it's potential in dx11 then Vulkan is showing what performance will be like in a multitude of games.

Even Raja says in the PCworld interview that they neglected OpenGL due to resources and there are certain extensions missing from their OpenGL driver. Vulkan is based on Mantle so has the full feature set required by Doom hence why Vulkan Doom runs optimally.

humbug · 9 Jan 2017 at 13:56

fs123 said:
Even Raja says in the PCworld interview that they neglected OpenGL due to resources and there are certain extensions missing from their OpenGL driver. Vulkan is based on Mantle so has the full feature set required by Doom hence why Vulkan Doom runs optimally.

He also said it would beat the 1080 even in OpenGL.

LoadsaMoney · 9 Jan 2017 at 13:59

humbug said:
He also said it would beat the 1080 even in OpenGL.

Lets see it then, and some Dx11.

shankly1985 · 9 Jan 2017 at 14:01

LoadsaMoney said:
They should stop conecentrating on the future, and do the here and now like Nvidia.

People will be buying cards on the release day, if Vega is getting whooped off the 1080 on that day, then the 1080 will be bought on that day, its no good anyone saying, but Vega whoops it in Vulkan, Dx12, when we've only got one Vulkan game, and a couple or so patched laters Dx11s, as by the time we have a good decent amount of Vulkan games, and proper Dx12 ones, both these cards will be well old, and have been surpassed by newer/better ones, the 1070/80 are already about 8 months old now, by the time Vega hits, they'll be a year+.

All this rubbish about AMD being the best for Vulkan and Dx12, as in the one game that uses Vulkan, and the couple of Dx11s patched laters to Dx12, they are showing the biggest boost, and being up with/besting Nvidias cards (bar Tombi which is a Nvidia game), is laughable, as Nvidia don't give a crap yet, they are the here and now, they ain't gona concentrate on getting a single game running better on their cards than AMDs now, or a couple of patched laters Dx11s, they'll wait until all those games are here, those APIs are properly used, and we have more than a couple or so games out using them, then they'll show us how crap they are in em.

Just remember the tessellation

But they is so much more that people take into consideration.
Even if the VEGA 10 is 10 FPS slower on avg depending on price plus Price on a Freesync Monitor its not all too bad.

The only people making it out to be bad is guys looking for GPU wars. I have never understood bragging rights when we talking about GPUs
and they is a very good reason, high end GPUs gains between them are so small you would never see the difference in a game!

GTX 1080 avg 70fps vs VEGA avg 60fps you wont notice this at all
And this is always the case when we compare current Gen GPUs.

Lets be real here for time being, the minority of PC gamers dont care about AMD vs Nvidia they buy what they see is an upgrade..

Said it before Vulkan and DX12 is happening now! 2017 will be a big year so why not make GPUs too take advantage of all this?
Would you be saying the same thing back when DX9 was the big player and DX11 was coming along? would you want AMD and Nvidia too ignore DX11 "FUTURE"?
Why hang in the past Loads?? lol

nashathedog · 9 Jan 2017 at 14:18

What I would ideally like is Vega to match the 1080 in all the DX 9, 10 & 11 titles that are already out, Vulcan which as TheRealDeal said shows the cards full potential has the card in the same ballpark as a 1080, maybe a bit better, Going on how previous AMD cards compare across api's that makes it appear to be a slower card in DX 9, 10 & 11.

However we do not know what's been changed with NCU that may make a difference so we'll have to wait and see, It's possible that they've caught up in that respect, I'm hoping they have as I'm buying one regardless providing they haven't totally screwed it up and I'm pretty sure haven't.

LoadsaMoney · 9 Jan 2017 at 14:29

shankly1985 said:
Said it before Vulkan and DX12 is happening now! 2017 will be a big year so why not make GPUs too take advantage of all this?

Right, so we'll have Vulkan and proper Dx12 games out in good numbers this year then ey ?

I can't see it myself.

nashathedog said:
What I would ideally like is Vega to match the 1080 in all the DX 9, 10 & 11 titles that are already out, Vulcan which as TheRealDeal said shows the cards full potential has the card in the same ballpark as a 1080, maybe a bit better, Going on how previous AMD cards compare across api's that makes it appear to be a slower card in DX 9, 10 & 11.

However we do not know what's been changed with NCU that may make a difference so we'll have to wait and see, It's possible that they've caught up in that respect, I'm hoping they have as I'm buying one regardless providing they haven't totally screwed it up and I'm pretty sure haven't.

Same, Dx11 will still be here for some time yet, were still waiting for all those Dx12 games Microsoft said would be out at Christmas 2014, when they announced Dx12, i think they said be about 25 of em or something, well where the hell are they ?, its 2017 now!

Toss3 · 9 Jan 2017 at 14:47

nashathedog said:
What I would ideally like is Vega to match the 1080 in all the DX 9, 10 & 11 titles that are already out, Vulcan which as TheRealDeal said shows the cards full potential has the card in the same ballpark as a 1080, maybe a bit better, Going on how previous AMD cards compare across api's that makes it appear to be a slower card in DX 9, 10 & 11.

However we do not know what's been changed with NCU that may make a difference so we'll have to wait and see, It's possible that they've caught up in that respect, I'm hoping they have as I'm buying one regardless providing they haven't totally screwed it up and I'm pretty sure haven't.

Can't really judge based on that benchmark; we have no idea what clockspeeds the CPU/GPU were running at and the drivers are probably far from optimized at this point (keep in mind that it isn't launching until may/june).

I assume what they used was an instinct MI25 (looks a lot like it from the pics people took of the setup).

shankly1985 · 9 Jan 2017 at 14:51

LoadsaMoney said:
Right, so we'll have Vulkan and proper Dx12 games out in good numbers this year then ey ?

I can't see it myself.

Same, Dx11 will still be here for some time yet, were still waiting for all those Dx12 games Microsoft said would be out at Christmas 2014, when they announced Dx12, i think they said be about 25 of em or something, well where the hell are they ?, its 2017 now!

And yet the same thing happened with DX11 games it taken awhile before that really taken off and till games started using it fully.
We had a load of games with DX9 + DX11 added in just like now DX11 + DX12
We should soon start seeing DX11 fade out, and when them games did have full advantage of DX11 we had the GPUs too back them up.
How can you expect the PC gaming industry to move forward if AMD and Nvidia dont help game devs move forward??
they would be no DX11 or DX12 or Vulkan if it wasn't for the GPU support.

Outandbout · 9 Jan 2017 at 15:12

FoxEye said:
It's amazing that a company that's been around as long as AMD has, still has not the faintest clue about what constitutes a good marketing/ PR campaign.

Mind-boggling, even.

I know right ....

I will give AMD marketing this one for free ...

Vega in Vegas CES i think they missed a big one here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ui0EgRsFVN8

LoadsaMoney · 9 Jan 2017 at 15:12

Im all for moving forward, but AMD won't sell many cards if they are getting beaten in all those games that are here now, and will be for quite some time to come, as Dx12s been a massive fail so far imo, but up with and beating Nvidia in upcoming future ones.

They have to be great at the here and now as well, not just the future, as i said, when the Vega reviews come out, if the 1080 is beating it, in thousands of games, and Vega is only beating it in the one Vulkan one, and the couple of Dx11 patched laters to Dx12 ones, no ones going to buy a one, doesn't matter that in the next few years to come, Vega will be faster in a few more, as they will already have lost the sales, like they did with the Fury, when that was hardly any faster than the 980 when it came out, 980Ti sales must have gone through the roof, what good was it months later being up with, and beating the Ti after a few more drivers, it was no good, as the sales had already gone, just like the 480s had gone when that followed, and it was only 970 performance, and slower than the 1060.

shankly1985 · 9 Jan 2017 at 15:16

And what numbers to you would smashing it come under?

Because from my understanding when a current Gen GPU vs current Gen they is never any smashing going on its more likely a tiny difference that none of us would even feel in a game.

You guys on here make these performances difference much worse than they really are lol
10fps Vega getting smashed Rip AMD xd

LoadsaMoney · 9 Jan 2017 at 15:32

shankly1985 said:
And what numbers to you would smashing it come under?

Because from my understanding when a current Gen GPU vs current Gen they is never any smashing going on its more likely a tiny difference that none of us would even feel in a game.

You guys on here make these performances difference much worse than they really are lol
10fps Vega getting smashed Rip AMD xd

10fps is nothing, if you're getting 100fps on Nvidia, and 90fps on AMD, then you wont notice the difference while playing, but the fact is, that extra 10fps the Nvidia card is getting, will see them hammering AMD on sales.

shankly1985 · 9 Jan 2017 at 15:35

LoadsaMoney said:
10fps is nothing, if you're getting 100fps on Nvidia, and 90fps on AMD, then you wont notice the difference while playing, but the fact is, that extra 10fps the Nvidia card is getting, will see them hammering AMD on sales.

But that's just what most on here believe. When the truth is people don't look at this when buying a new GPU they look at what they currently have and compared to that performance Is it an upgrade?

These Forums dig way too deep into all this GPU War!

AMD Rx 480 has sold really well for AMD and even gained massive share price vs last year alone. so the 1060 doing better at the start hasn't really effected much tbh

KillBoY_UK · 9 Jan 2017 at 15:40

humbug said:
He also said it would beat the 1080 even in OpenGL.

The only other windows PC game I know off that used OpenGL as it primary API in 2016 other than Doom was No man's sky, boy has it been years since we have had more than one big open GL game in a year!

akarypid · 9 Jan 2017 at 15:57

LoadsaMoney said:
Im all for moving forward, but AMD won't sell many cards if they are getting beaten in all those games that are here now, and will be for quite some time to come, as Dx12s been a massive fail so far imo, but up with and beating Nvidia in upcoming future ones.

They have to be great at the here and now as well, not just the future, as i said, when the Vega reviews come out, if the 1080 is beating it, in thousands of games, and Vega is only beating it in the one Vulkan one, and the couple of Dx11 patched laters to Dx12 ones, no ones going to buy a one, doesn't matter that in the next few years to come, Vega will be faster in a few more, as they will already have lost the sales, like they did with the Fury, when that was hardly any faster than the 980 when it came out, 980Ti sales must have gone through the roof, what good was it months later being up with, and beating the Ti after a few more drivers, it was no good, as the sales had already gone, just like the 480s had gone when that followed, and it was only 970 performance, and slower than the 1060.

Look, as reasonable as all this sounds, a lot of GCN's design was driven no by DX11 but by consoles. As console-style APIs finally become mainstream on the PC, the whole thing is finally playing right into AMD's hands, but in the meantime, they had to suffer. And it was a choice they made, nobody forced them.

As evidenced by the recent improved drivers and the Vega architectural changes: it wasn't all consoles. Drivers could've been sorted out much earlier (and still require work). Tile-based rasterisation was a game changer that caught AMD off-guard, yet they are only now incorporating it into GCN with Vega. Designing hardware to address the fact that consoles were hitting their limit - when the PC was NOT hitting its limit - was a choice they made (ACEs and async compute for a multi-threaded world, unlike the DX11 model). Their CPUs used in consoles could only scale with this model whereas PCs needed super-fast single-threaded performance...

This is part of doing business and Nvidia was better at it, which is why they pulled ahead.

AMD may have been the victim of whatever 'nasty business practices' people say Nvidia/Intel used, but for the most part: AMD deserves its fortunes.

For example, AMD did not invest in drivers and everyone blames lack of resources, yet Polaris has had the most impressive driver releases in the past 5 years and it was released when the company was in its most dire financial state. Why is that? Internal organisation: one of the things Koduri changed when he came back was that he took over both hardware AND software side in RTG. Developers in his group are accountable to him and managed based on Radeon priorities and schedules.

They actually bother to work on the drivers before the new card is launched. They bother to optimise games near their release date. We no longer have that sick 'oh, let's pick up this pending old task for the next release and optimise this old game that we neglected' instead of preparing for the next AAA title around the corner.

Bad things happened to AMD and they deserved most of them. Fortunately, the people in charge now seem to know how to run the business.

LoadsaMoney · 9 Jan 2017 at 16:07

Well the 480 seems to have addressed their Dx11 performance, as its up with Nvidias now (1060), so hopefully thats been carried forward to Vega, we'll just have to wait and see, if it has, then they'll get my money

akarypid · 9 Jan 2017 at 16:18

LoadsaMoney said:
Well the 480 seems to have addressed their Dx11 performance, as its up with Nvidias now (1060), so hopefully thats been carried forward to Vega, we'll just have to wait and see, if it has, then they'll get my money

5 years late... Plus it has the primitive discard accelerator...

Really, it's like Raja Koduri came in and asked the team: 'guys, why do we suck'? And he got:

"The drivers suck! We never get time to speak with the devs, they're off somewhere doing their own thing while we do ours"

"Our card spends half its time drawing zero-size triangles. At first it was silly game-devs, but then the competition caught wind of it and made sure there's as many of them as possible in its sponsored titles!"

"We consume too much power because we draw entire screens instead of small chunks at a time, like the mobile graphics guys do. It's 10 year old tech from PowerVR yet we won't implement it."

Since then they're like doing the obvious and it's made so much difference... How is any of that Nvidia's fault?

Rroff · 9 Jan 2017 at 16:22

akarypid said:
Look, as reasonable as all this sounds, a lot of GCN's design was driven no by DX11 but by consoles. As console-style APIs finally become mainstream on the PC, the whole thing is finally playing right into AMD's hands, but in the meantime, they had to suffer. And it was a choice they made, nobody forced them.

Frankly I think this is a bit of a pipe dream - I don't think we will ever see such symbiosis between PC and console hardware or even the APIs that it is going to play out as as big advantage to AMD as some believe.

Infact I think if anything we are going to see a little more movement away from it - PC developers despite the romanticised vision actually rarely have the need or desire to work as close to the metal as console requires and I fully expect to see the next iteration of the APIs in PC space move back towards a hybrid position with more of the abstraction of older API but more ability to work at a lower level if required than typical of older APIs rather than DX12 and Vulkan that forced developers to get their hands a lot more dirty even to do the basic stuff. (one of the reasons DX12 adoption has been so slow is that it is a lot more work to get results out of it and developers in general, the odd gurus aside, don't like that).

And to be honest I think AMD is finally admitting this - if you look at the changes through Fiji, Polaris and now Vega the approach is changing towards a more focused core pipeline with less under-utilised wider compute functionality added at the expense of core performance.