AMD VEGA confirmed for 2017 H1

[humbug]

My 780GHz was more expensive than the 290 - but cheaper than most of the 290X and on release in most games it beat out the 290X in some cases by a reasonable amount and was mostly ahead of the 290X OC models and continued to do so for a good 2 years until the 290 cards started to come upto parity by which time all those cards are old news really - they've only been saved a bit by the length of time we had been on 28nm, AMD's failure to push the performance envelop and nVidia trickling out performance up ticks. In any other generation those cards would have been completely irrelevant by now late performance bump or not.

The pair of you are exaggerating to bolster your arguments, it was not 2 years before the Hawaii SKU caught up, it beat the Titan-X on day one, the 780TI was nVidias reaction to the 290X beating the Titan-X.
AMD released better Hawaii optimised drivers soon after (moths) which pushed the 290X to parity with the 780TI, from there on the 780TI started to fall behind, as for the 780, the 7970 GE / 280X was starting to catch that.

 

[Rroff]

The 780 was always more expensive than the 290 and even very early on there was little difference between them, the 290X beat the Titan-X on lauch, the 290 was not far behind.

You could get 290's for sub £300 just a couple months after it launched, mine was one of the midrange ones at £320, the 780 was never anything like that cheap until it was EOL.

I just quickly totalled up the results over the launch reviews of the 780GHz edition - unfortunately they don't all have the original Titan - over a wide range of games in early 2014:

780Ti - 100%
780GHz - 98.5%
290X - 91%
780 - 88%
290 - 83%

The pair of you are exaggerating to bolster your arguments, it was not 2 years before the Hawaii SKU caught up, it beat the Titan-X on day one, the 780TI was nVidias reaction to the 290X beating the Titan-X.
AMD released better Hawaii optimised drivers soon after (moths) which pushed the 290X to parity with the 780TI, from there on the 780TI started to fall behind, as for the 780, the 7970 GE / 280X was starting to catch that.

Sorry that is rubbish - a year on as per my quick numbers above the Kepler cards still enjoyed a reasonable lead - I have a friend who owned a 290X Tri-X about the same time as I had my 780 and it was all of 2 years until he was consistently matching or beating me on performance - sure around 18 months in his card had made up a lot of ground but it was all of 2 years until it was comprehensive.

 

[RavenXXX2]

And that was with the 290 throttling due to the crap reference cooler, once third party cards arrived on the scene it was game over for the titan.

 

[humbug]

Release review of the reference 290/X, average across 20 games.

 

[TheRealDeal]

I just quickly totalled up the results over the launch reviews of the 780GHz edition - unfortunately they don't all have the original Titan - over a wide range of games in early 2014:

780Ti - 100%
780GHz - 98.5%
290X - 91%
780 - 88%
290 - 83%



Sorry that is rubbish - a year on as per my quick numbers above the Kepler cards still enjoyed a reasonable lead - I have a friend who owned a 290X Tri-X about the same time as I had my 780 and it was all of 2 years until he was consistently matching or beating me on performance.

A year on from release of the 290x/780ti the Maxwell cards released and we saw what happened to Kepler and what continues to happen. Remember the gtx780 released before the ti and 290's.

 

[nashathedog]

The pair of you are exaggerating to bolster your arguments, it was not 2 years before the Hawaii SKU caught up, it beat the Titan-X on day one, the 780TI was nVidias reaction to the 290X beating the Titan-X.
AMD released better Hawaii optimised drivers soon after (moths) which pushed the 290X to parity with the 780TI, from there on the 780TI started to fall behind, as for the 780, the 7970 GE / 280X was starting to catch that.

We had Omega and Crimson which gave a big performance boost. It was a Titan not a Titan X though and the Titan Black that got released with the 780ti to retake the top spot with a 10 or so percent lead over the 290x initially. If my 290x had not been a POS MSI gaming with 90 degree temps I would have not moved on to the Fury and instead waited.

 

[humbug]

I just quickly totalled up the results over the launch reviews of the 780GHz edition - unfortunately they don't all have the original Titan - over a wide range of games in early 2014:

780Ti - 100%
780GHz - 98.5%
290X - 91%
780 - 88%
290 - 83%



Sorry that is rubbish - a year on as per my quick numbers above the Kepler cards still enjoyed a reasonable lead - I have a friend who owned a 290X Tri-X about the same time as I had my 780 and it was all of 2 years until he was consistently matching or beating me on performance - sure around 18 months in his card had made up a lot of ground but it was all of 2 years until it was comprehensive.

Your sums are wrong...... again this is the actual release day review, on those throttling blower coolers no less.

 

[nashathedog]

Pricing on the 290 and 290x went silly for a while due to miners so they did cost more than the big Kepler cards and what they should have for a while (bar the Titan & Titan Black)

 

[Rroff]

Your sums are wrong...... again this is the actual release day review, on those throttling blower coolers no less.

Nope I've literally averaged up (started doing it awhile back due to an earlier dispute with Cat) the results as of a year after release of those cards as per a bunch of reviews done on release of the GHz edition - which is pretty accurate as to how they stacked up with drivers, etc. at that point over a wide range of as then released games.

 

[humbug]

Nope I've literally averaged up (started doing it awhile back due to an earlier dispute with Cat) the results as of a year after release of those cards as per a bunch of reviews done on release of the GHz edition - which is pretty accurate as to how they stacked up with drivers, etc. at that point over a wide range of as then released games.

Its your word against proven reality. stop, just stop....

 

[Rroff]

Its your word against proven reality. stop, just stop....

No please - google for yourself "GTX780 GHz review" these are mostly around Jan-March 2014 if you want to spend a lot of time adding up all the numbers over half a dozen different reviews you'll come to the same as what I have. Or just skimming through a few of them I think you'll find the results a little different to your memory of events - here are a few to get you started:

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2014/03/14/gigabyte-geforce-gtx-780-ghz-edition-review/1

http://www.eteknix.com/gigabyte-gtx-780-windforce-oc-ghz-edition-3gb-graphics-card-review/

http://www.vortez.net/articles_pages/gigabyte_gtx_780_ghz_edition_review,1.html

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014...0_ghz_edition_video_card_review/#.WIDh9n19EjU

http://www.techspot.com/review/738-gigabyte-geforce-gtx-780-ti-ghz/

http://www.pureoverclock.com/Review-detail/gigabyte-gtx-780-ghz-edition-review/

 

[humbug]

Thats a collection of reviews of an overclocked AIB card ^^^^^ apples for oranges, since when has that been acceptable?

This one was done a year after, all reference clocks. the 290X without its throttling cooler is 6% behind the 780TI, just outside margins of error, thats hardly the 780 none TI beating it is it?

 

[KillBoY_UK]

The GTX 780 came out a good 6 months before R290/x and so only had the 1st Titian and 7970/7970 ghz to deal with. GTX 780 ti and R290/x came out within a couple of weeks of each other.

 

[MyBrainz]

You guys wana do your Nvidia vs AMD somewhere else please?

I cam here to see if theres any new Vega news..

Jesus.

 

[humbug]

You guys wana do your Nvidia vs AMD somewhere else please?

I cam here to see if theres any new Vega news..

Jesus.

I'm happy to leave it there if Roff is.

 

[Rroff]

Thats a collection of reviews of an overclocked AIB card ^^^^^ apples for oranges, since when has that been acceptable?

This one was done a year after, all reference clocks. the 290X without its throttling cooler is 6% behind the 780TI, just outside margins of error, thats hardly the 780 none TI beating it is it?

Uh what? they also include results for the stock 780, 780ti, 290 and 290X including OC models so its possible to get numbers for a wide range of setups and scenarios not just the 780GHz and by having a wide range of results helps to eliminate testing errors or bias, etc. I'm not just taking my results from one site's roundup that happens to show what I want to see.

 

[humbug]

Uh what? they also include results for the stock 780, 780ti, 290 and 290X including OC models so its possible to get numbers for a wide range of setups and scenarios not just the 780GHz and by having a wide range of results helps to eliminate testing errors or bias, etc.

Its a Gigabyte Windforce 780 OC, TPU reviewed the same card at the same time and had it faster than the GTX Titan, i have a Windforce OC 970, it runs 1354Mhz without touching it, this despite 1253Mhz written in the specifications, 15%+ faster than the reference one again without touching it, it matches the 6GB 1060 reference, does that mean its just as fast? no! you can OC the 1060 too.
Using apples for apples the 290 is and always has been faster than the 780, the 290X faster than the Titan and a several percent behind the 780TI, thats a far cry from the claim that started this, i'm not going to post the slide unless you don't believe me.
i just want to let this thread move on now.

 

[Rroff]

Its a Gigabyte Windforce 780 OC, TPU reviewed the same card at the same time and had it faster than the GTX Titan, i have a Windforce OC 970, it runs 1354Mhz without touching it, this despite 1253Mhz written in the specifications, 15%+ faster than the reference one again without touching it, it matches the 6GB 1060 reference, does that mean its just as fast? no! you can OC the 1060 too.

What are you even talking about? has absolutely no bearing on what I've posted above.

EDIT: Think you are missing the point - I just spammed some links - not necessarily the ones I used - as a point of reference - I went over a bunch of those reviews and pulled out numbers over a range of scenarios from benchmarks where the appropriate cards were compared and averaged them.

 

[Rezident]

I dunno. I prefer a card that performs well now and gets faster in the future, as opposed to one that performs well now and gets slower when the vendor wants to sell something new and gimps your drivers.

Forward looking tech means a product with a longer life, which is good for the consumer.

Yes the way AMD cards get faster over time is really good actually. My 290 was a legendary card in this regard. Even the much derided, “bottlenecked “ etc. Fiji card I’m using now, seemed to struggle a bit with Hitman at 1440p on launch last year, but now that I’ve gone back to Hitman it plays it perfectly. No stutters at all, even on that engine. It’s even playing DXMD fine now, and nobody seemed to be able to get that game to perform properly on launch. Honestly I don’t even need a gpu upgrade anymore (although I still want one of course), which is good considering there’s nothing available!

 

[JediFragger]

You guys wana do your Nvidia vs AMD somewhere else please?

I cam here to see if theres any new Vega news..

Jesus.

They say Jesus saves!! Just not anyone in this thread....