• 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.
humbug said:
Yeah, but even if all i did was play games pre-2016 i would still wait on the 6 Core Ryzen, its current performance in old games at worst with a didcky Windows Schedular is still not at all bad, it will be £100 cheaper than the 7700K and in MT productivity tasks utterly destroy it and will less power consumption.

I you're not excited about whats happening in the world of CPU's right now you're mad, absolutely bonkers. this has been a long time coming.
Click to expand...

Oh certainly! The R5 1600X will be fantastic bang for buck, and the 1500X might even edge that out ( in older games, single threaded )since it will have a single CCX.
Where as the 1600X is a salvaged 1700/1800X.

Even so, it's clear more cores are needed. Ignoring Battlefield there; Dice has long been pushing for more cores.
Even games like For Honor showing significantly better minimums on Ryzen, Watch Dogs gobbling up 10 cores; and let's not forget a future GTA 6, and many other games. AMD's partnership with Bethesda as well; DOOM is a prime example of what can be done when those two work together.

I'm so excited for a competitive AMD; in both CPU and GPU markets. We'll all benefit from the competition, innovation and of course better prices.

Personally I'm sitting on my 5820K until Intel Coffee-Lake, and AMD Ryzen 2.0 before I build a new system. Got the CPU just after launch, and with newer games it's spreading it's legs even more. :D
 
silversurfer said:
Bf1 is probably one of the best examples of a modern game engine that will use every core, thats 1080p?
Click to expand...

In all GTA 5 720p and 1080p benchmarks the 7700k wins significantly over Ryzen, except it loses by 50% on minimums in 4K!
That's mental!

I'd give up some max FPS anyday if it means better minimums. The Titan X gets nearly a 50% increase in minimums with Ryzen in 4K, and all the other GPUs have improved minimums as well.

A shame they didn't also test Watch Dogs 2, as that game will happily use 10 CPU cores.

48a587975097413d8159691e589f8adf.png
 
N19h7m4r3 said:
In all GTA 5 720p and 1080p benchmarks the 7700k wins significantly over Ryzen, except it loses by 50% on minimums in 4K!
That's mental!

I'd give up some max FPS anyday if it means better minimums. The Titan X gets nearly a 50% increase in minimums with Ryzen in 4K, and all the other GPUs have improved minimums as well.
Click to expand...

Is there a graph or percentage of time at minimum FPS? its one thing if its a minor blip on the first frame of loading a map and another if its constantly dropping to minimum FPS.
 
Rroff said:
Is there a graph or percentage of time at minimum FPS? its one thing if its a minor blip on the first frame of loading a map and another if its constantly dropping to minimum FPS.
Click to expand...

Not that Linus has released, there are no 4K frametimes for Ryzen vs 7700K yet sadly.

PCPer only tested the 1080Ti on a 5960X, and included all the Frame testing goodies.
 
humbug said:
Yeah, but even if all i did was play pre-2016 games i would still wait on the 6 Core Ryzen, its current performance in old games at worst with a dicky Windows Scheduler is still not at all bad, it will be £100 cheaper than the 7700K and in MT productivity tasks utterly destroy it and with less power consumption.

I you're not excited about what's happening in the world of CPU's right now you're mad, absolutely bonkers. this has been a long time coming.

Oh and Intel, your mainstream chips don't have enough cores....

cfnh.png
Click to expand...

Did not not just promise to stop banging on about Ryzen just a few posts back, yet......
 
looks like the 1080 Ti FE coolers aren't up to much which buys AMD a little longer, I think the tricky thing in all this is an AMD customer moving on to enthusiast Nvidia hardware is a customer potentially lost to AMD for many years
 
BigBANGtheory said:
looks like the 1080 Ti FE coolers aren't up to much which buys AMD a little longer, I think the tricky thing in all this is an AMD customer moving on to enthusiast Nvidia hardware is a customer potentially lost to AMD for many years
Click to expand...

I wasn't going to watercool so these reviews have motivated me to atleast wait for custom cards now.
 
TheRealDeal said:
You are correct. Fury Pro never came with a reference cooler. Thank god :D:D:D.
Click to expand...
On a tiny board also...... But suprisingly AMDMatt has managed to overclock the single cores to 1200!!!!!!!!

Anyhow. AMD has shown that they provide some decent support these days, but goes completely in silence.
Two points. The UEFI Bios they released last April, almost 10 months after the FuryX & Nano came out, is allowing better overclocks and higher performance. How many do you believe upgraded their cards with them?
I did upgraded my Nano and straight away was able to overclock it from meagre 1070/520 to 1130/550 with some benchmarks running at 1140/550.
As I am going to do the second hand FuryX got last night in bargain price. Going to see how far it can go, given that isn't power starved as Nano is.

Also drivers. Last 5 consecutive drivers alone, the Nano got 0.7-1% per driver update.
I have some benchmarks on firestrike and Spy at constant 1100/550 and can show that the performance boost is there all the time between drivers over the last 6 months since I bought the 3D Mark package. (was benching the GTX1080 then).
Only with the 16.11 drivers didn't got perf changes.

So lets hope that Vega delivers. Ofc I am a consumer and if the Vega chip doesn't deliver I will switch to the 1080Ti.
CF FuryXs isn't for the long term.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom