• 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.
TNA said:
How am I saying this? It is like you keep seeing things I am not saying.. lol. Not sure if on purpose doing a strawman :p
Click to expand...

Because you are saying that, you think you are saying something that AMD has not tried before, AMD has brought out Halo cards to compete with NVs Halo cards and it has not done nothing for them.

Yes there are a few who about AMDs Halo cards instead of NVs but it has not made any worth while difference. if it had then AMD would have released there TX, 1080, 1070, competing cards first and you keep saying relative So AMD brings out a £600 card with TitanXP performance NV brings out at £600 card with Better than TitanXP performance 1080Ti, so from what you are saying you are still going to buy the £600 AMD card.
 
My predictions, Big vega will top the 1080 but come in at £550-£600.
To counter this we will see Nvidia drop the price of the 1080 and unleash the 1080Ti to compete with AMD.
 
DazQ87 said:
My predictions, Big vega will top the 1080 but come in at £550-£600.
To counter this we will see Nvidia drop the price of the 1080 and unleash the 1080Ti to compete with AMD.
Click to expand...

And that is my point, because it has happened before, but for some reason it will work out better for AMD this time being in the same situation again.
 
Like how the Fury X was going to be a Titan killer, but didn't even beat out the 980, and how the 480 was supposedly inbetween the 390X and the Fury, to shift the performance for the minimum spec of VR up, but it didn't even beat out the 2yr old 970. :p
 
Final8y said:
Because you are saying that, you think you are saying something that AMD has not tried before, AMD has brought out Halo cards to compete with NVs Halo cards and it has not done nothing for them.

Yes there are a few who about AMDs Halo cards instead of NVs but it has not made any worth while difference. if it had then AMD would have released there TX, 1080, 1070, competing cards first and you keep saying relative So AMD brings out a £600 card with TitanXP performance NV brings out at £600 card with Better than TitanXP performance 1080Ti, so from what you are saying you are still going to buy the £600 AMD card.
Click to expand...

I am not saying that. I am not sure that you are reading all my posts or you are just set on seeing what you want to see.

All of what you just typed has nothing to do with what I said :p

Anyway, did you see what Humbug is saying? ;)

He thinks the card we are talking about now will not only be faster than what I said, but quite a bit cheaper too... I can imagine you thinking something along the lines of "AMD should charge more than Titan XP price if the product is better" or maybe "if they charge £50 less, they will make a killing at £1050".

Just does not make sense what you are saying to me. As a matter of fact, come to think about it (correct me if I am wrong), at first you started of saying why should AMD charge so much less than Titan XP to my original comment, £50 cheaper should do. Now you are saying stuff about a Halo product and it would not do AMD any good... Does not seem to match or compute :p

I never said anything about AMD releasing a Halo product. Leave that to Nvidia. I have said they need to be releasing a card that will compete with the 1170 which will not be that far away by the time Vega comes out. They can charge £500-600 for it initially and when Nvidia some months after release the 1170, they can just drop the price a bit. So you see, no Halo card or anything about that :D
 
LoadsaMoney said:
Like how the Fury X was going to be a Titan killer, but didn't even beat out the 980, and how the 480 was supposedly inbetween the 390X and the Fury, to shift the performance for the minimum spec of VR up, but it didn't even beat out the 2yr old 970. :p
Click to expand...

Thats the problem. Not considering cost here. AMD are still a good way behind nvidia in terms of architectural performance.

RX 480 being 50% slower than a 1080 for near enough the same specs.

They are going to need something special with vega if they are going to compete with volta.

At the minute polaris is struggling to compete with maxwell never mind pascal.

I'm more of a nvidia man, however I hope AMD succeed as this will push nvidia's pricing down. Which is getting out of hand at the minute.
 
TNA said:
I am not saying that. I am not sure that you are reading all my posts or you are just set on seeing what you want to see.

All of what you just typed has nothing to do with what I said :p

Anyway, did you see what Humbug is saying? ;)

He thinks the card we are talking about now will not only be faster than what I said, but quite a bit cheaper too... I can imagine you thinking something along the lines of "AMD should charge more than Titan XP price if the product is better" or maybe "if they charge £50 less, they will make a killing at £1050".

Just does not make sense what you are saying to me. As a matter of fact, come to think about it (correct me if I am wrong), at first you started of saying why should AMD charge so much less than Titan XP to my original comment, £50 cheaper should do. Now you are saying stuff about a Halo product and it would not do AMD any good... Does not seem to match or compute :p

I never said anything about AMD releasing a Halo product. Leave that to Nvidia. I have said they need to be releasing a card that will compete with the 1170 which will not be that far away by the time Vega comes out. They can charge £500-600 for it initially and when Nvidia some months after release the 1170, they can just drop the price a bit. So you see, no Halo card or anything about that :D
Click to expand...

Read my first comment, the premise is why should AMD always have to equal or beat NV cards for considerably less money for people to consider buying the AMD at the same performance, It would not be unreasonable for AMD to ask just £50 less, thats basically what my first comment is saying in less words.

My second point is not whether AMD could or not or will or not make a TitanXP card for £600 or not, my issue is that you think it would do wonders for AMD as if NV are not going to combat it and have something relative in performance for similar price because the only way its going to help AMDs bottom line is if NV don't combat it.

Notice that the FuryX is AOL, its still AMD fastest single gpu card but yet its AOL and they dont even have a card to match it or beat it, the FuryX was made because we can and not because they need to or because it was going to make worthwhile profit.


If AMD make a £600 TXP performance card it to say because we can and it may help there image and not because its something that AMD needs to do.

£500-600 for it initially and when Nvidia some months after release the 1170, they can just drop the price a bit.
Click to expand...

They did that with the 7970 and the 290, how did that work out.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Final8y said:
Read my first comment, the premise is why should AMD always have to equal or beat NV cards for considerably less money for people to consider buying the AMD at the same performance, It would not be unreasonable for AMD to ask just £50 less, thats basically what my first comment is saying in less words.
Click to expand...

I don't feel this way, not sure why you thought I do. The reality however is AMD are behind currently, they need to gain market share. They are not going to get that by releasing cards that are the same performance, cost the same or more than the competition (who has had them out for year at that point) who are quite a bit more popular and has better marketing.

The reason you seem to have got confused in my opinion is because you are seeing Vega as Pascal's competition only. But by the time Vega is out, Pascal will be way past half it's life cycle. Vega by the looks of it will be coming out a whole year after Pascal. Therefore it needs to be providing better price for performance, which is what happens as time moves on, is it not? Using this logic is how I came to my decision of Big Vega needing to be at least as fast as Titan XP and cost in the range of £500-600 for ME to be have any interest at all.

But you did not like what I said and we have been debating about a bunch of stuff not even related to my original post which you replied to ;)


Final8y said:
They did that with the 7970 and the 290, how did that work out.
Click to expand...

So what exactly is it you are suggesting they should do then?

I told you what it would take from AMD for me to buy a Vega card. Which you took issue with, hence this debate :p

So far from what you have said, you think they should charge £50 less than the competition, so £1050 or something then? Not sure how this helps them in any shape or form in their current position.


jjgreenwood said:
Are there any facts about price and/or performance or are we just arguing about nothing again?
Click to expand...


Nothing to see here. Move along.

All I said was what I expect and what it would take for me to buy Vega.
 
jimferno said:
At this point I expect Vega to be a smidge under the performance of a 1070 tbh.
Click to expand...

One year after the release of the 1070, AMD brings out a card with HBM 2 and it cannot even match the 1070?

LOL! Not sure if serious :D

That would mean that AMD using a much newer architecture, new much improved HBM 2 memory and a HUGE process shrink cannot even get 20-30% performance over their previous fastest card released 2 years before (which is how old Fury X would be by the time Vega is out).

Did I say LOL? :p:D


ToTheMax said:
It'll be a sad day for everyone, no one wants a monopoly at the high end except Nvidia.
Click to expand...

Judging by some posts I think some people may :p
 
Gerard said:
You keep saying this but never back it up with any evidence, the "hunting titans" graphic was a fake, this has been pointed out to you tons of times before yet you keep on with the "titan killer" routine.

This is the one you keep going on about:

http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-r9-300-series-fiji-xt-release-date/

Something somebody knocked up in photoshop.
Click to expand...

There was loads on here expecting it to be a Titan killer after that, it was hyped to absolute buggery, and so was the 480, was a £200 1070 that thing. :p

TNA said:
One year after the release of the 1070, AMD brings out a card with HBM 2 and it cannot even match the 1070?
Click to expand...

They should be matching it now, but they can't, and its not even their top card, as they have a faster 1080 above that, and an even faster than that TXP above that.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom