AMD VEGA confirmed for 2017 H1

opethdisciple · 26 Mar 2017 at 17:13

Panos said:
AMD doesn't have fastsync yet, which is what you asking for.

Ahhh nope. I'm referring to adaptive vsynch in the drivers!

Panos · 26 Mar 2017 at 17:28

opethdisciple said:
Ahhh nope. I'm referring to adaptive vsynch in the drivers!

Nvidia Adaptive V-Sync will turn on V-Sync when the game's framerate hits the monitor refresh rate

AMD advices to either set the fps limited to 1 fps less than you monitor from the driver settings, or activate Vsync and Freesync. But I have always preferred the driver option.
Everything is capped at 143fps.

opethdisciple · 26 Mar 2017 at 17:42

Panos said:
Nvidia Adaptive V-Sync will turn on V-Sync when the game's framerate hits the monitor refresh rate

AMD advices to either set the fps limited to 1 fps less than you monitor from the driver settings, or activate Vsync and Freesync. But I have always preferred the driver option.
Everything is capped at 143fps.

Ah... so AMD have an option to cap fps in the driver? So I could set it to 59 and effective have no tearing?

Is this an easy thing to set in the AMD drivers?

---

Reading this back to my self, it sounds like I need a new monitor!

Panos · 26 Mar 2017 at 17:45

opethdisciple said:
Ah... so AMD have an option to cap fps in the driver? So I could set it to 59 and effective have no tearing?

Is this an easy thing to set in the AMD drivers?

---

Reading this back to my self, it sounds like I need a new monitor!

Very easy. Go to driver - Global settings, Frame rate target control

N19h7m4r3 · 26 Mar 2017 at 17:50

opethdisciple said:
Ah... so AMD have an option to cap fps in the driver? So I could set it to 59 and effective have no tearing?

Is this an easy thing to set in the AMD drivers?

Super easy, just a few clicks in total.

I use it to cap my FPS at 143 so it never goes over my monitor's 144Hz.

Panos · 26 Mar 2017 at 17:52

Also forgot. As easy can be set per game. Instead of global setting select the game you want fps capped

Griffildur · 26 Mar 2017 at 18:09

TNA said:
Not sure if serious

Trust me without it there would have been at least one person who would have not got it. I mean Doom and a few actually think this way so...

Not serious at all which most of the time is the state I float in ...

Doogles · 26 Mar 2017 at 18:15

Griffildur said:
good thing you put sarcasm at the end, everything you said was totally believable up to that point ...

Yeah I was thinking I use to like this guy at one point then the /s at the end made me like him again

LoadsaMoney · 26 Mar 2017 at 18:48

I just use RTSS to cap my frames.

AlamoX · 26 Mar 2017 at 18:51

opethdisciple said:
Ah... so AMD have an option to cap fps in the driver? So I could set it to 59 and effective have no tearing?

Is this an easy thing to set in the AMD drivers?

---

Reading this back to my self, it sounds like I need a new monitor!

puting limit to 59 fps wont get ride of tearing, and turning on vsync for max 59 fps just puts you at an effective 30fps.
the fps limit is there to set to whatever refresh rate your monitor has, without wasting extra and cuting down on power draw, and most importantly when you are using freesync monitor so you dont get out of the supported range.
bottom line there is no magical answer for tearing/stutter, the best solution is freesync/gsync.
personally i never use Vsync, the latency ****** me off, well because of the games i play, frustrating enough as is when i lose, dont need to blame it on the mouse responsivness

freesync monitors are pretty cheap, and they are really worth every penny.

TNA · 26 Mar 2017 at 19:50

Doogles said:
Yeah I was thinking I use to like this guy at one point then the /s at the end made me like him again

Hahahaha. I think after the /s at the end you liked me even more

N19h7m4r3 said:
Super easy, just a few clicks in total.

I use it to cap my FPS at 143 so it never goes over my monitor's 144Hz.

I have mine set to 60 in global. I do not think setting it to 59 will magically help with tearing. Would it reduce it even a little? Doubt it, hence never tried.

However if I do install a game that I think will benefit from better frame times, for that game I may let it go to 120fps because even though I have 60hz monitor and won't see the extra frames, the faster frame times you still feel the extra responsiveness.

With 60fps the frame time is 16.6ms and 120fps it is obviously half that. Though I hardly play any games where that extra smoothness comes in handy for me. If I did I would have just stuck with my 144hz monitor in the past

DragonQ · 26 Mar 2017 at 21:53

opethdisciple said:
So AMD neither have adpative vsynch or fast synch driver side?

That would actually be a big deal to me as although the plan might be to upgrade the monitor at some point, it does incur an additional cost.

Not sure but AMD have said themselves that using FreeSync + VSync is their recommended combo, and that VSync will only kick in if you're at maximum refresh rate (or higher), so no input lag or anything below that.

opethdisciple · 27 Mar 2017 at 00:34

Just reading this piece on Vega.

It goes on to say "Scott Herkelman, the former General GeForce Manager at NVIDIA and now VP of AMD took the stage".....

Didn't they also take someone from Intel to work on their CPU's?

No wonder Ryzen seems to be decent!

Well I've just bought a Ryzen 1700 so I guess I'll find out soon. I'll wait for Vega, despite the pull of the 1070.

opethdisciple · 27 Mar 2017 at 00:35

Supposedly the Instinct MI25 is already a Pro Vega based GPU.

MyBrainz · 27 Mar 2017 at 01:04

opethdisciple said:
AMD and their drivers.... do they have things like Adaptive Vsync? What about something similar to fast sync?

For me, a HUGE deal was adaptive vsync with Nvidia cards as I have an older monitor and it tears like crazy.

Saying that I do still actually get tearing even with adaptive vsync.

RadeonPro

Dynamic Vsync Control (DVC) support. This feature controls how vertical synchronization is applied at rendering time, automatically turning it off when frame rate is below monitor's refresh rate to reduce stuttering and turning it on when framerate is above or equal to monitor's refresh rate, improving smoothness.

http://www.guru3d.com/files-details/radeonpro-rc1-download.html

http://www.radeonpro.info/

He (Mr. John aka japamd) stopped working on this to work on Raptr, not sure what hes up to these days.

I was using this with DayZ Standalone before i bought a FreeSync monitor, worked well too

Sorry for the off-topic.. most of this thread is anyway

AllBodies · 27 Mar 2017 at 02:26

opethdisciple said:
Supposedly the Instinct MI25 is already a Pro Vega based GPU.

To hit 12.5 Tflops SP and 25 Tflops Half-P, they'd have to be running 1525 MHz clocks.

4096*2*1525

ExoMale · 27 Mar 2017 at 02:34

Rroff said:
Until recently I ran a 3GB card fine on 1440p and it would still cut it today mostly but that isn't going to last forever and 4GB seems potentially a bit limited going forward if developers do actually start squeezing more out of the VRAM with next generation effects when they are less limited by having to accommodate the memory usage of the API.

While 4gb will become useless in the future it is still good enough for now, mean 1gb & 2gb still get used, hell that 1060 has a 3gb option, it's not so much the amount, it's what you play that requires it, so far the division has been the only game to use nearly a 2gb vram limit in my experience, sometimes there's hardly much difference between high & ultra depending how the game engine is used as games with the same engine are not identical. If your paying stupid money then you'd ideally want no less than 8gb, I'd only buy the 2gb rx 460 because its less than £100.

both parties are making cards with less than 4gb vram still, so I don't know what market both are more focused on or if they trying to balance it.

triss · 27 Mar 2017 at 02:41

ExoMale said:
While 4gb will become useless in the future it is still good enough for now, mean 1gb & 2gb still get used, hell that 1060 has a 3gb option, it's not so much the amount, it's what you play that requires it, so far the division has been the only game to use nearly a 2gb vram limit in my experience, sometimes there's hardly much difference between high & ultra depending how the game engine is used as games with the same engine are not identical. If your paying stupid money then you'd ideally want no less than 8gb, I'd only buy the 2gb rx 460 because its less than £100.

both parties are making cards with less than 4gb vram still, so I don't know what market both are more focused on or if they trying to balance it.

I think the point is Yes 4gb is fine for some GPU's. But this is supposed to fill the top end space for AMD and at higher resolutions 4GB isnt enough

AllBodies · 27 Mar 2017 at 03:36

I agree, this 4GB thing would be a bad idea on AMDs part for this level of performance.

IMO 4GB should only be on cards with 480/1060 performance or below. Putting it on cards with 1070 or higher performance is mad.

TNA · 27 Mar 2017 at 08:16

But you guys are not understanding and taking it all out of context...

My understanding is, if they do offer a 4gb option along a 8gb one, it will be because the hbm2 will have the ability to use normal ram or ssd as an extension and quickly swap things in and out due to being much much faster than gddr5x.

As long as people are given the 8gb option, I really do not see what the trouble is. There is nothing wrong with having extra options.