• 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.
Still amazes me how AMD are keeping their cards so close to their chests on Vega. We are now 4 months in to the 1h of 2017 release, and still nada. I'm still standing by a late June release, maybe even missing out on that original deadline. At this rate I doubt we'll see specs until June, just weeks before release.
 
Last edited:
TonyTurbo78 said:
Still amazes me how AMD are keeping their cards so close to their chests on Vega. We are now 4 months in to the 1h of 2017 release, and still nada. I'm still standing by a late June release, maybe even missing out on that original deadline. At this rate I doubt we'll see specs until June, just weeks before release.
Click to expand...

Its being promoed as the card for Prey though, and that comes out in May.
 
TonyTurbo78 said:
where has it said Vega is launching with Prey?
Click to expand...
They teased Vega at a Bethesda preview event for the game a couple of months back.

amd-vega-koop-mit-betnpjaz.jpg
 
Panos said:
Amen
Also as someone who used a heavily overclocked gtx1080 with freesync monitor (2730z) for few months, ain't worth and went back to the overclocked nano.
the fps even if 40% less, are smoother compared to the NVidia card due to freesync.
while one of the games I play a lot, world of tanks, due to engine limitations, the difference was 90fps with freesync or 108fps without.
Click to expand...

This is similar to my experience as well. My Freesync 4K 32" Samsung monitor is waiting for a Vega GPU but until then I wold prefer 30% slower with Freesync than without. For example I have tested the difference between 35 FPS with Freesync and it looks smoother and better than 70 FPS without.

I know some will call this sacrilege or BS but no tearing or stutters at 35 FPS are better than 70 FPS with tearing and stutters.

Night and day.
 
opethdisciple said:
In all honesty being so close to Vega I wouldn't be making any big GPU purchases atm. Prices will drop at least on the Nvidia cards at the least. Wait and see what Vega is all about before making decisions.
Click to expand...
I don't think Loadsa cares. He thinks the best Vega won't even be offering 1080 performance:p

As for me, even if Vega comes in at a very good price for performance, i am confident if I chose to I can get £350 for my 1080, so £25 for a few months of fun is not bad ;)
 
opethdisciple said:
In all honesty being so close to Vega I wouldn't be making any big GPU purchases atm. Prices will drop at least on the Nvidia cards at the least. Wait and see what Vega is all about before making decisions.
Click to expand...

I'm calling it now, Vega will be 50% faster than a FuryX! A decent increase no doubt, but when you consider that the Ti is close to twice as fast in most games...
 
JediFragger said:
I'm calling it now, Vega will be 50% faster than a FuryX! A decent increase no doubt, but when you consider that the Ti is close to twice as fast in most games...
Click to expand...

It's all about price. A 1080 performance Vega for around £350 would be a good card.

And would sell like hot cakes.

That would make the Nvidia cards look very very expensive.

---

To use a boxing analogue. Ryzen was a good double jab, I'm now just hoping that Vega is the right hand follow up.

---

Even £400 for a 1080 performing Vega would be good.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom