AMD VEGA confirmed for 2017 H1

[AlamoX]

Some AMD marketing I was reading claimed the 580 was a 1440p card.

So according to these benchmarks the 580 does indeed seem OK at 1400p. However a game like Dishonoured 2 performance seems to take a big hit. Why? Is this because it's an Nvidia title?

So I am pulling out the benchmarks where the 580 tanks dramatically compared to it's other results in games.

WatchDogs 2. Nvidia gimping?

it is actualy really good at 1440p @60hz, it scales better than the 1060, yes you will get across some games where 60fps cannot be met unless you tweak some options, but it's still playable at highest setting for the vast majority of titles.
dont forget that games run only 25% slower on 1440p compared to 1080p, so if your games run around 80fps in 1080p, then it should run at 60fps @1440p.

 

[opethdisciple]

it is actualy really good at 1440p @60hz, it scales better than the 1060, yes you will get across some games where 60fps cannot be met unless you tweak some options, but it's still playable at highest setting for the vast majority of titles.
dont forget that games run only 25% slower on 1440p compared to 1080p, so if your games run around 80fps in 1080p, then it should run at 60fps @1440p.

25%? Are you sure?

I thought 1440p is actually almost double the amount of pixels as 1080?

2560 x 1440 = 3,686,400

1920 x 1080 = 2,073,600

So that comes to 56% extra pixels.

 

[TheRealDeal]

25%? Are you sure?

I thought 1440p is actually almost double the amount of pixels as 1080?

2560 x 1440 = 3,686,400

1920 x 1080 = 2,073,600

So that comes to 56% extra pixels.

It's around 25%-30% here for the 580 in these games but it's probably game dependant.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/asus_radeon_rx_580_strix_review,12.html

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/asus_radeon_rx_580_strix_review,10.html

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/asus_radeon_rx_580_strix_review,11.html

Here in Doom it's a lot more and what you would expect with the extra Pixels.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/asus_radeon_rx_580_strix_review,17.html

Could be that in Doom at 1080p there is no CPU Bottleneck so when the resolution is increased to 1440p it's still the Gpu doing all the work so the extra Pixels make a bigger difference. Then again the ones linked above were Dx12 so you would think it would be similar. Guess Doom on Vulkan might just be a much better implementation.

 

[Kaapstad]

25%? Are you sure?

I thought 1440p is actually almost double the amount of pixels as 1080?

2560 x 1440 = 3,686,400

1920 x 1080 = 2,073,600

So that comes to 56% extra pixels.

77.77% more pixels.

 

[opethdisciple]

77.77% more pixels.

My maths was:

3,686,400 100%

2,073,600


2,073,600 x 100 = (value)

(value) / 3,686,400 = 56

---

I think.... it's been a long day. Cant be bothered to do it again.

 

[Kaapstad]

My maths was:

3,686,400 100%

2,073,600


2,073,600 x 100 = (value)

(value) / 3,686,400 = 56

---

I think.... it's been a long day. Cant be bothered to do it again.

You should have used 2,073,600 as 100%

You are trying to work out how many more pixels 1440p is compared to 1080p.

 

[silversurfer]

I am curious if Vega will require more system memory to run properly compared to regular cards due to its paging techniques? Are there any tech details on this yet?

Yes it will just from what they have already said, it does depend of the games development also though. While it possibly could be genius on caching to much surprise its not really possible for them to defy the total requirement of a game for quickly available textures. You dont want to be seriously considering paging from disk to a graphics card so on top of the game exe itself unfragmented excess memory would be good. I said this with Ryzen, some people are thinking 8gb is ok and no it really isnt not when you build a new system and definitely nope when you buy expensive components.

Vega is not Polaris, you'd be a fool to go down this road of using old tech to predict new tech, its not a clever thing to do.

You would be a fool to ignore history, physics, economics and business practices.

Its reasonable to extrapolate based on non linear growth

 

[opethdisciple]

You should have used 2,073,600 as 100%

You are trying to work out how many more pixels 1440p is compared to 1080p.

Oops!

 

[AlamoX]

My maths was:

3,686,400 100%

2,073,600


2,073,600 x 100 = (value)

(value) / 3,686,400 = 56

---

I think.... it's been a long day. Cant be bothered to do it again.

point is if you run games at over 80fps 1080p get you 1440p@60, and 130fps 1080p gets you 4k@60, 25%/60%

 

[LoadsaMoney]

I also don't see the AMD, Dx12, as how long has Dx12 been around ?, and how many games have we got ?, its a massive fail so far isn't it ?, lets be honest, as to this day, all we've got, is the odd Dx11'er, thats been patched with Dx12 laters, and thats what we're still going to be getting, and for quite sometime to come, and why ?, because of Nvidia, the PC gaming market owners, they havn't bothered with Dx12 yet, so aren't very good at it, only AMD can do Dx12 well, AMD, who only have a small part of the market, so the devs wont bother catering for it, when Nvidia give us a Dx12 card, thats when we'll see the games, and not before, just like the tessellation, mantle etc...

Talking of mantle, hows that for a turnaround, when AMD started it all them years ago, the devs just didn't want to know, it got no interest at all, was only in a couple of games, so AMD had to give it up in the end, but now look at it, its the talk of the bloody town now, mantle, mantle, mantle, its all you hear, and the devs are all over it now, they're on with mantle games as we speak, mantle games are going to be flying out now, and why ?, thats right, because Nvidia, the PC gaming market owners, they are now doing it (as well).

All this AMD are in all in the consoles as well talk, it doesn't interest me one jot that either, and why ?, because im not in that market, i don't have a console, im a PC gamer, whose market is owned by Nvidia, so i don't give a **** about what AMD are doing in the console one, can say it matters all you like, as it doesn't to me, as they've been the only ones in the consoles for how long now ?, yet still, to this day, just about every game, barring the odd one here, there, runs much better on Nvidia on the PC, not AMD, whose hardware it is in all the consoles, no, and no, Scorpio isn't going to change that either, its just going to be as you were when that arrives on the PC, as if it made a difference to AMD on the PC, with them being the only ones in the consoles, and for this long now, every game would be running better on their PC gaming cards, than they do on Nvidias, no ifs, no buts, but they don't, AMDs powered console games, run much better on Nvidias cards, on the PC, not their own.

Can also forget about saying we've only got the 480 to compare to as well though, like some have said before, as they were in all the consoles, about 2/3 years before that even came out.

Only thing that will change it all for AMD on the PC, is for them to overhaul Nvidias share, and get back to competing, or taking over, which sadly, i don't think they'll do, and don't want to do now, as they've already conceded PC gaming in my book, with them now only doing VR and compute mainly cards.

 

[AlamoX]

I also don't see the AMD, Dx12, as how long has Dx12 been around ?, and how many games have we got ?, its a massive fail so far isn't it ?, lets be honest, as to this day, all we've got, is the odd Dx11'er, thats been patched with Dx12 laters, and thats what we're still going to be getting, and for quite sometime to come, and why ?, because of Nvidia, the PC gaming market owners, they havn't bothered with Dx12 yet, so aren't very good at it, only AMD can do Dx12 well, AMD, who only have a small part of the market, so the devs wont bother catering for it, when Nvidia give us a Dx12 card, thats when we'll see the games, and not before, just like the tessellation, mantle etc...

Talking of mantle, hows that for a turnaround, when AMD started it all them years ago, the devs just didn't want to know, it got no interest at all, was only in a couple of games, so AMD had to give it up in the end, but now look at it, its the talk of the bloody town now, mantle, mantle, mantle, its all you hear, and the devs are all over it now, they're on with mantle games as we speak, mantle games are going to be flying out now, and why ?, thats right, because Nvidia, the PC gaming market owners, they are now doing it (as well).

All this AMD are in all in the consoles as well talk, it doesn't interest me one jot that either, and why ?, because im not in that market, i don't have a console, im a PC gamer, whose market is owned by Nvidia, so i don't give a **** about what AMD are doing in the console one, can say it matters all you like, as it doesn't to me, as they've been the only ones in the consoles for how long now ?, yet still, to this day, just about every game, barring the odd one here, there, runs much better on Nvidia on the PC, not AMD, whose hardware it is in all the consoles, no, and no, Scorpio isn't going to change that either, its just going to be as you were when that arrives on the PC, as if it made a difference to AMD on the PC, with them being the only ones in the consoles, and for this long now, every game would be running better on their PC gaming cards, than they do on Nvidias, no ifs, no buts, but they don't, AMDs powered console games, run much better on Nvidias cards, on the PC, not their own.

Can also forget about saying we've only got the 480 to compare to as well though, like some have said before, as they were in all the consoles, about 2/3 years before that even came out.

Only thing that will change it all for AMD on the PC, is for them to overhaul Nvidias share, and get back to competing, or taking over, which sadly, i don't think they'll do, and don't want to do now, as they've already conceded PC gaming in my book, with them now only doing VR and compute mainly cards.

you explained it very well, PC gaming stoped advancing because of microsoft, when AMD forced M$'s hand with mantle things started moving, then stumbled on another wall standing in front of PC gaming's advancement and that is Nvidia.
you might not care, but other ppl do care, that's the bottom line of all this.

 

[Steampunk]

soon there wont be any need for Nvidia or AMD graphics to play at 4k/120fps, all you would need is an AMD APU to enjoy the latest game at the highest resolution/fps, and with 5G planned for 2019, the shift might be much sooner that we expect.
in fact sony and microsoft arn't even sure that there will be a new generation of consoles after scorpio/ps4pro, they are both focused on streaming services, and if this model happens to attract enough subscribers, then bye bye consoles, which will automatically kill off PC gaming and the glorious PC master race, all you would need is a device powered by something like an APU ( a low end APU ), so enjoy these last red/green arguments, because soon that would be like " you remember when ppl used to argue about graphics cards ? hahaha "

You think an APU isn't just another version of a PC? It's exactly that on the one chip.

PCs were playing games long before consoles, they will be playing games long after. I've been hearing the predicted death of PC gaming for nearly 40 years, and it hasn't happened yet. PC's will always be around as they are the soil from which games for every other platform grow. You can't even make a game for any other platform without a PC.

 

[Samwell]

you explained it very well, PC gaming stoped advancing because of microsoft, when AMD forced M$'s hand with mantle things started moving, then stumbled on another wall standing in front of PC gaming's advancement and that is Nvidia.
you might not care, but other ppl do care, that's the bottom line of all this.

Come on, probably Nvidia is also the reason for the third world problems, and earthquakes, aliens...

People should better look for the real reason and the main problem is you can't build a ground up DX12 engine, because you loose too many sales. All this DX11/12 mixed engines are not great and don't really take advantage of DX12. But first there are way too many people still on Win7/8.1. Second you would like to build a real DX12 game with Feature Level 12_0 and not 11_0 like all the DX12 games have now. But there are too many graphics cards which don't support FL 12_0. The whole Kepler line and additionally the 750Ti, which was pretty popular are only FL11_0. Then on AMD side you still have a lot of 79x0/78x0/7x700 and R280/270 owners, which also don't support FL12_0. And at last one big DX12 Feature is not even yet finished. Shader Model 6 is now in experimental support in the creators update and will be released this year. But it also can only be used by Feature Level 12_0 Gpus. So when Devs kill off Win7 and Kepler/GCN1, then we will see the big DX12 jump but not before.

But looking at steam hardware survey, with 52% WIn10 compared to 45% Win7/Win8 and the 750Ti as 2nd most popular gpu it will take at least one more year till the first real DX12 games appear.

 

[TNA]

Come on, probably Nvidia is also the reason for the third world problems, and earthquakes, aliens...

People should better look for the real reason and the main problem is you can't build a ground up DX12 engine, because you loose too many sales. All this DX11/12 mixed engines are not great and don't really take advantage of DX12. But first there are way too many people still on Win7/8.1. Second you would like to build a real DX12 game with Feature Level 12_0 and not 11_0 like all the DX12 games have now. But there are too many graphics cards which don't support FL 12_0. The whole Kepler line and additionally the 750Ti, which was pretty popular are only FL11_0. Then on AMD side you still have a lot of 79x0/78x0/7x700 and R280/270 owners, which also don't support FL12_0. And at last one big DX12 Feature is not even yet finished. Shader Model 6 is now in experimental support in the creators update and will be released this year. But it also can only be used by Feature Level 12_0 Gpus. So when Devs kill off Win7 and Kepler/GCN1, then we will see the big DX12 jump but not before.

But looking at steam hardware survey, with 52% WIn10 compared to 45% Win7/Win8 and the 750Ti as 2nd most popular gpu it will take at least one more year till the first real DX12 games appear.

This makes a whole lot more sense to me than "it is because of nvidia". I don't buy that. It takes time to transition over.

 

[triss]

Come on, probably Nvidia is also the reason for the third world problems, and earthquakes, aliens...

People should better look for the real reason and the main problem is you can't build a ground up DX12 engine, because you loose too many sales. All this DX11/12 mixed engines are not great and don't really take advantage of DX12. But first there are way too many people still on Win7/8.1. Second you would like to build a real DX12 game with Feature Level 12_0 and not 11_0 like all the DX12 games have now. But there are too many graphics cards which don't support FL 12_0. The whole Kepler line and additionally the 750Ti, which was pretty popular are only FL11_0. Then on AMD side you still have a lot of 79x0/78x0/7x700 and R280/270 owners, which also don't support FL12_0. And at last one big DX12 Feature is not even yet finished. Shader Model 6 is now in experimental support in the creators update and will be released this year. But it also can only be used by Feature Level 12_0 Gpus. So when Devs kill off Win7 and Kepler/GCN1, then we will see the big DX12 jump but not before.

But looking at steam hardware survey, with 52% WIn10 compared to 45% Win7/Win8 and the 750Ti as 2nd most popular gpu it will take at least one more year till the first real DX12 games appear.

Well put. Until the majority of gamers have dx12 compatible PC's devs will still be making dx11 games as to only make dx 12 games atm you would severely cut out a lot of your customers

 

[akarypid]

I got to say though: the thing that annoys me most is the constant nagging about AMD. Ryzen doesn't beat the 7700K, the 500 series was useless, Vega is late, there should at least be news about Vega, marketing sucks, etc etc etc

It's like "love to hate" relationship where the whole point is to nag about something. AMD have said Q2 2017 for quite a while now. They gave some info at the Ryzen launch event and since then are being low-key and silent. BAM you will get your card.

Yet people are able to write in the same post (and I won't quote anyone because it easily gets personal):

• 'look at Nvidia; low-key work, no hype or build-up and then BAM there's your card'
• a couple of sentences nagging about why doesn't AMD do the same (which they are)...
• ...concluding along the lines of 'at the very least, give us some news, why all the secrecy?'
• (more nagging follows)

It's somewhat scary when you think about it. It's like something's wrong with their mind or something!

 

[TNA]

I got to say though: the thing that annoys me most is the constant nagging about AMD. Ryzen doesn't beat the 7700K, the 500 series was useless, Vega is late, there should at least be news about Vega, marketing sucks, etc etc etc

It's like "love to hate" relationship where the whole point is to nag about something. AMD have said Q2 2017 for quite a while now. They gave some info at the Ryzen launch event and since then are being low-key and silent. BAM you will get your card.

Yet people are able to write in the same post (and I won't quote anyone because it easily gets personal):

• 'look at Nvidia; low-key work, no hype or build-up and then BAM there's your card'
• a couple of sentences nagging about why doesn't AMD do the same (which they are)...
• ...concluding along the lines of 'at the very least, give us some news, why all the secrecy?'
• (more nagging follows)

It's somewhat scary when you think about it. It's like something's wrong with their mind or something!

lol

 

[Journey]

I also don't see the AMD, Dx12, as how long has Dx12 been around ?, and how many games have we got ?, its a massive fail so far isn't it ?,

Take that quote back to 2011, and you could repeat it word for word about DX11, it was released in 2009, and the first real batch of new games didn't come through till 2012, so that was a three year wait for any real quantity of games. DX12 was released in July 2015, and has not yet been out 2 years, so you can't really call it a failure since you have to then call DX11 a failure.

It takes time for large changes like this, you are far to quick to write things off, if you feel they are not in the time you'd imagine it should take, try doing some research and understanding time scales better and you will see that DX12 is still in it's infancy.

 

[AlamoX]

You think an APU isn't just another version of a PC? It's exactly that on the one chip.

PCs were playing games long before consoles, they will be playing games long after. I've been hearing the predicted death of PC gaming for nearly 40 years, and it hasn't happened yet. PC's will always be around as they are the soil from which games for every other platform grow. You can't even make a game for any other platform without a PC.

what i mean is you wont need high computing anymore, you would need just enough to browse the web and play video streaming(games), no one would care about high gpu and cpu or apu or overclocking.
there wont be a need for high end performance if you are a gamer.
right now sony offers playstation now on PC, it streams playstation 3 and 4 games, you get a catalogue of 350 games for 15£ a month, and you dont have to download or install, just click and play.
now this service still doesn't have enough subscriptions to replace the console, but imagine if it does ? imagine 5G turns out as they say it would, extremly high DL speed, and very low latency, what if you have games playing at 4k 120fps, with sub 20-30ms latency, and on top of that 15 or 20£ gets you hundreds of current gen games ? i am saying you get a catalogue of all your current games + all those of playstation 3 and 4 for 15£, and you wouldn't need to spend 50£ on a new release anymore !
consider also this is the end of games piracy, a platform with 100-200mil subs, will represent a continuous stream of revenue every month for the studio that publish their game on the platform, studios will flock to this, i dont see any of them releasing a game on PC instead of that platform.
so yea PC gaming was here for a long time and will stay as the primary platform, you just would need a much lower spec PC, and require playstation now or Xbox Live, i wanted to say steam live, but i wonder what are valve's plans, this would also be the end of steam .
wether you like it or not, you have to admit that the pros crush the cons for any video game maker and publisher, big or small.

 

[Geck0]

that is the ultimate future. it still baffles me why in the 21st century so many people have computers at home, laptops they take to work/school and home. Computing is really a utility. People generally don't have their own power station in my back yard, I don't have my own water well and purification system, so why do people want their own portable data center? All you actually want is an interface, and someone else can worry about computer hardware.

Because when the power goes out and there is no internet I will still be playing and working offline. You will be having conniptions. End of world scenario you'll just be disadvantaged. I might offer you access to 4Gb of data for a stupid amount of livestock, or other negotiable non cash transactions. You should be comfortable when it turns out to only be 3.5 Gb.