AMD VEGA confirmed for 2017 H1

muon · 25 Apr 2017 at 02:20

Blackjack Davy said:
And you know exactly how much cooling Vega will require because...?

Vega is still GCN on same process with a whole lot more shaders. This isn't like Ryzen, something unlike anything AMD have produced before.

It will be power hungry, especially if they intend to clock it to RX 580 levels. In contrast Pascal is ridiculously efficient even at 2ghz.

In order to beat Pascal, IPC will still have to improve markedly, even if they produce a nassive chip. We will see.

r7slayer · 25 Apr 2017 at 02:59

muon said:
Vega is still GCN on same process with a whole lot more shaders. This isn't like Ryzen, something unlike anything AMD have produced before.

It will be power hungry, especially if they intend to clock it to RX 580 levels. In contrast Pascal is ridiculously efficient even at 2ghz.

In order to beat Pascal, IPC will still have to improve markedly, even if they produce a nassive chip. We will see.

How do you know it will be power hungry? They have improved vega much more than any previous iteration of gcn. They even said vega has the most changes and improvements to the silicon since gcn was first introduced back in the 7970 days.
So if polaris was a big improvement in mid range then vega should be even better especially when it comes to efficency. Maybe not on pascal level. AMD tout better ipc than nvidia anyway where with pascal they have higher clockspeeds.

Scougar · 25 Apr 2017 at 03:04

I thought I saw a reference to it being above 1500mhz for Vega. So if true, it can't be so bad that at stock it is that excessive.

JediFragger · 25 Apr 2017 at 08:32

r7slayer said:
How do you know it will be power hungry?

Because....they have form? 290X? Hot and loud. FuryX? Needed water. Vega....?

Toss3 · 25 Apr 2017 at 08:45

r7slayer said:
How do you know it will be power hungry? They have improved vega much more than any previous iteration of gcn. They even said vega has the most changes and improvements to the silicon since gcn was first introduced back in the 7970 days.
So if polaris was a big improvement in mid range then vega should be even better especially when it comes to efficency. Maybe not on pascal level. AMD tout better ipc than nvidia anyway where with pascal they have higher clockspeeds.

Would say it's going to be power hungry based on the clocks they are aiming for (supposedly). Pushing the architecture close to its max clocks isn't going to save power (speculation).

JediFragger · 25 Apr 2017 at 08:51

Toss3 said:
Pushing the architecture close to its max clocks isn't going to save power (speculation).

And look what they've done to Polaris in the 580 series, seems like they no longer care about energy efficiency imo.

Toss3 · 25 Apr 2017 at 09:08

JediFragger said:
And look what they've done to Polaris in the 580 series, seems like they no longer care about energy efficiency imo.

You know you can lower the clocks if you want to, right? Pushing higher clocks on the 580 just makes it easier to achieve the best performance and should allow OEMs to create coolers that work for that kind of workload.

rs155 · 25 Apr 2017 at 09:20

I am looking forward to see what AMD can do with the new cards, I'm lucky to not have such strict power requirements has other people seem to have (mabie the leccy in there parts is costly), i just got me a nice big shiny power supply and i did not get that so i can use less power

KillBoY_UK · 25 Apr 2017 at 09:25

r7slayer said:
How do you know it will be power hungry? They have improved vega much more than any previous iteration of gcn. They even said vega has the most changes and improvements to the silicon since gcn was first introduced back in the 7970 days.
So if polaris was a big improvement in mid range then vega should be even better especially when it comes to efficency. Maybe not on pascal level. AMD tout better ipc than nvidia anyway where with pascal they have higher clockspeeds.

A RX480 Polaris consumes as much power as GP104 GTX 1070, a Rx580 Polaris consumes more power than an GP104 GTX1080. While Polaris is an improvement over Hawaii and Fiji it still consumes far to much power and puts out to much heat for the performance you get.

To get the Pascal levels efficient as well as top end performance is a big ask for a GCN improvement personally I think they would need something new to pull that off.

Unlike Ryzen (or even Polaris), AMD have not been saying too much about Vega Performance compared to the products of the competition.

erazor51 · 25 Apr 2017 at 09:54

According to Don, the Radeon RX Vega performance compared to the likes of NVIDIA’s GeForce GTX 1080 Ti and the Titan Xp.

PandaNation: Why are FreeSync monitors so much cheaper than their G-Sync counterparts? I know you won’t be able to say much, but how does Vega compare to the Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Ti and the Nvidia Titan Xp? Big fan of AMD, thinking of doing a Mini-ITX Ryzen 5 build. Keep up the good work!

DON WOLIGROSKI: FreeSync is cheaper because it’s an open standard. In many cases a panel manufacturer can make a FreeSync panel by changing their monitor’s firmware and having it meet the spec. For G-Sync, Nvidia charges a licensing fee. Because of this differentiation alone, I think the inevitable future is FreeSync.

Vega performance compared to the Geforce GTX 1080 Ti and the Titan Xp looks really nice.

Source: http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-rx-vega-performance-gtx-1080-ti-titan-xp/

Phixsator · 25 Apr 2017 at 09:58

erazor51 said:
According to Don, the Radeon RX Vega performance compared to the likes of NVIDIA’s GeForce GTX 1080 Ti and the Titan Xp.
Source: http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-rx-vega-performance-gtx-1080-ti-titan-xp/

No thats not what he said. He said it "looks really nice" which can also mean price to performance compared to the 1080ti/Titan. Now of course i hope he means in pure performance as the only metric but these days these people are like politicians. Always twisting words around. I have to see the numbers from an independent reviewer/user before i'll believe anything.

JediFragger · 25 Apr 2017 at 10:01

erazor51 said:
According to Don, the Radeon RX Vega performance compared to the likes of NVIDIA’s GeForce GTX 1080 Ti and the Titan Xp.

Nah it's rubbish, it's the new 'Overclockers Dream' statement imo.

DONOHUE07 · 25 Apr 2017 at 10:05

erazor51 said:
According to Don, the Radeon RX Vega performance compared to the likes of NVIDIA’s GeForce GTX 1080 Ti and the Titan Xp.

Source: http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-rx-vega-performance-gtx-1080-ti-titan-xp/

Wccftech??? There hardly a credible source, I was following there daily rx480 news on the run up to release, the author kept saying the rx480 is going to blow people away with 980 esq performance and is likely overclock up to a 980ti, all while costing less than £200 on release. In the end it was pretty much the same price and performance as 1+ year old 970...

Mtom · 25 Apr 2017 at 10:06

muon said:
Vega is still GCN on same process with a whole lot more shaders. This isn't like Ryzen, something unlike anything AMD have produced before.

It will be power hungry, especially if they intend to clock it to RX 580 levels. In contrast Pascal is ridiculously efficient even at 2ghz.

In order to beat Pascal, IPC will still have to improve markedly, even if they produce a nassive chip. We will see.

The professional VEGA cards are already shipping to the preordering partners, 225W TDP, 1526MHz clock.

ToTheMax · 25 Apr 2017 at 10:07

erazor51 said:
According to Don, the Radeon RX Vega performance compared to the likes of NVIDIA’s GeForce GTX 1080 Ti and the Titan Xp.

Source: http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-rx-vega-performance-gtx-1080-ti-titan-xp/

Yeah I wouldn't hold my breath until actual independent benchmarks are revealed, that AMD speed comparison is totally vague.

Mtom · 25 Apr 2017 at 10:09

JediFragger said:
Because....they have form? 290X? Hot and loud. FuryX? Needed water. Vega....?

Ehm, you realize the 290X had the same TDP as the competing NV cards, and was only hot and loud with the crappy blower cooler? Also did you realize Fury X didn't need water, they just put it on to make it look more premium? It had the same TDP as the 290X

HeX · 25 Apr 2017 at 10:15

Mtom said:
Ehm, you realize the 290X had the same TDP as the competing NV cards, and was only hot and loud with the crappy blower cooler? Also did you realize Fury X didn't need water, they just put it on to make it look more premium? It had the same TDP as the 290X

Indeed, I've been running a 290 Tri-X since launch and it's silent under load, I've got the fans set to 40% while gaming and it hits ~76C max. Wouldn't call that particularly hot/loud.

And the Fury Nano shows that the Fury doesn't need water in any way, it's a tiny card with a single fan!

JediFragger · 25 Apr 2017 at 10:17

HeX said:
Indeed, I've been running a 290 Tri-X since launch and it's silent under load, I've got the fans set to 40% while gaming and it hits ~76C max. Wouldn't call that particularly hot/loud.

And the Fury Nano shows that the Fury doesn't need water in any way, it's a tiny card with a single fan!

Used to love my Sapphire 290's, great cards with really good cooling. Hopefully AMD can sort us out a good reference cooler this time!

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 25 Apr 2017 at 10:34

AMD confirms Vega will be out in the next two months:
http://hexus.net/tech/news/graphics/104953-rx-vega-launch-within-next-two-months-says-amd/

KillBoY_UK · 25 Apr 2017 at 11:03

Mtom said:
Ehm, you realize the 290X had the same TDP as the competing NV cards, and was only hot and loud with the crappy blower cooler? Also did you realize Fury X didn't need water, they just put it on to make it look more premium? It had the same TDP as the 290X

Official TDP and the real world power consumption are very different things, Hawaii taught us that.