• 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.
Phixsator said:
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.
Click to expand...

Its reasonable to conclude he means the Vega will compete well with the 1080 on FPS. Price or other factors are secondary and not even within his view possibly as some of it relys on production figures, yields all sorts. I'm pretty clear he means its often as fast as those cards.
Maybe for the 1080ti he references its good in Doom on vulkan and we'll realise its not close otherwise but my impression is he means its in the race not especially lagging those two. He could just be biased, lying, incorrect or however people want to frame it but I'm taking that statement as pretty clearly he means to say its a competetor at that level.

If he just meant image quality and its half the fps of a 1080 card then yea thats seriously deceptive lol


Nifty site I stumbled on hyperlinking coders, engines in various games over time etc - http://www.mobygames.com/game-group/3d-engine-rage
 
AlamoX said:
they cannot, AMD need to stop this, if they beat 1080ti they can price their flagship however they want ( within reason ofc) , but if they can't, then the price need to be much more than 50$ off the 1080Ti, it just doesn't work, mindshare is much more important than higher margins, much more, that's the sales of all your future releases.
so vega need to have a price disruptive enough to nulify the failed performance crown in ppl's minds, and that need 150$ to 200$ saving off the current performance crown, believe me AMD won't start selling GPUs untill they understand this.
it might be hard financialy, but if they want to claw back market share, and change the perception ppl have of them, this is how they should do it, either get performance crown for couple generations, and if you can't, then make a product as close as possible, then slash the price to a point where performance per dollar renders the price of the crowned ridiculous to even enthusiasts.
Click to expand...


AMD can't afford to suffer tiny margins on high end parts. They need profit in order to reinvest in future generations. AMD have repeatedly said they don;t want to be seen as a budget brand.

And if AMd really want to have Vega come in $200 cheaper the competition then they should have dropped the idea of using HBM, that has forced them to be in a position where they can't win a price war.
 
D.P. said:
AMD can't afford to suffer tiny margins on high end parts. They need profit in order to reinvest in future generations. AMD have repeatedly said they don;t want to be seen as a budget brand.

And if AMd really want to have Vega come in $200 cheaper the competition then they should have dropped the idea of using HBM, that has forced them to be in a position where they can't win a price war.
Click to expand...
This depends on the margins. They are at this time offering a £500 cpu that has 8 cores with 16 threads. Intel are charging £1000 for a similar competing chip. They might go through the short term pain for long term gain approach to get the mind share up. They need to sell cards and price matching Nvidia probably is not a good idea even with an advantage in performance. They really are in a hard spot with what is the right way forward.

Bring out a great card at a great price which gets the user base up who can spread the word that indeed the hardware is good and the drivers ain't crap or price match Nvidia and sell less which won't achieve this. They really need to gain reputation before they can lose the budget brand.
 
If Intel one day (or some other 3rd party) came to market with their own GPU, would you buy it?

What we need to keep everyone honest is another player at the high end.

Surprised no one's tried jumping in. (I know of Knights Landing)
 
TheRealDeal said:
This depends on the margins. They are at this time offering a £500 cpu that has 8 cores with 16 threads. Intel are charging £1000 for a similar competing chip. They might go through the short term pain for long term gain approach to get the mind share up. They need to sell cards and price matching Nvidia probably is not a good idea even with an advantage in performance. They really are in a hard spot with what is the right way forward.

Bring out a great card at a great price which gets the user base up who can spread the word that indeed the hardware is good and the drivers ain't crap or price match Nvidia and sell less which won't achieve this. They really need to gain reputation before they can lose the budget brand.
Click to expand...

But they've done this before, they had the 4XXX which were all excellent price/performance and they held the graphics card crown for ages with the 4870x2, then the 5870 was 300 pound flagship, the 6XXX was a bit meh...

Then they launched the 7970 at about 500 quid.
 
Mtom said:
231456_amd_3.png
Click to expand...

I am highly sceptical. But if true, I will be very happy and the decision whether or not to buy one will be super easy...

I still don't think Vega can beat a 1080ti, even though I would very much want it to. I hope I'm proved wrong, but otherwise I see it as a 1080 competitor, if even that.
 
silversurfer said:
Its reasonable to conclude he means the Vega will compete well with the 1080 on FPS. Price or other factors are secondary and not even within his view possibly as some of it relys on production figures, yields all sorts. I'm pretty clear he means its often as fast as those cards.
Maybe for the 1080ti he references its good in Doom on vulkan and we'll realise its not close otherwise but my impression is he means its in the race not especially lagging those two. He could just be biased, lying, incorrect or however people want to frame it but I'm taking that statement as pretty clearly he means to say its a competetor at that level.

If he just meant image quality and its half the fps of a 1080 card then yea thats seriously deceptive lol


Nifty site I stumbled on hyperlinking coders, engines in various games over time etc - http://www.mobygames.com/game-group/3d-engine-rage
Click to expand...

I to think that vega will be competitive in pure fps numbers or at least that is what they are going for. Another statement from that AMD that was on the Wanshow with Linus clearly confirmed it was their goal to "take nvidia down a peg" and you dont do that unless you are beating nvidia in raw performance. But then again you never know. I am hoping for the best but expecting less.
 
Martini1991 said:
But they've done this before, they had the 4XXX which were all excellent price/performance and they held the graphics card crown for ages with the 4870x2, then the 5870 was 300 pound flagship, the 6XXX was a bit meh...

Then they launched the 7970 at about 500 quid.
Click to expand...

True and for the majority they held a much bigger share of the pie. I don't know what the way forward is but it's a hard one.
 
D.P. said:
AMD can't afford to suffer tiny margins on high end parts. They need profit in order to reinvest in future generations. AMD have repeatedly said they don;t want to be seen as a budget brand.

And if AMd really want to have Vega come in $200 cheaper the competition then they should have dropped the idea of using HBM, that has forced them to be in a position where they can't win a price war.
Click to expand...

yes, but they do not have a choice, it's either perpetual underdog, or try and get out of this cycle, and after these last couple years i think AMD got a clear message of the global mindshare, they will never sell enough product no matter how amazing they are, even if they bring Vega beating the 1080Ti and price it the same or even 20-30$ less, Nvidia will still sell twice as many Ti than vega, you can be 100% sure of it, but if Navi manages to do what vega did, the mindshare will shift and navi will start selling well as good or even better than nvidia, but if Navi comes out short, it would be like hiting a reset botton on mindshare, ppl will still see AMD product as incappable.
AMD cannot drop HBM, because it's a huge part of all their future products, from APU's to Navi and beyond, and it's all because of the HB memory controller and cache, in many instances AMD explained how they want to make scalable GPUs, CPUs and APUs, part of that is using HBM memory stacks over the graphic unit it self not along side it, and just scale those units on interposer, so HBM isn't going anywhere, and the price isn't that high if you manage the size, especialy if you come up with a way to cancel the down side of it, let's say by having 512TB or virtual adresses.
beside HBM is more expensive but how much expensive is it ? is 4GB HBM cheaper than 8 or 12GB of GDDR5/X ? intel is starting to use it, nvidia too, so AMD wont be the only company paying for it's bad yields.
googled it but couldn't find the price of HBM2 and DDR5/X per GB, if anyone has the info...
 
Last edited:
TheRealDeal said:
This depends on the margins. They are at this time offering a £500 cpu that has 8 cores with 16 threads. Intel are charging £1000 for a similar competing chip. They might go through the short term pain for long term gain approach to get the mind share up. They need to sell cards and price matching Nvidia probably is not a good idea even with an advantage in performance. They really are in a hard spot with what is the right way forward.

Bring out a great card at a great price which gets the user base up who can spread the word that indeed the hardware is good and the drivers ain't crap or price match Nvidia and sell less which won't achieve this. They really need to gain reputation before they can lose the budget brand.
Click to expand...

It's easy to launch a cpu at a lower price because cpu production costs are so low. But people tend to forget that a Vega 10 GPU will cost 4-5 times the amount of a ryzen cpu to make and additionally you have your partners, which also want some of the margin. With cpus you get this margin too.
 
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/
Click to expand...

Phixsator said:
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.
Click to expand...

I think he was talking about small Vega, so it's all good either way...
 
Mtom said:
First it was H1 2017 then it was H1 2017 and now it's H1 2017 if we go by the official AMD statements.
Click to expand...

AMD's roadmap they published last year said a 2017 release. They later clarified by saying first half of 2017, they've never said anything different. It's just rumour sites and what not that have been promoting that.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom