AMD VEGA confirmed for 2017 H1

peterhc · 26 Sep 2016 at 18:51

Does any one got any info about suspected performace from upcoming AMD gpu? any speculations? something worth reading ? instead of 3 pages about whats max seting and whats not ?

h4rm0ny · 26 Sep 2016 at 21:42

Kaapstad said:
Nothing to talk about.

Maximum means maximum.

And I agree with that maximum is maximum. And if the context is ONLY in benchmarking, then that's all that needs to be said. But the moment you go into the subject of what graphics card you want or the value of it, it becomes inappropriate to discuss maximum settings without context of if that actually improves image quality. You could turn up super-sampling to 4K and have 16xMSAA as well but it would not improve image quality in a way people would notice.

h4rm0ny · 26 Sep 2016 at 21:46

peterhc said:
Does any one got any info about suspected performace from upcoming AMD gpu? any speculations? something worth reading ? instead of 3 pages about whats max seting and whats not ?

I don't think we do. And that's the reason why there's so much meandering chat. But I'll speculate for the Hell of it: Vega will be around the power of the 1080 but have more memory and perform noticeably better in newer games. 1080 will drop in price just before it is launched when Nvidia get hold of working samples to work out where to pitch at.

Rroff · 26 Sep 2016 at 21:52

bru said:
Don't forget highest DSR, setting with the highest smoothness, highest Transparency AA, most pre-rendered frames etc etc.

Didn't there used to be a setting to have 64x AA in the NVidia control panel?

Does a setting that make things more difficult to render or just gives no visual benefit, even then everyones eyes are different, who is to say someone cannot tell the difference between with 8x AA at DSR of 8x with 100% smoothness rather than 8x AA with DSR at 8X with only 99% smoothness.

That is the problem, where does it end. That is why I think people should state maximum in game settings,, rather than just maximum settings.

nVidia have all kinds of buried AA modes - including old quincunx stuff, SLI 64x MSAA, etc. some of the modes go way over the top IQ wise but are completely infeasible to run in double digit framerates.

LoadsaMoney · 26 Sep 2016 at 22:01

Im sticking with my, its just going to be a Fury, but with more vram

Griffildur · 26 Sep 2016 at 22:06

I expect something around a 1070 quality, around £350 and this is my best case scenario. I really hope they do better though, but based on their history, I doubt it.

SiDeards73 · 26 Sep 2016 at 22:39

Griffildur said:
I expect something around a 1070 quality, around £350 and this is my best case scenario. I really hope they do better though, but based on their history, I doubt it.

Nah AMD will drop something that sits between 1080 and TitanXP performance, but it will be around £650 and probably gimped in some form or other, either a rubbish cooler, or will OC like a house brick, oh and it will probably run really hot as well.

The performance is probably going to be there but the downsides are going to outweigh the positives, that and its going to be expensive, and its probably going to be a fail of a reference cooler again, i just hope they dont go down the FuryX AIO fiasco route again either.

Gerard · 26 Sep 2016 at 22:45

SiDeards73 said:
Nah AMD will drop something that sits between 1080 and TitanXP performance, but it will be around £650 and probably gimped in some form or other, either a rubbish cooler, or will OC like a house brick, oh and it will probably run really hot as well.

The performance is probably going to be there but the downsides are going to outweigh the positives, that and its going to be expensive, and its probably going to be a fail of a reference cooler again, i just hope they dont go down the FuryX AIO fiasco route again either.

Nothing wrong with an aio IF they don't go the cheap route again. The 295x2 aio didn't have any issues with pump whine noise. Just when they went to coolermaster who got the pump off a third party it went downhill for fury x.

bru · 26 Sep 2016 at 22:54

Nothing wrong with a AIO if done properly I agree, lets just hope that it is a case of Vega 10 gets an AIO for aesthetic reasons and not that it needs an AIO to keep it cool, of course it probably wont come with an AIO, not if it is anywhere near the 225w TDP that has been leaked for the server part.

triss · 26 Sep 2016 at 22:55

Aio should be a option not what a card comes with standard as it is a limiting option for many

Gerard · 27 Sep 2016 at 10:14

triss said:
Aio should be a option not what a card comes with standard as it is a limiting option for many

For the fury x though the difference between that and fury was about 3-4 fps at best. The fury x certainly didn't need an aio its just seems to be what they went with due to complaints about their reference coolers on the 290 series, regular fury cards ran pretty cool with third party heatsinks (despite people banging the drum about fury x NEEDING an aio this obviously wasn't the case). I honestly prefer an aio if its done right, and fury x certainly didn't do it right.

SiDeards73 · 27 Sep 2016 at 10:18

AIO should be a partner option, like EVGA do with their hybrid one etc... Its not like the Fiji cards overclocked in any meaningful fashion to warrant the AIO either tbh.

All it does is add to the cost of the product if its not actually proving any real benefit, 3-4fps difference between FuryX and Fury.. yeah i'll take a Fury thanks, cheaper and easier to deal with plus no chance of pump whine or the AIO leaking everywhere.

I wish EVGA were an AMD partner in all honesty, Sapphire are decent but EVGA just seem to be really really good with their products and options like the upgrade trade in etc.

Seriously AMD could do with a partner like that. I just hope Vega does not come with a horrendous reference cooler, im happy to wait a bit longer for a decent cooled card, i will never buy another reference AMD card again after my 290.

JediFragger · 27 Sep 2016 at 10:31

SiDeards73 said:
I wish EVGA were an AMD partner in all honesty, Sapphire are decent but EVGA just seem to be really really good with their products and options like the upgrade trade in etc.

eVGA ftw

Gerard · 27 Sep 2016 at 10:37

Problem with evga is as we all know they take forever to get decent availability.

SiDeards73 · 27 Sep 2016 at 11:29

Gerard said:
Problem with evga is as we all know they take forever to get decent availability.

Probably cos their products are so highly regarded and sell out quickly.

LoadsaMoney · 27 Sep 2016 at 13:33

Gerard said:
For the fury x though the difference between that and fury was about 3-4 fps at best. The fury x certainly didn't need an aio its just seems to be what they went with due to complaints about their reference coolers on the 290 series, regular fury cards ran pretty cool with third party heatsinks (despite people banging the drum about fury x NEEDING an aio this obviously wasn't the case). I honestly prefer an aio if its done right, and fury x certainly didn't do it right.

Yeah hardly anything in it, when i was checking out the Fury at my res (1440p), it was mostly only around 5fps faster the X, which is nothing.

Kaapstad · 27 Sep 2016 at 14:02

LoadsaMoney said:
Yeah hardly anything in it, when i was checking out the Fury at my res (1440p), it was mostly only around 5fps faster the X, which is nothing.

AMD missed an opportunity with the Fury X.

They should have allowed AIB partners to use air coolers from day one to keep the price down and give better choice.

LoadsaMoney · 27 Sep 2016 at 14:09

Kaapstad said:
AMD missed an opportunity with the Fury X.

They should have allowed AIB partners to use air coolers from day one to keep the price down and give better choice.

Yeah i don't understand that, as it could easily have been air cooled, as look at the Nano, only 50MHz lower on the core, and just a single piddly fan on it to cool it.

Went with the AIO to give it that Premium feel, to justify the high price.

Kaapstad · 27 Sep 2016 at 14:20

LoadsaMoney said:
Yeah i don't understand that, as it could easily have been air cooled, as look at the Nano, only 50MHz lower on the core, and just a single piddly fan on it to cool it.

Went with the AIO to give it that Premium feel, to justify the high price.

I think a lot of people who use a single card actually like the look of a large card, so having some of the AIB partners put their high end coolers on the Fury X would have worked well.

flopper · 27 Sep 2016 at 16:03

Gerard said:
For the fury x though the difference between that and fury was about 3-4 fps at best. .

Hum what?
did you mean the 1080 the added tax card vs Furyx maybe?
checked some deus:x numbers and I guess your statement means absolutely nothing then. Just saying people believe things that isn't true.