Associate
- Joined
- 13 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 1,106
- Location
- Scunthorpe
-
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
- Thread starter Doom112
- Start date
- Status
Already been posted and debunked as fake news click bait trash. Nothing listed there adds up to what's been released.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 31,179
This only means that a good chunk of the chip is dedicated to Compute, not necessarily good for gaming...
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 May 2013
- Posts
- 9,915
- Location
- M28
Has it been released?Vega MI25 released back in December, is 12% faster than Titan X Pascal (the old one). Yes it does inspire confidence
Not a graphics card.
Show me some gaming benchmarks where it beats a Titan.
Possibly, but FP32 is what's used in gaming, and it's more raw performance there than the Titan XP, or GTX 1080Ti
Both Vega and Tesla run FP16 at 2:1, hence the great performance in Deep/Machine Learning.
The problem is, unlike NVIDIA; AMD doesn't have the resources and money to develop two different cards for different segment. No P100 vs GP102
They just have Vega 10 to cover both enterprise, and high-end gaming.
It's been released, but it's got no display outputs, just like Tesla ( sorry means no games benchmarks for you ). It's currently used by for Cloud Game Streaming services from LiquidSky.
http://hexus.net/gaming/news/industry/103957-amd-vega-powered-liquidsky-streaming-servers-go-live/
Last edited:
I haven't had a chance to even try the new Quake.
It's way too fast for my liking, but if you like Quake then your going to love it, something tells me it's going to be a very popular e-sports title and AMD is going to be plastered all over it so it's a great coup for AMD marketing Polaris and Vega regardless the performance.
We all know.
It's way too fast for my liking, but if you like Quake then your going to love it, something tells me it's going to be a very popular e-sports title and AMD is going to be plastered all over it so it's a great coup for AMD marketing Polaris and Vega regardless the performance.
I like a good FPS, but I'm not as quick as I use to be. I'll probably get mangled by all the youngones in that game.
As for more Speculation on VEGA, here's an interesting video, especialy in regards to the PS4 Pro using FP16 compute for gaming.
Meaning if AMD can get some partnered developers to offload some functions to FP16, AMD will gain massive performance increases.
As Vega has 25TFLOPs of FP16 performance.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 May 2013
- Posts
- 9,915
- Location
- M28
Only asked about being released as having trouble finding them for sale whereas you can easily obtain a Tesla. Just thought they were waiting until Naples was ready to offer a total package.
Ah yeah, AMD are solely supplying them for LiquidSky under a contract at the moment.
Although the launch for retails does seem to line up with Naples still.
I like a good FPS, but I'm not as quick as I use to be. I'll probably get mangled by all the youngones in that game.
As for more Speculation on VEGA, here's an interesting video, especialy in regards to the PS4 Pro using FP16 compute for gaming.
Meaning if AMD can get some partnered developers to offload some functions to FP16, AMD will gain massive performance increases.
As Vega has 25TFLOPs of FP16 performance.
Good video, anyone who thinks Vega is just a higher clocked Fury-X needs to watch that, it is higher clocked, 1525Mhz base but is also an entirely different GPU, it has higher Instructions per clock, 2.6x the Tessellation Throughput and a brand new Rasterizer.
If you just take an assumed 10% higher IPC and the 'base clock speed' difference (it may have a Boost Clock ontop of the base clock) we could be looking at about 60% higher performance output vs Fury-X, the new Rasterizer is a complete unknown and the 2.6x higher Tessellation Throughput could be 0 to a lot more performance depending on the game, typically where AMD do bad against nVidia in that sense they will do A LOT better.
It is literally turned upto 11
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 23,065
- Location
- London
Good video, anyone who thinks Vega is just a higher clocked Fury-X needs to watch that, it is higher clocked, 1525Mhz base but is also an entirely different GPU, it has higher Instructions per clock, 2.6x the Tessellation Throughput and a brand new Rasterizer.
If you just take an assumed 10% higher IPC and the 'base clock speed' difference (it may have a Boost Clock ontop of the base clock) we could be looking at about 60% higher performance output vs Fury-X, the new Rasterizer is a complete unknown and the 2.6x higher Tessellation Throughput could be 0 to a lot more performance depending on the game.
It is literally turned upto 11
Sounds like a Ryzen too me. Which is a good thing. Worth waiting for.
VEGA possible leaked performance lol.
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/possible-radeon-rx-vega-3dmark-time-spy-benchmark-result.html
So TPU is getting it right.
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/possible-radeon-rx-vega-3dmark-time-spy-benchmark-result.html
So TPU is getting it right.
Very obviously an overclocked Fury-X with a none standard driver ^^^^ its same Chinese guy who claimed he had a Polaris GPU that was faster than the 980TI.. like lol.
This guy has them falling over eachother to post his trolling crap, seriously these reviewers need to wakeup to the fact they are being trolled.
Yes, in the sense that with Ryzen AMD are addressing all of the weaknesses they had vs Intel Vega is AMD reaction to nVidia.
It should be good.
This guy has them falling over eachother to post his trolling crap, seriously these reviewers need to wakeup to the fact they are being trolled.
Yes, in the sense that with Ryzen AMD are addressing all of the weaknesses they had vs Intel Vega is AMD reaction to nVidia.
It should be good.
Last edited:
Seriously? TPU listed made up numbers and said 5% slower than GTX 1080.
Your link doesn't even match up with that, and in TimeSpy of all things, and yet you say they're getting it right? None of that seems accurate in the slightest. That's at best overclocked Fury X performance.
Its the same Chinese account who claimed they had a 980TI beating RX 480... these people probably even know this but are posting it anyway for click bait.
If the benchmark is right than TPU is correct on specs but not on performance. According to this benchmark, even if they OC to 1500 Mhz still it will not beat GTX 1080 leave alone Ti.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Oct 2013
- Posts
- 4,132
- Location
- Scotland
Lol why do you even bother trying? Everyone knows you spout nonsense that is 100% anti-AMD. Give it a rest already.
Its a fake... get with the program, remember that Chinese guy these journalists kept posting his crap? 980TI beating RX 480? all that? this is just a rinse and repeat of that. its New GPU click bait, again....
- Status