AMD VEGA confirmed for 2017 H1

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

LOL, going by that chart you have linked to there is a 23% difference between the 160 and the 480, that certainly isn't negliable.

Which is still much smaller than previously. The R9 390 and GTX970 had like a 60% difference and that was almost halved with the RX480 and the GTX1060.

OFC,its no point denying Nvidia has the edge.

Having said that they use different process nodes,and the RX480 uses more VRAM chips too. Look at the steppings on the Polaris 10 and 11 GPUs - they are apparently on a third respin. Global Foundries original 14NM failed miserably and they licensed what Samsung was using and apparently had issues with that too.

There is noise of AMD using Samsung too,so maybe if we see some Samsung made Polaris GPUs,we can see how much the design is behind Nvidia.

The problem is though that the GTX 1080 doesn't offer next-gen performance; it's basically a slight improvement over what we've had for a long time already - we need something close to the Titan X, but cheaper (so people can put them in CF/SLI), in order for 4K gaming to become a reality. The Titan X is the only decent card this gen imho, and we know nvidia haven't even unleashed the full potential of Pascal yet due to AMD lagging so far behind.

Sorry missed that - I get what you are saying but ultimately AMD needs to still have an answer to the GP104 first especially in manufacturing costs.

Remember,the best AMD has in a laptop is the mobile RX470 and Nvidia has a mobile GTX1080,and there is more likelihood of a prebuilt gaming PC having something like a GTX1070 or GTX1080.

AMD needs a card that can do qHD first.

There will be a larger Vega it appears,but my main worry with that is Nvidia has separate large die chip lines - ones for gaming and ones for commerical work. If AMD make a once size fits all chip,I suspect they will need to make some compromises. I expect a large die AMD chip will use HBM2 and be very expensive.

 

[five8five]

The real nonsense is exclaiming 10 watt differences as majorly more efficient.

The RX 480 sits in a 20-30 watt gap between the GTX 980 and 1060 despite having more memory on the board, and all three perform at similar levels. So, evidently, any efficiency differences are indeed negligible unless those 10 watts have now become reason for shouting blue murder around here.

Different reviews have different results but the underlying trend is that a 1070 consumes fewer Watts than a 480 but has far better performance (980Ti equalling / beating). You could say that Polaris has caught up Maxwell re. efficiency but certainly not Pascal.

 

[Dave2150]

Says who?

? Seriously?

The 1070 replaced the 970
The 390X replaced the 290X
The 1080 replaced the 980
The RX480 replaced the R9 380

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Different reviews have different results but the underlying trend is that a 1070 consumes fewer Watts than a 480 but has far better performance (980Ti equalling / beating). You could say that Polaris has caught up Maxwell re. efficiency but certainly not Pascal.

It still hard to directly compare - you could argue the GTX1050 and RX460 are a better comparison due to a similar 14NM process node and bus sizes,except GF licensed it from Samsung. Even that is skewed by the fact it looks like Polaris 11 yields are terribad as the desktop RX460 uses a salvaged chips and apparently the GTX1050TI does not.

Samsung had mass availability of their 14NM chips in June 2015,and GF around a year later. GF has a history of having node issues,but sadly the WSA means AMD are stuck with GF and if they don't produce enough chips with them they get hit with major financial payouts.

No doubt this is a problem for AMD more than us as consumers but WSA doesn't really help them one bit and is probably why they are using GF and not Samsung yet.

 

[Lokken86]

? Seriously?

The 1070 replaced the 970
The 390X replaced the 290X
The 1080 replaced the 980
The RX480 replaced the R9 380

Id say the rx480 is more a 280x replacement but maybe that's being over analytical. Think the "x" just got moved to the front.

 

[DragonQ]

Id say the rx480 is more a 280x replacement but maybe that's being over analytical. Think the "x" just got moved to the front.

X = 10

 

[melmac]

Says who?

says AMD. They said this back at their first Polaris event back in March/April.

 

[mahius]

? Seriously?

The 1070 replaced the 970
The 390X replaced the 290X
The 1080 replaced the 980
The RX480 replaced the R9 380

Naming scheme means jack this gen. Even taking into account the whole 4GB/2GB thing, the cheapest 4GB RX 480s barely touch where the priciest 4GB R9 380s were.

970 was replaced by 1060 (ignoring the pointless 3GB version)
390(X) had no replacement
980 was replaced by 1070
380 was barely replaced by 470 (which I'll admit, is priced fairly close to the 480 and performs similarly, you can't argue the 470 is a 370 replacement though, completely different pricing bracket even taking into account 4GB version)
960 was replaced by 1050
370 was replaced by 460

Especially for Nvidia this gen, the names mean nothing when making comparisons to last gen. The strange thing is that the 1080 is still the big hitter, despite Titan XP existing for more performance. I'm struggling to see how a 1080ti could fit in between the two. Either it beats the Titan XP or where would it even fit in with performance?

I'm also finding it funny how this 'get hyped for AMD's next card' thread is going the same way as the last one. About 150 pages more till we have a Chinese streamer leaking Vega with performance not what we expected and many of those pages arguing about fake leaks/lack of news/AMD 'when it's ready' jokes. Alas, not being unemployed anymore means I don't have time to enjoy the banter that will happen on this thread on a regular basis. So in a way... it all works out!

 

[Seanspeed]

Can't remeber the last time amd released an x80 card for 300€+.

I cant either. Give me a ring when it happens for the first time cuz the 480 certainly isn't a 300 Euro card. You may find one that costs that much, but outliers always exist. You can find £500 1070's, but that's not what they normally cost.

Naming scheme means jack this gen. Even taking into account the whole 4GB/2GB thing, the cheapest 4GB RX 480s barely touch where the priciest 4GB R9 380s were.

Keep in mind

1) The 480 is replacing both the 380 and 380X together.

2) Brexit hit right as Polaris came out, creating instant higher pricing. Thank your friendly neighbor immigrant hater for that, not AMD.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

You kind of need to look at the USD prices though - the weakest pound for a few decades has not helped us though.

Edit!!

I mentioned it earlier.

Emm,have you kind of missed where it was priced at??

You do realise the R9 285 2GB was priced at $249??

The R9 380 4GB rebadge was priced at $199.

The R9 380X 4GB was priced at $230.

The RX480 4GB which AMD was making a big deal at was marketed as being a $199 card and the 8GB version at $240.

We had a massive drop in the pound so that didn't help,but the RX480 was a R9 380/R9 380X replacement.

Its no different than a GTX1060 being a GTX960 replacement either.

The GTX960 2GB launched at $200. The GTX1060 6GB FE was $299 but aftermarket models started at $249.

The GTX1060 3GB started at $210.

Sure we had EOL deals on the R9 390 and GTX970 but their true replacements are the GTX1070(AMD has not shown up yet with their replacement).

The RX480 4GB started at a lower RRP than the R9 380X. The FE GTX1060 is the only real outlier there but I don't know anyone who ever bought one.

 

[Mtom]

Naming scheme means jack this gen. Even taking into account the whole 4GB/2GB thing, the cheapest 4GB RX 480s barely touch where the priciest 4GB R9 380s were.

970 was replaced by 1060 (ignoring the pointless 3GB version)
390(X) had no replacement
980 was replaced by 1070
380 was barely replaced by 470 (which I'll admit, is priced fairly close to the 480 and performs similarly, you can't argue the 470 is a 370 replacement though, completely different pricing bracket even taking into account 4GB version)
960 was replaced by 1050
370 was replaced by 460

Especially for Nvidia this gen, the names mean nothing when making comparisons to last gen. The strange thing is that the 1080 is still the big hitter, despite Titan XP existing for more performance. I'm struggling to see how a 1080ti could fit in between the two. Either it beats the Titan XP or where would it even fit in with performance?

I'm also finding it funny how this 'get hyped for AMD's next card' thread is going the same way as the last one. About 150 pages more till we have a Chinese streamer leaking Vega with performance not what we expected and many of those pages arguing about fake leaks/lack of news/AMD 'when it's ready' jokes. Alas, not being unemployed anymore means I don't have time to enjoy the banter that will happen on this thread on a regular basis. So in a way... it all works out!

Well you get all the replacement cards wrong as it seem.
The successor always have more performance in the ~same price bracket (price inflation taken into account). Not same performance for less money as you imply.

970 was replaced by 1070
390(X) had no replacement
980 was replaced by 1080
380 was replaced by 480
960 was replaced by 1060
370 was replaced by 470 (although AMD made a shuffle here, as the 470 is only marginally slower than 480, then there's a huge gap to 460.

 

[FoxEye]

Yep, its aimed at customers who want to experience VR without spending £400+ on a GPU.

The whole VR thing is nonsense/ marketing (same thing). The 480 is OK at driving a single 1080p screen in modern games on High settings - anything more than that it's out of its league.

I own one. Just playing SOMA tonight on recommended settings @ 1080p it lags a fair bit in places.

It sure isn't driving 2x 1080p screens for VR with butter smooth frame rates.

 

[Seanspeed]

The whole VR thing is nonsense/ marketing (same thing). The 480 is OK at driving a single 1080p screen in modern games on High settings - anything more than that it's out of its league.

I own one. Just playing SOMA tonight on recommended settings @ 1080p it lags a fair bit in places.

It sure isn't driving 2x 1080p screens for VR with butter smooth frame rates.

Nothing about it is 'marketing' or 'nonsense'. The only thing nonsense is your repeatedly poor understanding of what people are talking about and obviously limited understanding of the tech involved.

You saying you're playing in VR at 1080p is the first giveaway that you are full of crap.

You obviously have no clue about the technical demands of stereoscopic rendering.

 

[Toss3]

I cant either. Give me a ring when it happens for the first time cuz the 480 certainly isn't a 300 Euro card. You may find one that costs that much, but outliers always exist. You can find £500 1070's, but that's not what they normally cost.

Have you checked the prices recently? There were no RX 480 available for less than 300€ on release.

 

[Bonjour]

Have you checked the prices recently? There were no RX 480 available for less than 300€ on release.

Isn't that a contradiction? 'Recently' is not 'release'.

Anyway, there were 480s available for under €300 on release. There always have been.

 

[meldarthx]

Have you checked the prices recently? There were no RX 480 available for less than 300€ on release.

*coughs supply vs demand coughs* it prices now do not reflect the fact where its price was released and which charge it was replacing.....AMD released the right card at the right price *not exactly here in Britain but that's because of economics 101 - the pound fell* to get AMD market share back up...

 

[Toss3]

Isn't that a contradiction? 'Recently' is not 'release'.

Anyway, there were 480s available for under €300 on release. There always have been.

It launched recently. Didn't see any? At least not a single one that was in stock. Only the 4Gb version was under 300€.

 

[meldarthx]

It launched recently. Didn't see any? At least not a single one that was in stock. Only the 4Gb version was under 300€.

480 launch recently?? we have a funny definition of recently - 5 months ago isn't exactly recently - again economics 101 supply vs demand......its a very well selling card. you have retailers that will price gouge -

good place to check for prices is pc part picker.....almost positive it works for Euro prices too....

 

[Toss3]

*coughs supply vs demand coughs* it prices now do not reflect the fact where its price was released and which charge it was replacing.....AMD released the right card at the right price *not exactly here in Britain but that's because of economics 101 - the pound fell* to get AMD market share back up...

People keep saying that it was because of the pound that the prices were so high, but what about the rest of Europe? No way it was only because of the GBP that the prices were above 300€. As for your argument for supply and demand, sure, but wouldn't that also have been true for the previous launches? And demand doesn't really set the starting prices; it just drives the prices up or down depending on how the market responds to the particular product, and as we've seen the prices have fallen quite dramatically. It doesn't really matter that AMD set the MSRP at 199 usd - this was still the first time an x80 product launched at 300€, which was a ridiculous price point for what it offered when you could get a nano or fury for not much more, or a 290x/390x/GTX 980/GTX 970 on the second hand market for much less.

 

[Bonjour]

It launched recently. Didn't see any? At least not a single one that was in stock. Only the 4Gb version was under 300€.

It's OK to be confused. PC components (and economics) can be a little complicated sometimes.

It launched 5 months ago. Not really 'recently', especially in terms of PC component pricing.

Here's RX480 pricing on ******, dating back to June 29th. Hopefully it assists with your discombobulation. Hopefully you don't find exchange rates confusing as well.