• 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.
mahius said:
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?
Click to expand...

I wish people would stop arguing this realignment of models to justify the high pricing of nVidia cards this year! I've seen this here and around the web.
960 replaced by 1060
970 replaced by 1070
980 replaced by 1080
980Ti to be replaced by 1080Ti
Titan X Maxwell replaced by Titan X Pascal

Why would this be any different, as it makes such simple sense? Are people saying this to explain the line-up before the 1080Ti was announced? If you think the 980Ti is replaced by the 1080, then what does the 1080Ti replace?
 
Bonjour said:
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.

6AB5l17.png
Click to expand...

So where is your proof that the cheapest store had any in stock? All of the stores I checked upon release had the price set to 300€. Checked the price history of the RX 480 for the most popular brands and the cheapest of these was 288€, which isn't a far cry from 300€. Not sure what you are trying to prove here? The price of the RX 480 was too high for what it offered and was marketed and hyped as something different than it actually was.

Price history of three popular RX 480s:



 
Toss3 said:
Not sure what you are trying to prove here? The price of the RX 480 was too high for what it offered and was marketed and hyped as something different than it actually was.
Click to expand...

No it wasn't. Some people on forums went mad thinking that it would be nearly as fast as the 1070 with an overclock. It was getting so crazy here that Gibbo had to step in and tell people that it was never going to reach that performance level.

AMD always stated that the 480 was going to be a mainstream part replacing the 380/380x. The 380x launched at $229, the 380 at $179. The 8GB RX 480 launched at $249, the 4GB launched at $199.

The RX 480 cards aren't even the most expensive x80 cards that AMD launched. The 280x launched at $299 and the 280 launched at $279.
 
Last edited:
awaybreaktoday said:
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/AMD-Z...ws/Live-Stream-Vorpremiere-neue-CPUs-1214744/

AMD will be launching a new processor architecture at the beginning of next year with Zen, launching a pre-stream live stream on 13 December to provide a more accurate outlook on the new CPUs.
Click to expand...

If they actually wanted to provide an "accurate" outlook they would be sending out samples to objective reviewers instead of creating more hype. They apparently haven't learned from their mistakes, but let's hope that the product is good at least. Was hoping to see some Vega news as well, but apparently we won't be seeing anything in quite a while. :(
 
Seanspeed said:
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.
Click to expand...

You're a real piece of work, Seanspeed. And your reading comprehension is awful too.

I said I'm playing on a single 1080p screen, and the 480 slows down/lags in plenty of places.

Now if you're going to tell me that rendering for a VR device (of half-decent resolution) is *less* demanding than rendering a single 1080p screen, then perhaps it's *you* who's full of it.

The 480 is a mid-range - soon to be low-end - card, aimed at "VR" users as a way to generate some extra sales from people who don't know any better.

Let's face it, it's not a beefy card at all.
 
awaybreaktoday said:
AMD Vega 10 to beat Nvidia Pascal GTX 1070, 1080; Launch in 2017 with 24 TFlops, HBM 2 memory and 225W TDP

http://www.hngn.com/articles/219370/20161130/amd-vega-10-beat-nvidia-pascal-gtx-1070-1080-launch.htm
Click to expand...

12 regular TFlops. The 24 TF figure is for "half precision". Ie, fudging the figures.

humbug said:
http://www.fudzilla.com/news/graphics/41643-amd-vega-10-scores-24-tflops
Click to expand...

Again, they are comparing GP102 ~10 TF single-precision with Vega 10's 24 TF half-precision. Utter fail (but it is Fudzilla, so what do you expect :p)
 
Last edited:
Bonjour said:
12 is still more than the TXP.
Click to expand...

Hmm... Don't want to get ahead of myself, but what was I saying about Vega being as fast if not faster than TXP? :p:D

Obviously can't be sure with just that information, but it does sound promising if AMD did good work on the new architecture :)
 
Bonjour said:
12 is still more than the TXP.
Click to expand...

Comparing theoretical FP32 performance between brands and architectures is pointless. AMD always has more theoretical compute, Nvidia also design cards with more engineering to exploit their compute and operate more efficiently.
 
D.P. said:
It was the usual AMD fanboys that were hyping up Polaris to impossible levels. SOme of us that are more interested int he technology than brand affiliation repeatedly pointed out AMD's own marketing materials and some cold hard facts about the power efficiency of the existing GPUs and the new process changes.
Low and behold the RX480 gets released exactly as I and several other indicated, yet we had to endure months of fanboy-ism, name calling and outlandish claims of getting paid by Nvidia.
Click to expand...

I think most people just wanted to believe AMD would create another great value product that would be almost as fast as nvidia's top offerings, but at a much lower price - you know like they used to back in the day? I honestly believed they had pulled off some sort of miracle the way that most people were hyping the gpu before launch, but it ended up being a dud.

I honestly still don't quite understand what the point of Polaris is, I mean wouldn't it have been cheaper, faster, and better to just cut down and shrink the nano? Pretty sure the nano uses less power than most aftermarket RX 480s while still outperforming them quite significantly. The Nano would have been the perfect GPU for 14nm.
 
Last edited:
D.P. said:
Comparing theoretical FP32 performance between brands and architectures is pointless. AMD always has more theoretical compute, Nvidia also design cards with more engineering to exploit their compute and operate more efficiently.
Click to expand...

The latest Nvidia cards are crippled at compute. That's why the RX480 is so popular with miners.
 
Bonjour said:
12 is still more than the TXP.
Click to expand...

It's not the total theoretical performance it's have those flops translate into fps. Again you have to assume AMD is focusing all their efforts on getting there cards as good as they can for DX12/Vulkan rather then improving there dismal dx11 performance. So it will be interesting to see what Vega brings to the table in terms of architecture improvements.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom