Associate
if those numbers are real, they are bound to give Nvidia a run for its money. Things might look quite good for us gamers if that really happens and AMD doesn't screw yet another big launch.
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.
12 is still more than the TXP.
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.
You don't get it yet, even if Vega was 20TFlops, it would still loose to TXP.
Why? Because NVIDIA rule the gaming world. They control the vast majority of the developers. All they'd have to do is make one or two changes in Gameworks code, and AMD cards would be nerfed to oblivion in that game.
It's happened before and it will happen again.
They'd also be able to force the developer to remove the option to disable Gameworks, I expect that will happen soon enough, if Vega is amazing.
The nano is expensive as heck to make, the HBM memory for starters but also the chip is huge and the only way the nano gets reasonable performance per watt is because they are hand picked chips that are under-locked and undervolted. The regular Fiji chips went in to the FuryX where water cooling was also used to help reduce power usage
AMD needed a new chip but Polaris was just a half arsed attempt, yet another tweak of Hawaii. The macro-architecture just didn't scale even to Hawaii very well so pushing it further was never going to cut it. Polaris was a weird stop-gap solution, which is why there is no high end and the launch was rushed with many stupid mistake like bad cooler and only a 6pin power.
Vega is the real update to Hawaii (Fiji was an HBM experiment of a scaled up Hawaii, Polaris is a stop gap). R&D budget resulted in the severe delays.
The sites a joke, They also have a top 5 gpu's of 2016 article, Apparently the top five are the 1080, Titan X, 260x, 460 and Fury, All of which use DDR5 memory.Maybe a sign as to the credibility of this report, but I can't even access it at work because the firewall has labelled it as "suspicious"
At no point was I suggesting the 480 was high end. But you are showing woeful understanding of how VR works, though you are at least correct that running VR titles is harder than it would be with an equivalent app running in 2d. But that's kind of key there - 'equivalent'. VR titles are typically not built to be as demanding as a normal 2d AAA game is.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.
This is laughable conspiracy theory nonsense.You don't get it yet, even if Vega was 20TFlops, it would still loose to TXP.
Why? Because NVIDIA rule the gaming world. They control the vast majority of the developers. All they'd have to do is make one or two changes in Gameworks code, and AMD cards would be nerfed to oblivion in that game.
It's happened before and it will happen again.
They'd also be able to force the developer to remove the option to disable Gameworks, I expect that will happen soon enough, if Vega is amazing.
Are we all aboard the hype train again?
The sites a joke, They also have a top 5 gpu's of 2016 article, Apparently the top five are the 1080, Titan X, 260x, 460 and Fury, All of which use DDR5 memory, apart from the Fury
It's only depressing if you buy into such absolute ridiculous nonsense.Anyone watched Hamish's latest video about the GPU wars being over? God that was depressing. In summary he concluded it doesn't matter if AMD's were faster and cheaper Nvidia's mindshare guarantees team green will always sell more.
It's the HNGN site that needs fixing, I'm simply quoting their 'Best gpu's of 2016' article that states that the Fury uses 4gb's of DDR5.Fixed
Marketing matters a great deal, and unfortunately in this case it's much like Apple vs Google, with AMD being Google.
MY main concern with Vega is that they will price it based on Nvidias high end pricing. maybe only marginally lower. and fire it in at £800/£900. That will be "game over" for me I'm afraid. Im not paying that to game at high end, nor am I paying £600 to game at mid end.
I hope they price it to come in well below. try and really pull their boots up.
MY main concern with Vega is that they will price it based on Nvidias high end pricing. maybe only marginally lower. and fire it in at £800/£900. That will be "game over" for me I'm afraid. Im not paying that to game at high end, nor am I paying £600 to game at mid end.
I hope they price it to come in well below. try and really pull their boots up.
Total guesswork but what do people think Vegas chances of running games at 4K will be? Tempted to wait and get Vega / 4K monitor but don't want to be knocking settings way back