• 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.

Radeon VII

Darujhistan said:
So basically the last three GPU launches:

RTX 2080i et al - Disappointing.

2060 - Disappointing.

Radeon VII - Disappointing.
Click to expand...

Yes because we are no longer getting a price for performance improvement, not like before anyway. If they carry on like this, they may say 3080 Ti is 40% faster than a 2080 Ti, but now costs £1800.
 
nashathedog said:
They're using the chips that never made the cut for the professional cards.

It sits between the Vega 56 & Vega 64 in relation to how cut down it is from the full fat chip, rops are the same though.
Click to expand...
So if we say the 2080Ti is 30-35% faster than the 2080/Radeon VII, then AMD would need to make a Vega GPU with ~80 compute units in order to match/beat the 2080Ti. Would that be possible and viable at a price below the Ti?
 
IT Troll said:
So if we say the 2080Ti is 30-35% faster than the 2080/Radeon VII, then AMD would need to make a Vega GPU with ~80 compute units in order to match/beat the 2080Ti. Would that be possible and viable at a price below the Ti?
Click to expand...

The problem is not that cant make that chip, its the power draw is going to be huge. Already a 330w card
 
TNA said:
Yes because we are no longer getting a price for performance improvement, not like before anyway. If they carry on like this, they may say 3080 Ti is 40% faster than a 2080 Ti, but now costs £1800.
Click to expand...

Since Titan and 780 GTX Nvidia have been doing all they can to push mid and high end prices to stupid levels. They have finally succeeded and have now pushed the "mainstream" RTX 2060 to what use to be mid tier prices.

The fact AMD have been able to use failed Instinct cards to supply the enthusiast gaming market is down to Nvidia's greed. Had RTX 20x0 been priced at realistic levels then AMD would have had nothing to counter with unless they were prepared to make a massive loss. Fortunately for AMD Nvidia's greed knows no bounds. Despite the prices of RTX 2080Ti Tom's Hardware idiotically said "just buy it", the ******* ********. I mean the moron tech press are even declaring RTX 2060 as a great card for the price compared to it's bigger brothers. How idiotic are these people that would fall over themselves to believe RTX 2060 is a great price just because the bigger Turing cards are stupidly expensive?

Thankfully there are still some in the tech press who have some principles (HardOCP). The fact RTX 2080 cards are available at cut down prices so soon most likely points to the fact the average consumer are finally catching on to the con job Nvidia have pulled.

Mainstream GPUs used to cost ~$200 - $230. One down from top tier cost ~$350 - $400 (GTX 570, GTX 670, HD 7950, GTX 980, R9 290), yet now Nvidia are pushing RTX 2060 at these prices and the tech press are calling it awesome.

I bought my Vega 64 at £450 and felt it was at least a good bargain over 980Ti/Fury X. Yet now if I want an upgrade of any measurable amount I have to pay £700. 30% -50% extra performance used to be at a similar price point. Now we actually have to pay 70% extra for the privelage of "upgrading".

Rant over :)
 
Last edited:
ICDP said:
Ooh I see it has jumped up 30 extra watts according to the rumour mill. Or did you just make that number up?
Click to expand...

sorry typed and extra 3 in there, but amd own slides indicated the 7nm process is 25% faster at the same power consumption, so take vega64 performance and add 25% at the same power level AMD own website indicate 295w typical board load. These fit in well with with performance numbers released.
 
The problem is, the only way to fight against these prices is to not buy into them, this causes huge loss of profits for the company you choose, meaning that they cannot invest in making a better product and have to charge a higher price to recoup the loses....
So the horrible choice is just buying whatever they put out ... seems vastly unfair
 
IT Troll said:
So if we say the 2080Ti is 30-35% faster than the 2080/Radeon VII, then AMD would need to make a Vega GPU with ~80 compute units in order to match/beat the 2080Ti. Would that be possible and viable at a price below the Ti?
Click to expand...

That'll never happen, AMD won't be able to match a 2080ti with the current tech and architecture. Going on the math of increasing performance by adding more cores etc then yes it could theoretically match a 2080ti but you can say that about anything, A Polaris chip with 5000 stream processors could match it too but building one is either not possible or not viable so there'll never be one. For AMD I think matching the performance of a 2080ti & going beyond `it will only be possible once we move on from GCN & build something new from the ground up. Additions to the base foundations of GCN can only go so far.
 
AMDPower said:
sorry typed and extra 3 in there, but amd own slides indicated the 7nm process is 25% faster at the same power consumption, so take vega64 performance and add 25% at the same power level AMD own website indicate 295w typical board load. These fit in well with with performance numbers released.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I had read the same myself so concluded about 295w for the extra claimed avg 29% performance.
 
They are almost certainly runoff chips from the professional market as discussed before, which means AMD gain some income instead of binning the chip and eating the cost. It's never going to be ideal but it helps mature the process before new arch on new process, sort of like the old Intel 'Tick Tock' style.

I hope it's competitive but I do feel it's just AMD getting what they can out to try and make some money and headlines until Navi.
 
Sargatanas2511 said:
They are almost certainly runoff chips from the professional market as discussed before, which means AMD gain some income instead of binning the chip and eating the cost. It's never going to be ideal but it helps mature the process before new arch on new process, sort of like the old Intel 'Tick Tock' style.

I hope it's competitive but I do feel it's just AMD getting what they can out to try and make some money and headlines until Navi.
Click to expand...
In a way it makes no sense, because if they are throwing them in the rubbish anyway, why not price a bit more sexy, like $599 ? You know, they were going in the bin anyway
 
Illuminist said:
In a way it makes no sense, because if they are throwing them in the rubbish anyway, why not price a bit more sexy, like $599 ? You know, they were going in the bin anyway
Click to expand...

I understand that. It might make sense when the full reviews come out. If it does best the 2080 then $699 makes sense for them compared to the competition and might end up causing the 2080 to come to which will bring the VII down.

We will have to wait and see if they got the price right.
 
Sargatanas2511 said:
I understand that. It might make sense when the full reviews come out. If it does best the 2080 then $699 makes sense for them compared to the competition and might end up causing the 2080 to come to which will bring the VII down.

We will have to wait and see if they got the price right.
Click to expand...
Do you or anyone know when an embargo lifts on reviews? people must have received them already like linus and G nexus as there is only 2 weeks until launch day.
 
I'd hope to see reviews before launch. No way I'm buying without seeing them (unless the price is £549, in which case I'll happily pre-order.. but that won't happen)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom