Poll: ** The AMD VEGA Thread **

[TNA]

Not a good indication. The Vega 64 @ 1546 is 12.66TFLOP, and the FuryX @ 1050/500 is 8.6TFLOP. (so a good 47% more)
However their FPS difference in BF1 according to AMD is just 20% at 2560x1440. Something a FuryX @ 1190/600 (AMD UEFI bios, stock AIO) can come close if not beat.
There is something seriously wrong with the AMD Vega presentation. Clearly something is wrong and cannot be justified. Alternative, they did a computing card trying to cut into that market segment for first time, and didn't bother about gaming. A similarly (1546) clocked FuryX could trash it by a very good margin.

Clearly the IPC is not the same, that is all. People need to stop comparing it to Fury X clock for clock. End performance is all that matters and this is where Vega has disappointed as it has not improved enough over Fury X. With all those extra transistors, time for new architecture, HBM2 and they did not even get 50% improvement...

This pretty much means Vega was not designed primarily for gaming, but for compute.

I do think over time we will get 10-20% improvement though. But I talking about 12-24 months, not in the next few weeks.

 

[TNA]

Dennis!!! Is that really you? We miss you!!!!

He must be getting tired of that. Even I said it a few months ago when I first noticed his name. lol

 

[TNA]

I just turned down the opportunity to get a 1080Ti with an EVGA hybrid cooler for £520 on members market

 

[TNA]

Hi,

Any chance of AMD crashing the launch to 7th August?
Thanks.

Crashing? Yep

 

[TNA]

If the minimums are as good as they make out, then I may just grab a Vega 56. If not waiting for xx70 variant of Volta

 

[TNA]

that 3x is for a very specific set of applications and I very much doubt any owner of such card would suddenly decide to drop it and get a Vega instead. From what Ive seen so far it's not like Vega will be close to 1080 TI, or Titan cards so what you are saying doesn't really make sense.

It sounds to me like they did a very nice thing for owners of such cards enabling something they didn't have to do. Thank you, move on, nothing to see here.

Not sure if serious. lol

0_o

Exactly. It is obvious that they had it locked and released it due to competition forcing their hand. How can one not see this?

If anything Titan owners who will be using this new unlocked performance should be thanking AMD.

 

[TNA]

are you actually serious? what competition???

 

[TNA]

Yeah they missed a 1 off, should be 1100w

Did not know you had a fetish for PSU's also Loadsa, I always thought it was just CrossFire

 

[TNA]

Already having an effect on Nvidia it seems.

But it shows they are not giving people things untill they need too!

Indeed.

 

[TNA]

LOL, oh come on D.P.

Nvidia saved us from AMD's dirty marketing tricks by unlocking pro optimisations, mysteriously waiting until Vega was released before doing so(nearly a full year after Titan XP was released)

What would we do without Nvidia to save us from the Vile AMD and their cunning marketing.

I know right. The spin this guy uses is too funny at times.

Please Nvidia save us from dirty tricks of AMD, please use this opportunity to bury this filthy company once and for all so we can all pay whatever you ask of us for your future GPUs.

1060 £500? Why not
1070 £800? Sounds good.
1080 £1000? I'll take two.
1080Ti £2000? Bargain, will sell my 1080's and upgrade!
Titan Xp £5000? Thank god we have Nvidia to innovatate and brings us this performance. Will take 4. Oh and don't forget to sell me the key that unlocks SLI for another £1000

At least we won't be needing a 1000W PSU to drive these cards. Money saved. Thank god that dirty AMD is gone!


Now that is out of the way. Let us get back to Vega news guys please.

 

[TNA]

Probably developed arthritis of the fingers given his posts are never short

Lol

 

[TNA]

Is this really a Freesync 2 monitor with HDR and 144hz with LFC so full range? If so it could be interesting. Not quite 4K, but I would consider going back to 1440p if the monitor is very good. At least Vega 56 would be more than good enough to drive it

 

[TNA]

The monitor is nice but for me, the stand makes it a no go. Way to big and I wouldn't have anywhere for mouse and keyboard.

Will have to wait and see some proper reviews. If they are very good, this monitor could be the first to convince me to drop a resolution. I am not bothered about the stand, I have the space. I would be set for 2-3 years with that monitor until the OLED 4K stuff shows up at decent prices.

 

[TNA]

It looks like the first of the Freesync 2 monitor's are landing just in time for Vega,

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/sams...-hdr-widescreen-curved-monitor-mo-236-sa.html

32", 1440p, Quantum Dot, HDR, LFC, Freesync 2, 1ms, 144hz VA panel.

Sadly I can only afford one or the other

I wonder if Crowley can do me a deal!

Nice price for a 32" but in my opinion the resolution is too low for that size. I would save some money and go for the 27" version. Will be higher quality due to better PPI.

I would even prefer they made a 24" one. Would be better PPI, no need for curve and probably a lot cheaper.

 

[TNA]

Was thinking about the 27" too, but 80-120Hz freesync range and no VESA support makes me a sad panda.

Yea, just saw your other post. Lost interest immediately. The only reason I was interested was because the monitor seemed have everything except the 4K resolution which I was willing to look past.

How disappointing if this is what Freesync 2 will be

 

[TNA]

I can understand (sort of) people already owning a free sync monitor and thinking they are 'locked in' to AMD. They aren't of course but hey...

But I struggle to see why now after such a lacklustre vega release people are looking to buy a freesync monitor and tie themselves in to 'soon to be' last gen performance.

I have a Freesync monitor and do not feel locked in at all. There is a good chance my next GPU will be a xx70 Volta unless I like what I see in the reviews for Vega 56.

 

[TNA]

Trouble is, if you buy FreeSync, and you're one of those who say they can't go to Nvidia because of it, then you're going to spend the next couple of years, turning settings down, missing out on games etc..., while waiting for your next card, which when arrives, will be around the same performance as cards from Nvidia, that were released a couple of years ago, and at performance that we've already surpassed.

So, you are buying Volta for your freesync monitor then (like what I will most likely do)?

In my case all 5 of us thought the AMD screen looked way better as it was night and day. 3 were kids and just go with there eyes. I knew AMD was always said to be better here but when i seen them side by side one had colour and the other looked way plainer almost like the brightness had been turned up to high so washed away the colour. On the Amd side black was black and not grey and all other colours seemed to pop. Could be a mixture of things that made the difference so big but it was there.

I notice it straight away. I prefer AMD's default colours. But once I switch over to Nvidia, after a while you forget and everything looks fine anyway. Plus I calibrate my monitor also which helps

 

[TNA]

On top of that you've got this controversy that Nvidia drivers are no good scaling across multi cores.

Which I think deserves another deep dive. Because if it's true TRUE that's a big deal. Again something I expect them to fix as of Volta.

Reiterating my thoughts that Nvidia build for today and AMD build for tomorrow.

When multi cores are wide spread and the average Joe has 6+ cores in his rig Nvidia will reengineer their drivers to scale better.

AMD knew with Ryzen and with Bulldozer that the average Joe would soon have affordable multicore chips in their rigs so put the effort in too DX12/Vulkan and scaling side ways rather than IPC.

If I had a Ryzen PC I would just go for Vega at this point, then can always upgrade to Navi a couple years later. At 1440p Vega would be more than enough I would imagine. If I was on 1440p I would be getting a Vega 56, but Vega does not look like it will cut the mustard at 4K and feels like it would be a waste of my money when Volta is around the corner which will likely provide 1080Ti performance for around Vega 56 prices and run a hell of a lot more efficiently making less noise. So I will miss out on Freesync, so what, never bothered me all these years, won't let it bother me now

 

[TNA]

As a consumer, I bought a GTX 1070 for 380 dollars. I sold it, in order to eventually get Vega and a Ryzen system. To now find that the Vega 56 is basically the same price as the GTX 1070 for the same money is very frustrating, when AMD have had 15 months or whatever to get to this place.

I feel you man. I also had a 1070 which I sold and after all this time all AMD can do is match it, which is very disappointing.

Unless Vega 56 turns out to be closer to 1080 performance, at least in AMD games, then it will be disappointing at $399. AMD needed to hit $299 price point for Vega 56 (assuming it is around 1070 performance) and they would have got a lot of praise like they did with Ryzen.

 

[TNA]

6 things you should know about Vega

https://www.gamespot.com/gallery/ra...Zm3Ri8KXkQoPU4RUCnfTUw7kH&bt_ts=1501681444394

Basically what we already knew.

Vega 64 vs 1080
Vega 56 vs 1070

Problem is their pricing. Vega 56's performance could have been had 15 months ago for the same price. Basically AMD came in way late and did nothing to improve price for performance. Hence why they are going on about it being cheaper due to Freesync etc.

Think I made up my mind at this point. Skipping Vega for Volta