• 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.

Poll: ** The AMD VEGA Thread **

On or off the hype train?

  • (off) Train has derailed

    Votes: 207 39.2%

  • (on) Overcrowding, standing room only

    Votes: 100 18.9%

  • (never ever got on) Chinese escalator

    Votes: 221 41.9%
  • Total voters
    528
Status
Not open for further replies.
Chuk_Chuk said:
He has a good point but nobody expected a 52% increase in single threaded performance from bulldozer to Ryzen.
Either way RX Vega will be interesting either a total disappointment or a magnificent card.

I do wonder, aren't AMD a little to calm with FE reviews. Seriously no significant attempt at damage control merely brushing it aside. There is an interesting storm coming.
Click to expand...

Either FE results are representative, there's nothing that can be done, and RTG are keeping their heads down. Or AMD are trolling everyone because they know they have something special. Websites will look silly for trying to extrapolate from FE to RX.
 
spoffle said:
People were saying the exact same thing when we were speculating about Ryzen. What they managed with Ryzen isn't proof that they're sandbagging, but it's why people think there's a chance they can close the gap.

They closed their gap with Intel and in some areas passed them and this has inspired hopefulness that they're intending on doing the same thing with Vega.

As I said, it's obviously not proof of it, but also things aren't adding up at all with what we've seen of Vega so far. It makes no logical sense.
Click to expand...

The difference is that Intel's improvements over the years have been incremental at best, whereas Nvidia make substantial gains in performance every time they release a new architecture.
 
Mayh3M said:
The difference is that Intel's improvements over the years have been incremental at best, whereas Nvidia make substantial gains in performance every time they release a new architecture.
Click to expand...

Latest new NVidia architecture was Maxwel all way back in 2014.....

D.P. said:
The codes are GCN cores, the shader engines are what AMd refer to as NCU
Click to expand...

And I quote Raja from a resent twitter post...

Q: Many argue that vega is just a refined polaris gpu, how would you respond to this ?

A: My software team wishes this was true:)

Vega is both a new GPU architecture and also completely new SOC architecture. It's our first InfinityFabric GPU as well
Click to expand...
 
What I don't like is the fact that Gamer Nexus excluded the Fury X from any of the games tested. I can see no reason to do that other than if they were asked to exclude them as he did say he'd been in touch with AMD. I would have thought they were one of the most important cards to compare the results with due to it being AMD's high ends users that missed out during the 400 & 500 series releases. That smells fishy to me.
So, for this review not including the most relevant results they get a thumb's down, That's for either not understanding what viewer's would want to see compared or excluding them because AMD asked for them to not be included which means they're not trustworthy.


D.P. said:
The codes are GCN cores, the shader engines are what AMd refer to as NCU
Click to expand...

Thank's for the info, I was presuming that was the name he was looking for.
 
Panos said:
Latest new NVidia architecture was Maxwel all way back in 2014.....
Click to expand...


I'm pretty sure Pascal has been launched between 2014 and now, and is newer than maxwell.

and no, Pascal isn't Maxwell overclocked, there's a lot of changes under the hood that increased effeciency and power, for different memory compression and design, to the dx12 support pipeline.

anyway, considering we have in one generation seen a near 50% performance boost is pretty impressive no?
 
nashathedog said:
What I don't like is the fact that Gamer Nexus excluded the Fury X from any of the games tested. I can see no reason to do that other than if they were asked to exclude them as he did say he'd been in touch with AMD. I would have thought they were one of the most important cards to compare the results with due to it being AMD's high ends users that missed out during the 400 & 500 series releases. That smells fishy to me.
So, for this review not including the most relevant results they get a thumb's down, That's for either not understanding what viewer's would want to see compared or excluding them because AMD asked for them to not be included which means they're not trustworthy.




Thank's for the info, I was presuming that was the name he was looking for.
Click to expand...


they said fury x benchmarks are on the way, they've already put 40 hours into the video/ review and simply didn't have time to get the fury benched as well as it wasn't to hand until the last minute (which is why they could on use it for firestrike)
 
Panos said:
And I quote Raja from a resent twitter post...

Q: Many argue that vega is just a refined polaris gpu, how would you respond to this ?

A: My software team wishes this was true:)

Vega is both a new GPU architecture and also completely new SOC architecture. It's our first InfinityFabric GPU as well
Click to expand...

So it is replacing GCN all be it based from GCN?
 
zornyan said:
they said fury x benchmarks are on the way, they've already put 40 hours into the video/ review and simply didn't have time to get the fury benched as well as it wasn't to hand until the last minute (which is why they could on use it for firestrike)
Click to expand...

I missed that, Thankyou for the update, It seems I put my tinfoil hat on when I got up this morning :D

EDIT:
That said it should have been delayed for them to be added because like I mentioned it's AMD's high end users with Fury cards that will want to compare them, Judging by what is included it looks the FX will be too close to call in some of the results.
 
Last edited:
WCCF just put up a story where Raja tweeted the size of the RX Vega die and it's smaller by a long margin to that estimated in the PCper teardown on the FE.

Just another variable in the mix.
 
Mr Jerico the self proclaimed potato camerman has another FE benching video up that was recorded properly, I haven't watched it yet but it's more results for the mix.


EDIT His core clock seems to be at 1600 so I'm presuming he's overclocked and not experience the memory downclock Gamer Nexus did.
 
Last edited:
RavenXXX2 said:
AMD better hope Vega does good at mining because gamers aint buying this **** lol.
Click to expand...

According to Pcper it's not, someone else mentioned it may be because of the memory latency. I'm not sure why you think it won't sell, The only thing that'll stop it selling is if AMD ask silly money for it.
 
980ti -> 601mm2
Fiji -> 596mm2

1080ti -> 471mm2
Vega -> 484mm2

If RX Vega is closer to the 1080ti than the Fury was to the 980ti, then the gap is closing...
 
Tommy_Here said:
The issue we've got 1080 is over a year old anyone wanting 1080 performance would've jumped on a 1080 by now with the price decrease.
This now brings me onto 980 Ti clock that to 1500mhz and 8+ghz on the memory it's touching the heels of s stock 1080 so if Vega is 15%faster than 1080 then at stock it'll be 20-25% faster than a 2 year old card which launched at £550... that would be pretty pathetic.
Amd needs this card to be faster than a 1080 Ti otherwise what's the point in waiting?
Click to expand...
Exactly, this could well end being AMD's biggest disaster to date, i held of upgrading from a 290, purely because of Vega, I won't be making that mistake again.
 
If you go to 25m 25s in the new Jerico video, with a 1600 core overclock he get's an average frame rate of 40 fps in max'd out Metro last light @ 4k with advanced phsyx on, Is that any good?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom