The Fury does the same thing, it's power management isn't very good, it kills performance, that's why that dude did that app called "clock block" because the clock was bouncing around everywhere then AMD put the power saving on/off option in the drivers, and to this day it still has to be on the off position for gaming otherwise it affects performance (well at least last time I tried to use the power saving feature). Then they came up with chill which I haven't tried yet but apparently works ok, but only on a per game basis.
-
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 **
- Thread starter TNA
- Start date
- Status
The Fury does the same thing, it's power management isn't very good, it kills performance, that's why that dude did that app called "clock block" because the clock was bouncing around everywhere then AMD put the power saving on/off option in the drivers, and to this day it still has to be on the off position for gaming otherwise it affects performance (well at least last time I tried to use the power saving feature). Then they came up with chill which I haven't tried yet but apparently works ok, but only on a per game basis.
On my end it was killing performance, and often in the worst place possible, (witcher 3 was the worst), well lets say it looked like their power ramping system lagged behind, so if went from a normal scene to an intensive scene it would kill performance because it looked like it took time maxing out the clocks and if you turned away from the intensive scene and then turned back to it, it would do the same, the clocks jumped everywhere
Permabanned
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 9,221
- Location
- Knowhere
Maybe sacrifices had to be made in order to make it a better all-rounder,
When AMD launched that vid with the sticker "Poor Volta", I was expecting something special. I have since lowered my expectations and expecting a 1080 competitor. AMD have pitted their card against a 1080 and said that the cost of monitor and card will be $300 less than the NVidia equivalent and people are expecting RX Vega to cost $100 less than a 1080 is currently. Whilst I want to big up AMD and say well done, I can't help but think this is poor after so long. The 1080 launched over 14 months ago, it uses far less power than Vega and whilst I respect that AMD have a limited R&D budget, I can't help but feel that they are so far behind, it is frankly embarrassing. They hype train has certainly derailed.
What were they thinking when they did this vid?
What were they thinking when they did this vid?
This I agree with. They took a stab, got hopes up, kept the train for Vega going thanks to Ryzen really and although we could see from some slides they were aiming at more the 1070 market this year the power consumption and the thought of how inefficient the GPU is compared to that of AMD that even if it comes in at £350 I wouldn't be able to justify it.
It feels like a really bad stop gap that they were forced to add something to their current lineup but had nothing close to ready. Did what they could but honestly it just isn't enough to make me interested which is a shame as initially was hoping they could come back in and really shake things up. Instead if anything Nvidia could probably raise their prices again and people still buy them.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 31,182
Sad but true, think we have to accept amd are so far behind nvidia now, there's no hope of catching up and nvidia can charge what that like for there cards, bad for us buyers and pc gaming imo
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,222
Now that's not true at all. They were so far Behind Intel which is not the case since Ryzen release. It only takes one killer design to get you back in the game. Vega does not look to be that design but Navi atm looks to be a move in an exciting new direction. Vega seems to have a lot of tech that's just not going to be used and until it does it will not be shown in it's best light. The power/performance is a very big let down as for some reason AMD seem to have taken a step back.
This has always been my frustration with AMD - yet again another 2-3 generations and some of the stuff in Vega will show its real potential but in the meantime they've sacrificed what is needed here and now too much while putting effort into things that won't be useful for awhile yet - and it isn't like these things have a pressing need to be hashed out in a working product and couldn't be developed in the background in the lab.
This round isn't good for AMD but like TRD said, Ryzen was a good thing and hoefully AMD can learn from that and come back with a killer GPU. Sadly it does mean that NVidia kind of gets a free run and can charge rather exuberant prices and thos who want the performance will have to pay it
True but I'm sure nvidia have not spent the last year sitting about doing nothing so I'm thinking amd some how have to jump 2 generations just to catch up, I hope they can but I can't see it
If Vega is not competitive and Nvidia can keep selling 1080/ti, don't expect to see Volta for a while. Nvidia will keep milking what they've got and save Volta for when they need it against Navi.
In fairness they were only so far behind Intel because they spent all their money on a bankrupt GPU company and didn't have enough left to R&D and decent CPUs for a few years. Prior to that their CPUs had been leading the way for half a decade.
Would have had less of an issue if they'd gone for a CPU direction that was more inline with realworld computing requirements at the time and less an idealistic direction trying to force a multi-threaded world long before it was a viable reality.
Nah, NVidia will release Volta whenever it is ready. They will cash in as much as possible and no point waiting it out.
Well in fairness if they just played "follow the Intel" we would never have had DDR memory, and we wouldn't have gotten mainstream 64bit, dual core, tri core, quad core, hex core, etc until years after we actually got them.
Hell if it hadn't been for AMD innovation then Intel's current flagship enthusiast CPU would probably currently be a 4c8t i7 with dual channel RAMBUS lol.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 9,221
- Location
- Knowhere
Howdy, It's allway's good to read the opinion's of a fresh set of eye's so thank's for joining.
Same here.
We know that the FE is the big chip so I doubt they're now showing us the cut down RX. It may be the air cooled RX though.
If they supported it I bet a lot of us would have gone green, I recently grabbed a 1060 to tide me over, If they supported it I'd of grabbed a 1080 or 1080ti.
Actually it was a bit like that apart from the power on release, The 980ti was just out of reach while some games had the 980 ahead.
If Vega performance is about the same as a GTX 1080 this is not a disaster providing AMD get the following right.
1. The price (bang for buck).
2. The cooling (temps and noise levels).
As to the high TDP, this is not a problem providing they get cooling right. The extra electricity it will use compared to a GTX 1080 is not going to push the users bill up that much.
1. The price (bang for buck).
2. The cooling (temps and noise levels).
As to the high TDP, this is not a problem providing they get cooling right. The extra electricity it will use compared to a GTX 1080 is not going to push the users bill up that much.
- Status