Poll: ** The AMD VEGA Thread **

[D.P.]

It really does look like they have targeted making money outside gaming for this round and are trying to market the gaming Vega the best way they can with what they have.

But Vega FE is not really designed for applications outside gaming. If they really wanted to compete in the HPC/compute markets then it absolutely would need 1:2 FP64 support. It also doesn't compete probably in the professional market since FE drivers are not certified and there will be a proper Firepro Vega later.


We will know in a few days but Vega is looking like the Bulldozer. Hope I'm wrong.

 

[JediFragger]

With Pascal Nvidia new they had a clear performance lead and zero competition so being straight ot he point worked.

True, it's when either of them are going to go behind that it gets fuzzy. AMD's will be interesting for sure.

 

[TwsT]

Freesync adds nothing to the price.. thats the point.

Edit (adaptive sync not fast sync derp)

adaptive sync adds nothing to the cost freesync is neither free nor open source it's simply cheaper than g-sync. Freesync monitors have a price and there are none freesync versions.

adaptive sync is the vesa standard that I believe AMD gpu's do support and I imagine Nvidia will eventually.

 

[TheRealDeal]

Adaptive sync is the Vesa Standard. Fast Sync is a Nvidia feature and it looks like AMD will be adding there own version to there software suite.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

fast sync adds nothing to the cost freesync is neither free nor open source it's simply cheaper than g-sync. Freesync monitors have a price and there are none freesync versions.

Fast sync is the vesa standard that I believe AMD gpu's do support and I imagine Nvidia will eventually.

FreeSync is the AMD software interface to a Vesa standard that is being incorporated into newer scalers.

AMD didn't invent the standard and Nvidia is also part of the consortium behind it.

The most AMD did was poking

Also how come some of the cheapest monitors in the world with display port have FreeSync?

My mate just bought one last month for his budget gaming rig for just over £100 and it has a 40~76HZ range.

Edit!!

It is actually a 35~75HZ range:

https://uk.hardware.info/reviews/6417/14/aoc-gaming-monitors-review-for-every-budget-conclusion

The models we're very excited about, are the G2260VWQ6 and the G2460VQ6. They excel not only because of their speed, but also because of their color quality. Synchronization is a huge plus especially under 60Hz, which is why we think the range of 35-75Hz is fine. Further the price of these products is simply right. When looking at the entire market, we'd already label both of them as Great Value, but because of its excellent color quality we also award the G2260VWQ6 with an Excellent Choice Award.

Its a £100 monitor!! The fact is for a slower card like an RX570,anything under 60HZ is going to be helpful as you tend to be more GPU limited even at 1080p with a cheaper card.

 

[ubersonic]

Its a £100 monitor!!

It is but it would also be cheaper without Freesync as a selling point, hence people pointing out that while it adds very little to costs it does add to prices.

 

[subbytna]

https://www.nordichardware.se/nyheter/radeon-rx-vega-prislapp-sverige.html

HAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAAH Is all I have to say to AMD. I am AMD fanboy but this is just ridiculous. Nobody will buy something that does not perform
the same as a 1080TI what kind of madness is this.

It's pretty much known that it's in between a 1080 and a 1080Ti in performance. It won't beat a 1080Ti.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

It is but it would also be cheaper without Freesync as a selling point, hence people pointing out that while it adds very little to costs it does add to prices.

No it wouldn't really mean that - since I even made a thread yonks ago about the first £100 budget monitors with displayport. The first cheap monitors with displayport had FreeSync and that is because they used newer generation budget scalers which probably supported displayport,but also parts of the newer specifications for adaptive sync.

Also so many times people have tried to make that argument elsewhere(not here)- I remember when some of the budget 120/144HZ FreeSync monitors came out,someone argued with me,I went through a load of UK retailers and showed them,that the only 120HZ/144HZ budget monitor which was cheaper was on clearance,ie,and was the same line as that FreeSync monitor was basically replacing it.

 

[Mauller]

But Vega FE is not really designed for applications outside gaming. If they really wanted to compete in the HPC/compute markets then it absolutely would need 1:2 FP64 support. It also doesn't compete probably in the professional market since FE drivers are not certified and there will be a proper Firepro Vega later.


We will know in a few days but Vega is looking like the Bulldozer. Hope I'm wrong.

Vega FE can be used for AI work, it also has plenty of pro use cases where certification is not required. The certification is only really needed in big companies where the work being done can be considered mission critical etc.

 

[TwsT]

Adaptive sync is the Vesa Standard. Fast Sync is a Nvidia feature and it looks like AMD will be adding there own version to there software suite.

apologies your'e right

but yes freesync itself is not the free thing

 

[melmac]

All the talk of NVIDIA'S G-Sync tax, how many of you honestly believe that NVIDIA have any say In the price set for most of these monitors.

They are that price because they will sell at that price not because NVIDIA has any say in it.


If NVIDIA really wanted to sink Vega they could just adopt the Adaptive Sync standard as G-Sync lite and make the AMD argument a completely moot point.

Nvidia has a lot of say in the price of Gsync monitors. The monitor manufacturers have to buy the Gsync module from Nvidia. Where do you think the term freesync came from? It was because the monitor manufacturer didn't have to pay any licensing fees to AMD, nothing to do with the monitor been free. You can probably work how much that costs manufacturers by looking at the price difference between their Freesync and Gsync ranges where they have the exact same monitor at two different prices.

And I don't think you are right about the second point either. Nvidia want to tie people into their eco system. The more people that buy gysnc monitor the better for them. If they switched over now to adaptive sync it would look bad for Nvidia. Adaptive Sync has become Freesync to most people and is associated with AMD. How would it look if Nvidia started using something AMD's name is linked with.

 

[D.P.]

FreeSync is the AMD software interface to a Vesa standard that is being incorporated into newer scalers.

AMD didn't invent the standard and Nvidia is also part of the consortium behind it.

The most AMD did was poking

Also how come some of the cheapest monitors in the world with display port have FreeSync?

My mate just bought one last month for his budget gaming rig for just over £100 and it has a 40~76HZ range.

Edit!!

It is actually a 35~75HZ range:

https://uk.hardware.info/reviews/6417/14/aoc-gaming-monitors-review-for-every-budget-conclusion



Its a £100 monitor!! The fact is for a slower card like an RX570,anything under 60HZ is going to be helpful as you tend to be more GPU limited even at 1080p with a cheaper card.

The response times do slightly disappoint - they're not bad per se, but the competition not offering FreeSync is still faster.

So they made a tradeoff and are producing a lower quality screen with freesync at a similar price to better screens without freesync.


Freesync isn't free of cost, the word free refers to licensing.

GSync is marketed as a premium technology in higher end monitors, so the prices are just higher anyway. The issue of Gsync monitors needing a redsign to accommodate the hardware is a but overspoken. Sure, if a manufacturers wanted to add gsync to an existing display it might require a small redesign depending on the chassis (or as Roff pointed out with his Asus, it just gets taped into place). but if a manufacturer wanted to designa new screen that supported Gsync an freesync/no sync then the extra cost is non-existent in that respect as the design work has to be done anyway. the hardware and license is soemthign like $30. The price difference in the end will mainly come down to the prices the manufacturer can sell the screen at. Quite obviously if people weren'tt paying the prices for Gsync monitors then they wouldn't sell and manufacturers would stop producing them. The fact that Gsync monitors are sold at a premium means the public are quite happy to pay that price and the manufacturers enjoy the extra profit margin.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

apologies your'e right

but yes freesync itself is not the free thing

So they made a tradeoff and are producing a lower quality screen with freesync at a similar price to better screens without freesync.

I just looked at one your biggest competitors which actually stock a larger selection of monitors - including loads more budget ones.

The cheapest 22" FreeSync monitor with Displayport is only £2 more than another one from a crapper brand(with no FreeSync) which does have Displayport.

The first £100 monitor with displayport actually was a FreeSync one,and its down to the scaler used.

Also,D.P. I actually have seen that £100 monitor in action,at a LAN,and for the price its pretty solid gaming monitor,and that similar price non-FreeSync one with DP seems to have worse image quality according to reviews I looked at.

Would I expect a more expensive GSync monitor at £250+ to be better,yes OFC,but FreeSync has always been targeted as a more budget option.

Edit!!

Here is the thread I made ages ago:

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/t...-freesync-monitors-starting-from-99.18689519/

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Having said that I do think once you get into the realm of £500+ monitors and £500+ cards,the cost differences probably are less important to be totally fair as the high end market tends to be less cost conscious to a degree.

 

[five8five]

AMD are probably pulling an Nvidia trick where they throw silly prices around and then sell at a slightly less silly price so that all the numbskulls think it's a bargain cause it isn't the original sillier price.

Well it does look like a bargain compared to Vega FE Water

 

[Jono8]

oops wrong thread

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

AMD are probably pulling an Nvidia trick where they throw silly prices around and then sell at a slightly less silly price so that all the numbskulls think it's a bargain cause it isn't the original sillier price.

It has to beat a GTX1080FE by a reasonable amount though,or at least be around aftermarket GTX1080 level,otherwise I am not sure unless they pitch this under the price of a GTX1080,whether it will gain any traction as a card.

Edit!!

If you look at the Fury X,the TPU launch review shows the reference GTX980TI was upto 10% faster at qHD and 4K and that was not helped by the 4GB of VRAM for certain games I suspect.

If this can barely match a GTX1080,it will be relatively worse especially as it is on a new node,as the GTX1080TI FE is between 20% to 30% faster than a GTX1080 FE:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Zotac/GeForce_GTX_1080_Ti_Amp_Extreme/31.html

 

[Nablaoperator]

tweet by ayymd ceo: Getting ready to ship @AMDRyzen #Threadripper... super excited! More details on @Radeon Vega and Threadripper at #SIGGRAPH2017.

can she be any more clear about the status of vega's paper launch?

 

[MichaelM]

I've had enough of waiting for Vega. I'm waiting for Navi now.

 

[Nablaoperator]

The way this "learn more about vega" stuff is dragging ... i may end up with a bloody phd by september
somehow those obnoxious prices quoted by nordichw are looking acceptable if it can cut the wait..
i hope the swedish have good healthcare programs for 25% vat