Poll: ** The AMD VEGA Thread **

[AMDPower]

http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-rx-vega-64-56-official-slide-performance-specs-price-leak/

AMD is using the flagship Radeon RX Vega 64 Liquid cooled models in most of the benchmarks and this variant has the highest clock speeds of all. In performance tests, AMD used a reference GTX 1080 against their RX Vega 64 Liquid edition and most of the results were on par with the GeForce solution. The difference here is that AMD is calling RX Vega 64 as the more smoother option for the same price.

this could mean the air cooled version will not be as good as the 1080 and you might have to buy the liquid cooled version.

Why did AMD just not just stick with ramping up polaris given the high demands and just releasing navi next year, why waste money. They must have known how bad it performance/power/price ratio was.

 

[cainer]

So... Gibbo when can we expect pre orders?

they'l probably wait untill some of their competitors go live with their prices

 

[d_brennen]

http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-rx-vega-64-56-official-slide-performance-specs-price-leak/



this could mean the air cooled version will not be as good as the 1080 and you might have to buy the liquick cooled version.

Why did AMD just no just stick with ramping up polaris given the high demands and just releasing navi next year, why waste money. They must have know how bad it performance/power/price ration was.

As the saying goes, you got to **** with the dick you got

 

[Gregster]

Not sure if this was posted (I expect it was very early on) but posting for those like me who might have missed it

 

[JediFragger]

Why did AMD just no just stick with ramping up polaris given the high demands and just releasing navi next year, why waste money. They must have know how bad it performance/power/price ration was.

A part of it I'm guessing is that they're obligated to buy a certain amount of HBM2 from Hynix. I could be extremely wrong though, just a guess.

 

[TNA]

^^ Nope not seen that gregster. Going to update the OP soon with a round up of all info so far.

 

[tyler_jrb]

http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-rx-vega-64-56-official-slide-performance-specs-price-leak/



this could mean the air cooled version will not be as good as the 1080 and you might have to buy the liquick cooled version.

Why did AMD just no just stick with ramping up polaris given the high demands and just releasing navi next year, why waste money. They must have know how bad it performance/power/price ration was.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

A part of it I'm guessing is that they're obligated to buy a certain amount of HBM2 from Hynix. I could be extremely wrong though, just a guess.

Its why it would be interesting to see if RX Vega and Fury X compared clock for clock- I wonder if AMD expected higher HBM2 speeds than what they got in the end??

 

[mcfanner]

Hi just wondering if my 650w psu will be enough for the 56 or 64 aircooled version ?

 

[RavenXXX2]

Benchmark leaked.



AMD should have come in cheaper, I don't think they take the discrete gaming market seriously at all. Back to basics head of RTG said, vega is anything but.

 

[opethdisciple]

Same time next year lads.

 

[opethdisciple]

Rx Vega Base 64. Is it faster than GTX 1080?

 

[cainer]

wouldnt be surprised to see Nvidia start to bundle in a game or two with their 1070/1080/1080 ti's before Vega's available stock lands,
i dont see them lowing their prices as they have no need to, but a game or two to sweeten the deal will make more people think twice about jumping on Vega

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

A 64% increase from Vega 56 to Vega 64 for only a 30% increase in FLOPs??

 

[Freddie1980]

according to gamers nexus, they have also tightened the AVFS voltages in the launch drivers/bios. Which should help FE cards as well.

It is a little disappointing in terms of launch performance, but I still believe it will increase to the point of being ahead of the 1080 and catching up to stock 1080ti after another month or two.

I have mixed feelings, on one hand yes AMD's best efforts are disappointing as we still don't have any real competition at the top tier (1980ti/Titan Xp) but then again I never had any expectations that AMD could deliver us a product that could compete at that level and AMD delivered on my low expectations.

My biggest concern is just how long with Vega stick around for. I mean look at it, the chip is huge, the memory is expensive, the card requires a beefy VRM systems to regulate the huge amount of power it requires, this must surely add-up to slim margins for AMD. Yet this is going up against a glorified mid card 1080 which means Nvidia could potentially kill Vega tomorrow by cutting prices to a level where AMD can’t produce an RX Vega cheap enough to warrant selling. Just look at Fury that didn’t hang around for very long at and given on the face of it Vega hasn’t moved forwards from GNC (potentially even gone backwards) I can see the same happing here.

 

[Martini1991]

Is vega just a higher clocked fury x then ?

 

[Toss3]

Not sure if this was posted (I expect it was very early on) but posting for those like me who might have missed it

That is cringe-worthy now that we've seen how it performs relative to the power it consumes (and this is in AMD cherry-picked scenarios!) - and lol at the "buttery smooth framerates" when you can see the game lagging in the background: https://youtu.be/uxVzDQtHzqo?t=9m

 

[N19h7m4r3]

Is vega just a higher clocked fury x then ?

No, Vega is 25-31% faster while clocked nearly 60% faster.

Vega is also too big, as a die shrunk Fury X would be much smaller at 14nm.

 

[Martini1991]

No, Vega is 25-31% faster while clocked nearly 60% faster.

Vega is also too big, as a die shrunk Fury X would be much smaller at 14nm.

That sounds worse

 

[N19h7m4r3]

That sounds worse

It is. Vega does great at compute, and workstation tasks with the correct drivers; but none of that performance the Floppers seem to translate into 3D and games.