• 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.
Nexus18 said:
Except there is a big difference between:

- 300% over night
- 20-30% at "most" spread across 6+ months to 2 years
Click to expand...

how do you know it's over night?

How do you know people haven't been working on that for ages? How on earth do you know anything unless you work on that card yourself? Let's stop making guesses to further agendas shall we? How about we take that uplift and be happy for it. maybe even say thanks ...!
 
FoxEye said:
They can't. They have a Wafer Supply Agreement with Global Foundries that lasts into 2020 and beyond.

AMD are wedded to GloFo and that's that.
Click to expand...

No, they're able to use TSMC as well, under their agreement they'd just have to pay fees to GF if they do decide to use them. In the event of GF having major problems they would most likely go TSMC.
 
Killer7xx said:
No, they're able to use TSMC as well, under their agreement they'd just have to pay fees to GF if they do decide to use them. In the event of GF having major problems they would most likely go TSMC.
Click to expand...
Define "major problems"... Because it's abundantly clear that GloFo's 14nm process is not good for high clockspeed GPU chips.

And yet AMD were still forced to use them. Perhaps the fees you mention are so high that they realistically can't use TSMC even if it's the better choice for their GPUs.
 
FoxEye said:
Why do you keep shifting between $ and £ as tho they are interchangeable? They weren't/aren't. It muddies the water.

Maxwell launch price was £270/$329 for the 970.

Pascal launch price was £400/~$449 for the 1070. AIB boards form Giga and MSI were $439 and $429 (or vice versa).

We were saying that "Brexit isn't the be-all, end-all" of this price rise. The USD price did jump between Maxwell and Pascal. Brexit is not the smoking gun people keep saying. nV pushed the price a tier higher than it had been during Maxwell.

Any one of us could just find an old thread from around Pascal's launch and see people complaining how the price had shot up vs the 970. And that was before Brexit.

And yet everybody just wants to blame Brexit now for literally everything. If AMD/nV put price the 2070 or the Vega 20 mid-range part at $499 (USD), somehow that'll be the fault of Brexit...

It's an excuse people like to use to justify paying more. Because they want to pay more, but they also want to feel like they had no choice. That's the real problem. People want to spend spend spend but feel like a victim while they do...
Click to expand...

The starting RRP for the 1070 was $379, and since the 1070 release, the GBP to USD rate has mostly been between 1.25-1.30 which after VAT equates to our prices basically being equal to the set dollar price.

1070's have STARTED from the correct RRP. The facts fly in the face of what you are saying.

The exchange rate was ~1.6 when the 970 came out. This is why the 970's started around the £260 mark. If we still had that exchange rate, 1070's would likely have started at the £300 mark.

Those are unfortunately the facts of the situation. Go and ask Gibbo.
 
JediFragger said:
Nope, AMD used to be well-supported here (and ATi before that) but their sub-par performance over the years have seen more and more ATi/AMD fans become disillusioned and slowly the nVidia bias came about. Believe me, I've been here since '99 ;)
Click to expand...

I can't say that's true lol. There's always been a Nvidia fanboy contingent on here, it's just that they are extremely quiet when ATI/AMD has the upper hand, then whenever they see an opening they take the opportunity to make digs at AMD. There's always certain people on here who are vocally against AMD products, going as far as admitting they'd never buy one.
 
It's a bit bizarre really seeing some of the PSU comments in this thread even if some are tongue in cheek. I mean, the TDP is higher than recent flagships, but it's still GTX580/HD7990 TDP, and we didn't need/use multi Kw PSUs for those.
 
FoxEye said:
Define "major problems"... Because it's abundantly clear that GloFo's 14nm process is not good for high clockspeed GPU chips.

And yet AMD were still forced to use them. Perhaps the fees you mention are so high that they realistically can't use TSMC even if it's the better choice for their GPUs.
Click to expand...

Major problems such as in one process being clearly inferior to the other or they cannot keep up with demand due to yield issues. 14nm having slightly lower clocks compared to 16nm isn't a big enough reason to go with TSMC. As we have seen with the Pascal GPUs on 14nm, they only tend to clock about 100 MHz under the 16nm GPUs at maximum overclock.
 
LoadsaMoney said:
** removed **
Aynone going Xfire ?

:D
Click to expand...

lmao...yeah definitely, especially after reading this

AMD is reportedly scaling down efforts on its end to support and promote multi-GPU technologies such as CrossFire, and not in favor of open-standards such as DirectX 12 native multi-GPU, either.
Speaking to Gamers Nexus, an AMD representative confirmed that while the new Radeon RX Vega family of graphics cards support CrossFire, the company may not allocate as many resources as it used to with older GPU launches, in promoting or supporting it.

This is keeping up with trends in the industry moving away from multi-GPU configurations, and aligns with NVIDIA's decision to dial-down investment in SLI.
This also more or less confirms that AMD won't build a Radeon RX series consumer graphics product based on two "Vega 10" ASICs.
At best, one can expect dual-GPU cards for the professional or GPU-compute markets, such as the Radeon Pro or Radeon Instinct brands.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Griffildur said:
how do you know it's over night?

How do you know people haven't been working on that for ages? How on earth do you know anything unless you work on that card yourself? Let's stop making guesses to further agendas shall we? How about we take that uplift and be happy for it. maybe even say thanks ...!
Click to expand...

"over night" statement is a figure of speech....

I am sure that as soon as they caught wind of what vega FE was capable of, they would have been doing everything to improve their cards but again that is what, a few months at most despite people who own the cards and use them for such tasks that have been complaining since the gpu was released? And again, a 300% improvement in a few months at most? Yeah ok....

As uber said, it more than likely had the features disabled from day 1 in order for those who really needed the extra power for such tasks to cough up even more and get a quadro card but with the vega fe etc. coming out and spanking the titan xp for pro work, nvidia had no choice but to enable features/improve the gpu. That is how competition in the business world works.

If you want to believe that nvidia had been working on that from the start and that the 300% improvement update just happened to come out right after vega's release then be my guest :)

Also, don't people on here say about how nvidia are the best because you get the full performance on day 1 i.e. no having to wait around for months in order for the gpus to perform as they should have on day 1??? If it took nvidia this long to get 300% improvement then my goodness, they make AMD look godly in the driver department....
 
Last edited:
FoxEye said:
You clearly have no idea how PSUs work. Feel free to run yours at its maximum output. I sure as hell won't be doing that with mine.

Educate yourself and stop relying on whoever "Kyle at Hardforum" is to spoonfeed you.

e: Also please buy a Vega 64 and try using it with a 500W PSU, with a i7, a couple disk drives, a few system fans... Please let us all know how long it runs before catching fire :p

You're saying you can run a system with a 400W GPU with a 500W PSU.

No-one is taking *that* seriously. no one.
Click to expand...

I know plenty about how a PSU works. Do you how to read? I did say it wasn't overclocked. You really like to exaggerate things and make everything sound way worse than it actually is, RX Vega doesn't use 400W.

Do you know who Kyle Bennett is? He is the owner of HardOcp, the guy who actually has an RX Vega, the guy who is currently working on a review. So since neither us has a card and can't measure power use, I will take his word over yours.
 
And yet everybody just wants to blame Brexit now for literally everything. If AMD/nV put price the 2070 or the Vega 20 mid-range part at $499 (USD), somehow that'll be the fault of Brexit...

It's an excuse people like to use to justify paying more. Because they want to pay more, but they also want to feel like they had no choice. That's the real problem. People want to spend spend spend but feel like a victim while they do...[/QUOTE]
I couldnt agree more im sick to death of people blaming brexit for price rises. We are lucky what we pay now in a few generations when raw materials are depleated things are going to cost a lot more unless we find a way to mine asteroids or something. Sorry gone of topic abit it just annoys me a lot.
 
Confuzz said:
I couldnt agree more im sick to death of people blaming brexit for price rises. We are lucky what we pay now in a few generations when raw materials are depleated things are going to cost a lot more unless we find a way to mine asteroids or something. Sorry gone of topic abit it just annoys me a lot.
Click to expand...

But it is LITERALLY why we in this country are paying more...The pound was worth ~20% more when the 900 series came out. That is EXACTLY why the 970 started at ~£260. If we had the same exchange rate as back then (~1.6) the 1070's would have started at around ~£300.

There is no disputing this, it is just a fact. : / Gibbo himself has said exactly this at launch of the 1000 series as well.

The cards are set at a dollar price. Our money is worth many less dollars now, so we pay more.

The 970 started at around $329/1.6 X 1.2 (for VAT)

The 1070 starts at around $379/1.3 x 1.2 (for VAT)

The 1000 series was tricky as Gibbo explained, because they had to be careful of the crashing exchange rates so there was a certain amount of hedging going on with the prices, with the expected and then confirmed plummet of the pound due to Brexit
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom