• 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.
TheSwede said:
How can they have a "Was" price since card never been sold before ? :confused: :rolleyes:
JpcQj6e.gif
Click to expand...
Are you getting confused? That card has been out a while.......
 
andybird123 said:
you are saying FRAME, yes, but you are ignoring textures, if textures are not in VRAM they need to be loaded from somewhere else and you haven't actually stated a reasonable solution that isn't latency intensive, if they are sharing memory they are sharing bandwidth and increasing latency (because sharing memory would need an off chip controller to prevent other issues)

at present a GPU loads all or nearly all of a level's textures to VRAM so that they are ever present and easily accessible without latency - splitting a single frame to smaller chunks does not solve this issue

basically, you appear not to have a clue what you are talking about and no one has actually stated how they intend to solve these issues

I'm not saying these issues are not at all solvable, but the actual performance increase the solution represents remains to be seen as to whether it is really worth it over a monolithic design

saying "because CPU" isn't an answer as the challenges the two face are fundamentally different

when mantle/dx12/vulkan first started appearing there were statements that they would allow GPU's in crossfire/SLI to share VRAM, but for the same reasons many of us with a little bit of knowledge questioned this and pointed out the same reasons as to why it wouldn't save much or offer much of an advantage and to date no one has even tried (with DICE devs even pointing out the same issue as to why they would not even try it).
Click to expand...

You do know games have been using ram and hdd/ssd for texture caches for ages? :D You seem to be pretty clueless.
For saying frame I tought you would understand I ment that everything is loaded what is shown on frame, textures included....
Why would 2 gpu card need more memory or banwich when they are sharing the memory? Gpu 1 would not need to load then what gpu 2 needs to load. 2 gpu desing with shared memory would not need to load everything twice. I didnt say breaking the frame multiple parts would help memory, I said it would help utilize shaderz that are not utilized now because of AMD design. And I dindnt say see how cpu are build you can make gpus same way. Even Nvidia has already stated multiple chip cards is way to go forward. Yields making small dies are far better than using big dies.
 
D.P. said:
Who is annoyed at AMD?


The only annoying think is clickbait articles trying to get ignorant AMD diehards to believe that Navi is going to be some miracle that cures cancer.

Navi will be a monolithic die.
When MCM gous come to fruition beyond 7nm, the goal is purely to reduce manufacturing costs since the process gets so expensive.
What AMD have publicly talked about is simply called crossfire, and getting developers mutiple GPUs. This is self-evident by the fact AMD just aren't bothering making high-end compeition and instead want developers to better code crossfire compatible games
Click to expand...

Can I ask what AMD did to you? Just curious why everything you say about AMD is negative and quite frankly, seems a bit angry.
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Because everytime people talk about AMD going to multiple chips in AMD THREADS,the same people get annoyed saying it will be rubbish or bad or will never happen whilst ignoring the fact Nvidia is doing the same,and yet never do that in Nvidia threads saying the same thing.

So it is hypocrisy really that the same people have not been moaning in Nvidia threads about Nvidia looking at the same thing.

All they are doing is trying to thread thrash AMD threads.

Whether Navi does it not is not relevant,unfortunately for certain people,its the way things will go whether they like it or not,so they will need to deal with it.
Click to expand...

+1

AMD have been talking about doing this for a long time now and have just done it with there Cpu's. I understand it's a bit more complicated to do with Gpu's but it's coming possibly with Navi and Nvidia will be doing the same thing when the time is right for them.
 
I really want reviewers to compare both AMD and nVidia cards on both AMD and Intel CPUs. This will hopefully highlight the nVidia on Ryzen issue to people as well.
 
It looks like any hope of Ryzen / TR paired with Vega pulling some magic numbers out the bag isn't going to happen .. unless there are still driver optimizations to come ?
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Because everytime people talk about AMD going to multiple chips in AMD THREADS,the same people get annoyed saying it will be rubbish or bad or will never happen whilst ignoring the fact Nvidia is doing the same,and yet never do that in Nvidia threads saying the same thing.

So it is hypocrisy really that the same people have not been moaning in Nvidia threads about Nvidia looking at the same thing.

All they are doing is trying to thread thrash AMD threads.

Whether Navi does it not is not relevant,unfortunately for certain people,its the way things will go whether they like it or not,so they will need to deal with it.
Click to expand...
Not seen that happening, care to give links to such posts.

What I do see is people being taken along for a ride with these fanciful click bait articles, and then other people trying to ground things in reality using cold hard facts, logic, physics, and economics. Of course that can upset people's delusions.

I don't see anyone ignoring the fact that Nvidia is also researching such technologies for the future. For example most posts are including Nvidia in the dicussion, this is especially true of my posts where I make related statements such as "AMD/NV will use MCM to reduce costs on new processes".

You say it is hypocracy that no one is moaning at Nvidia.well no one is moaning at AMD either, or again please provide a link to these posts.


If you think someone is trying to trash an AmD thread then report them. But really it seems you just aren't understanding the posts.
 
Steampunk said:
Seems like AMD simply aren't targeting the TI at all, and are matching a factory overclocked 1080.
Click to expand...

They would love to go after the 1080 Ti or even Titan Xp but you can only use what is available in the tank.

AMD need to offer better value for money than you get with the GTX 1080 and all will be fine, if they don't people won't buy Vega just because it is expensive and made by AMD.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom