Poll: ** The AMD VEGA Thread **

[N19h7m4r3]

What a fail, benching it against a gaming card.

The Vega card was also tested using gaming drivers it seems.

As both Vega and the Titan Xp are being shown up by a £660 Polaris card.

Vega FE (£1200)
Catia = 135.75
CREO = 83.94
SolidWorks = 114.88
Cinebench OpenGL = 183.28

Radeon Pro WX 7100 (£660)
Catia = 104.34
CREO = 82.08
SolidWorks = 111.55
Cinebench OpenGL =197.11

Titan Xp (£1200)
Catia = 107.29
CREO = 65.2
SolidWorks = 67.75
Cinebench OpenGL = 169.72

 

[AllBodies]

The Vega card was also tested using gaming drivers it seems.

As both Vega and the Titan Xp are being shown up by a £660 Polaris card.

Vega FE (£1200)
Catia = 135.75
CREO = 83.94
SolidWorks = 114.88
Cinebench OpenGL = 183.28

Radeon Pro WX 7100 (£660)
Catia = 104.34
CREO = 82.08
SolidWorks = 111.55
Cinebench OpenGL =197.11

Titan Xp (£1200)
Catia = 107.29
CREO = 65.2
SolidWorks = 67.75
Cinebench OpenGL = 169.72

So....back on the train again?

It beats the Titan Xp in every (professional) metric using comparable drivers?

 

[five8five]

http://pro.radeon.com/en-us/vega-frontier-edition/

In the DeepBench benchmark. It doesn't specify the driver.

According to the notes, the other benchmarks use more up to date drivers then going by the NVidia drivers used.

 

[D.P.]

So....back on the train again?

It beats the Titan Xp in every (professional) metric using comparable drivers?

And is similar to the RX480. yay, so fast.

Or alternatively, what a pile of horse excrement.

 

[Sargatanas2511]

And is similar to the RX480. yay, so fast.

Or alternatively, what a pile of horse excrement.

Yup, That Titan XP should really be doing better than that RX480.

 

[D.P.]

Yup, That Titan XP should really be doing better than that RX480.

I would be more worried about Vega being no better than an RX 480 if you believe that crud, because we all know how well a Titan stands up to the 480 in gaming.

 

[Sargatanas2511]

I would be more worried about Vega being no better than an RX 480 if you believe that crud, because we all know how well a Titan stands up to the 480 in gaming.

Then stop using this crud to justify negative comments .

 

[D.P.]

Then stop using this crud to justify negative comments .

i'm not, quite the opposite. i'm telling people to ignore such junk. Certain other posters seem to think there is value to the numbers though. Of course such posters have a very particular affinity with certain hardware vendors.

 

[Erik13]

Then stop using this crud to justify negative comments .

Lol thats exactly what i thought, why so much negativity if titan xp is even slower than vega compared to rx480 pro variant

 

[AllBodies]

And is similar to the RX480. yay, so fast.

Or alternatively, what a pile of horse excrement.

Yeah but that's the comparable drivers, no?

The RX 480 beats it using firepro drivers.

But the Titan Xp and the Vega are both using gaming drivers.

 

[Lokken86]

Look guys its clear that Vega is no better than a 480 lets move on. Even though the company can produce Ryzen and Threadripper from such a disadvantageous position and somehow have Intel on the run we must be expecting too much that they possibly get a GPU to even match their own FuryX...

 

[Phixsator]

Look guys its clear that Vega is no better than a 480 lets move on. Even though this company can produce Ryzen and Threadripper from such a disadvantageous position and somehow have Intel on the run we must be expecting too much that they possibly get a GPU to even match their own FuryX...

Pretty much sums up my own thoughts.

 

[D.P.]

Yeah but that's the comparable drivers, no?

The RX 480 beats it using firepro drivers.

But the Titan Xp and the Vega are both using gaming drivers.

which means both the Vega numbers and Titan numbers are useless.

NVidia and AMD purposely limit performance in pro software in their gaming drivers, e.g. drawing lines is typically throttled.

 

[akarypid]

The Vega card was also tested using gaming drivers it seems.

As both Vega and the Titan Xp are being shown up by a £660 Polaris card.

Vega FE (£1200)
Catia = 135.75
CREO = 83.94
SolidWorks = 114.88
Cinebench OpenGL = 183.28

Radeon Pro WX 7100 (£660)
Catia = 104.34
CREO = 82.08
SolidWorks = 111.55
Cinebench OpenGL =197.11

Titan Xp (£1200)
Catia = 107.29
CREO = 65.2
SolidWorks = 67.75
Cinebench OpenGL = 169.72

I'd be interested to see results of a WX 7100 using gaming drivers (if possible to run) or at the very least an RX480/580 clocked to match the WX 7100.

Just want to see what sort of impact the theory of a gaming Vs pro driver has.

 

[Chuk_Chuk]

I'd be interested to see results of a WX 7100 using gaming drivers (if possible to run) or at the very least an RX480/580 clocked to match the WX 7100.

Just want to see what sort of impact the theory of a gaming Vs pro driver has.

Are you aware that the WX7100 is clocked lower, than its gaming counter parts?
I've heard that there are minor changes in hardware that allow for improved performance. Not sure how/if this is true though.

 

[N19h7m4r3]

I'd be interested to see results of a WX 7100 using gaming drivers (if possible to run) or at the very least an RX480/580 clocked to match the WX 7100.

Just want to see what sort of impact the theory of a gaming Vs pro driver has.

Are you aware that the WX7100 is clocked lower, than its gaming counter parts?
I've heard that there are minor changes in hardware that allow for improved performance. Not sure how/if this is true though.

Gotcha covered folks!

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-480-polaris-10,4616-8.html

http://proclockers.com/reviews/video-cards/gigabyte-radeon-rx-480-g1-gaming-8gb-graphics-
card-review?nopaging=1

The OpenGL performance of the RX 480 was from the G1 Gigabyte overclocked card.
The WX 7100 is clocked below the reference 480, and has slower RAM as well.


Vega FE (£1200)
Catia = 135.75
CREO = 83.94
SolidWorks = 114.88
Cinebench OpenGL = 183.28

RX 480 (£240-500)
Catia = 92.14
CREO = 47.3
SolidWorks = 74.14
Cinebench OpenGL = 166


Radeon Pro WX 7100 (£660)
Catia = 104.34
CREO = 82.08
SolidWorks = 111.55
Cinebench OpenGL =197.11

Titan Xp (£1200)
Catia = 107.29
CREO = 65.2
SolidWorks = 67.75
Cinebench OpenGL = 169.72

 

[akarypid]

Are you aware that the WX7100 is clocked lower, than its gaming counter parts?
I've heard that there are minor changes in hardware that allow for improved performance. Not sure how/if this is true though.

Yes, which is why I said that "ideally a WX 7100 with gaming drivers" (if possible to run; maybe the gaming drivers simply won't work with), OR at the very least the results of an RX480/580 clocked to match the WX 7100 (i.e. under-clock the gaming card so that it's closer to the pro one).

 

[Erik13]

Gotcha covered folks!

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-480-polaris-10,4616-8.html

http://proclockers.com/reviews/video-cards/gigabyte-radeon-rx-480-g1-gaming-8gb-graphics-
card-review?nopaging=1

The OpenGL performance of the RX 480 was from the G1 Gigabyte overclocked card.
The WX 7100 is clocked below the reference 480, and has slower RAM as well.


Vega FE (£1200)
Catia = 135.75
CREO = 83.94
SolidWorks = 114.88
Cinebench OpenGL = 183.28

RX 480 (£240-500)
Catia = 92.14
CREO = 47.3
SolidWorks = 74.14
Cinebench OpenGL = 166


Radeon Pro WX 7100 (£660)
Catia = 104.34
CREO = 82.08
SolidWorks = 111.55
Cinebench OpenGL =197.11

Titan Xp (£1200)
Catia = 107.29
CREO = 65.2
SolidWorks = 67.75
Cinebench OpenGL = 169.72

Unless i am missing something this actually looks good for amd on par with expectations at least

 

[akarypid]

Unless i am missing something this actually looks good for amd on par with expectations at least

It's still all speculation, because (if I'm not mistaken) we don't know for a fact that these (Vega FE) results are from gaming drivers.

But yes, it does seem to be a fact that gaming drivers score significantly worse...

 

[ShiWarrior]

apparently you can now pre order the Frontier Edition, not checked where
maybe US only (not sure)