• 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.
TheRealDeal said:
I think it was Raja himself that said RX Vega will be faster than the FE edition so clocks have to be as high as that card you would think to achieve this.
Click to expand...

He never said the gaming cards would have higher clocks.speeds, only that the gaming card would have better performance for gaming. The assumption at the time was the FE cards would have professional drivers which aren't as fast for gaming.

Turns out that may not actually be true, which is very strange.

Either way, I don't see AMD releasing a single GPU rated at 375w. That is just unfathomable. There were a lot of leaked benchmarks run at nearer 1200MHz, these could absolute be engineering samples down locked and indeed that is the most likely reason for the discrepancy. However, it wouldn't surprise me one bit if the gaming cards card came in at nearer 1200MHz and 275w. Why then did Raja talk about gaming Vega being faster? Well who knows, it is AMD we are talking about "overclock dream". There could be some thing simple like the gaming cards will get 8GB of the 2.0GBPS memory and thus have more bandwidth,bit run at lower clocks.
 
not long to wait now until we are finally put out of our misery. I then do the unthinkable, buckle and proceed to order that 1080ti and give up on Freesync.
 
I sure as hell can't wait until they are released. Sometimes wonder why i come and take a peek at this thread. Just gives me a head ache. Bit like the overclockers dream ehh D.P? :D
 
melmac said:
Except that the Titan cards are advertised as gaming cards.
Click to expand...


If you've followed nvidia pr since the original titan's release you'd know nvidia don't specifically advertise them as gaming cards, that being said they still stick geforce gtx on top of the card in led's so doesn't really matter what they say. :p
 
D.P. said:
He never said the gaming cards would have higher clocks.speeds, only that the gaming card would have better performance for gaming. The assumption at the time was the FE cards would have professional drivers which aren't as fast for gaming.

Turns out that may not actually be true, which is very strange.

Either way, I don't see AMD releasing a single GPU rated at 375w. That is just unfathomable. There were a lot of leaked benchmarks run at nearer 1200MHz, these could absolute be engineering samples down locked and indeed that is the most likely reason for the discrepancy. However, it wouldn't surprise me one bit if the gaming cards card came in at nearer 1200MHz and 275w. Why then did Raja talk about gaming Vega being faster? Well who knows, it is AMD we are talking about "overclock dream". There could be some thing simple like the gaming cards will get 8GB of the 2.0GBPS memory and thus have more bandwidth,bit run at lower clocks.
Click to expand...

I can't ever remember a Pro card being clocked higher than a gaming version but i guess there is a first for everything.
 
D.P. said:
Either way, I don't see AMD releasing a single GPU rated at 375w. That is just unfathomable.
Click to expand...

That figure was for the Total Board Power, PCIe + 8pin + 8pin for the liquid cooled version.

Also people are forgetting Apple are putting Vega cards into their iMacs later this year. No way Apple would use such a hot mess if they really used that much power.

AMD skipped Hawaii and Fiji because of their power requirements and TDP.
 
FoxEye said:
I predict cut-down Vega will offer 290/390/480/580 performance for about... let's see... £250 quid?

:p :p :p
Click to expand...
Dont think it'll be that cheap for a while. People say 4gb is unlikely, to get it that low would need like 2gb versions like that demo of HBCC. I love that spectrum of extremes to be a possibility but its improbable.
They didnt launch 580 only to wipe it out that fast. Say Vega is 1080ti maybe better sometimes despite the doubts by many then the cut down version is a bit hobbled and cheaper and its sub 1080 but that is still expensive. The Vega versions will either be premium performance or in the laptop area of expensive and wont eclipse that 580 area anywhere close to this year.
If Navi is much later then the more digestible mainstream types of Vega I guess wont arrive especially fast. The little? CPU/GPU hybrid is most interesting if it'll be something close to what could be bought by a casual user, do we still expect that 2017

Chuk_Chuk said:
The answer to your question: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owL_KY9sIx8
Other interesting vids: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rq1aqYFj7aQ&t=1s
https://youtu.be/m5EFbIhslKU
Click to expand...
Interesting how it all fits together
CIwLQUp.jpg
cAeHTzl.png
yeKyj7q.png
WaeijgF.jpg
9eQFqYl.jpg

Radeon VEGA Frontier Edition Professional Air Cooled Graphics Card - 16GB HBM2 - 4096 Stream Pro
Total value excluding VAT £998
Click to expand...
There you go, 3 figures if you are a business. The ones paying in a strong currency could even call it a reasonable business expense :p

opethdisciple said:
Looks like a Subaru!
Click to expand...
Yep classic colours
1iQwiZP.jpg

I dont think the gaming version is going to be blue? Theres that gold version so I think gaming is red, led etc
 
Last edited:
V F said:
What is the game image with all the wireframe/polygons supposed to resemble?
Click to expand...

It's part of their new programable geometry pipeline rendering stuff where it shows the full wireframe, but can apparently Not render things that aren't displayed on the monitor.
Think of it as a nice fix to prevent Crysis 2 issues were AMD cards lost all their performance because it was rendering a tessellated ocean below the ground.

From the AMD Event
http://www.pcworld.com/article/3153...w-about-amds-cutting-edge-graphics-cards.html
The way graphics cards render games isn’t very efficient. Case in point: the below scene from Deus Ex: Mankind Divided. It packs in a whopping 220 million polygons, according to Koduri, but only 2 million or so are actually visible to the player. Enter Vega’s new programmable geometry pipeline.

Rendering a scene is a multi-step process, with graphics cards processing vertex shaders before passing the information on to the geometry engine for additional work. Vega speeds things up with the help of primitive shaders that quickly identify the polygons that aren’t visible to players so that the geometry engine doesn’t waste time on them. Yay, efficiency!
Click to expand...
 
Hmm 220million must be ignoring backface culling (which should be as efficient as any other discard system) and the engine really should be using PVS, some quick and dirty occlusion culling with an imposter or similar techniques, etc.
 
Chuk_Chuk said:
Its the same as the image just before it, without the textures. Is that what your asking?

Edit: It seems the guy with the complicated name:p understood the question better than me
Click to expand...

Yeah, @N19h7m4r3 :D

Quite neat though. I suffered that with the 5870 CrossFire on Crysis 2. The part in the city with all the robots and machines that was somewhat dark grey-ish blue.
 
Rroff said:
Hmm 220million must be ignoring backface culling (which should be as efficient as any other discard system) and the engine really should be using PVS, some quick and dirty occlusion culling with an imposter or similar techniques, etc.
Click to expand...

Surely, regardless of if you have backfacing culling on or off a polygon is a polygon. Your not going to count it twice because backface culling is off.
 
Chuk_Chuk said:
Surely, regardless of if you have backfacing culling on or off a polygon is a polygon. Your not going to count it twice because backface culling is off.
Click to expand...

From a quick look at the scene the only way I can imagine they got to that number is counting backfaces and other polygons that would be discarded due to things like frustum culling which is a bit deceptive.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom