-
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 Vega Review Thread.
- Thread starter Kaapstad
- Start date
Soldato
People been speaking like Vega has concrete boots for about 6 months now. I dont think they are doomed just yet. Its late and kinda messy so far, I think near year start we heard of some kind of power draw issue they couldnt knock on the head and that was quite accurate. However it seems HBM2 is not quite fast enough anyway ( to challenge ti), we kinda already knew that too so its down to improvements there. I guess that will happen and they'll refine drivers for these.
The lack of stock is also not good but I dont doubt they want to sell for the msrp. Its all a little late that is the theme, I dont label it a disaster outside of hyperbole
HBM2 is plenty fast if they used 4 stacks of it like they did with Fury X. But then can you imagine how much they would have to charge us?
Soldato
I guess I'm just going to start the wait all over again for Navi. The Fury is good enough for now and if that chart is even remotely accurate Navi should be released Q1/Q2 of next year with 50% better performance then Vega.Regardless of everything, AMD failed with Vega even their biggest supporters.
There were many of us here who wanted the Vega 64 regardless it's performance, and especially myself have been the advocate of wait and see, arguing with many in this very forum, who jumped on the Vega FE benchmarks spreading doom and gloom.
However here we have a card that doesn't deliver what promised.
Where is the rumoured Infinity Fabric from CES and Computex?
Where are the benefits of the Ryzen + Vega ecosystem? Just the packaged deals, which were terrible and with no discount in UK?
Also have a look at here, the AMD posted the image bellow months ago.
Vega 64 is on avg 45% faster than the Polaris on DX11 @ 2560x1440, and roughly 64% on DX12, but at 100% (double) more power consumption. Which should place it roughly next to the 28nm GPU.
Yeah many blame Nvidia and Intel, but they manage to pull through what they do, because there is no competition.
Nvidia could have released the Volta by now. The full chip is "launched" since May 10th. It usually takes 2 months of R&D to start "carving" it as it happened with Kepler, Maxwel and Pascal.
But there is no point. They longer hold it, the less the stock will be of Pascal cards, which in light of the expected Vega, had stalled the sales.
And regarding the last bit, see how many bought a GTX1080Ti in here just this week, after Monday. Even myself, after having placed unsuccessfully, and with big messing by the bank and phone browser, order for Vega 64 liquid and finding ludicrous the new pricing, by whom ever wants to grab quick money.
Given also the 1080Ti performance at 3440x1440 and 2560x1440, expect in few months Gsync monitor sales go up, because actually regardless the price, is a good card for more than a single year, like the Vega 64 is. Assuming Navi is good and doesn't tank also.
Who wants to start the thread
I got all excited and did one last time, your turnI guess I'm just going to start the wait all over again for Navi. The Fury is good enough for now and if that chart is even remotely accurate Navi should be released Q1/Q2 of next year with 50% better performance then Vega.
Who wants to start the thread
I guess I'm just going to start the wait all over again for Navi. The Fury is good enough for now and if that chart is even remotely accurate Navi should be released Q1/Q2 of next year with 50% better performance then Vega.
Who wants to start the thread
Honestly not taking the mick, but got to love the optimism in here!
The chart was posted as proof that AMD didn't match their expectations, and then we use it to justify a bright future with the next release. Here's hoping!
Honestly not taking the mick, but got to love the optimism in here!
The chart was posted as proof that AMD didn't match their expectations, and then we use it to justify a bright future with the next release. Here's hoping!
Well at least AMD were honest in that slide, it actually says projected roadmap, subject to change. The guy who made the slide for Vega pricing must have forgot to use it on that slide.
Projected pricing, subject to change, aka new AMD tech called Dynamic pricing
Associate
My first ever BIOS flash was turning my 9700 into a 9700 Pro which saved me nearly £100, really was great timesIf i remember correctly i am sure i turned a fair few 9500 to 9700 great times
Associate
My first ever BIOS flash was turning my 9700 into a 9700 Pro which saved me nearly £100, really was great times
Yep for sure great times 128 bit bus to a 256 bit bus
would only work with non pro 9500 ..i did a fair few at the time bios and hardware modhttps://www.digitaltrends.com/how-to/radeon-9500-to-9700-mod-faq-a-follow-up/
Soldato
Honestly not taking the mick, but got to love the optimism in here!
The chart was posted as proof that AMD didn't match their expectations, and then we use it to justify a bright future with the next release. Here's hoping!
Personally as I see it, the replacement of the Aorus 1080Ti Xtreme is to be out around 2019, being suitable for 4K gaming.
The Aorus Xtreme a fantastic card for 2560x1440 & 3440x1440 and we ain't going to see GPU performance jumping much until then.
Caporegime
I can see why a few are cheesed off in here in truth but if they do get the cards out at £450 and especially the custom cooled one's, I don't see Vega as a fail in gaming (I genuinely don't give a hoot about compute). The biggest issue is AMD themselves and the PR department.... Poor Volta being something that sticks in my mind and a silly silly PR stunt when you look at the big picture. Charged £450 for 30 mins and then went and upped the price astronomically!
For what it is, Vega 64 at £450 is decent, Vega 64 at £550 and above isn't IMO and I understand that HBM isn't cheap and AMD's margins won't be anywhere near as much as NVidia's but the launch does seem to be a bit comical.
For what it is, Vega 64 at £450 is decent, Vega 64 at £550 and above isn't IMO and I understand that HBM isn't cheap and AMD's margins won't be anywhere near as much as NVidia's but the launch does seem to be a bit comical.
Soldato
My first ever BIOS flash was turning my 9700 into a 9700 Pro which saved me nearly £100, really was great times
I did the pencil approach.
Associate
Yes agree with you
I would buy at £450 for sure...that's what cheesed me of and many others is seeing it @ £450 and then shoot up... no one wants to pay more when they have seen it at £450 already ...AMD would have been better not having it at £450 in the 1st place ...
So from the information I've gathered gamers are now a secondary focus to AMD (I'd recommend watching the video over on goodoldgamers). Which is a shame, but they need money and they can't rely on a fickle crowd for that (heck i wasn't even going to buy VEGA unless it was like twice as fast as a titan XP for half the cost).
As for the price/performance. Everyone is measuring performance in gamers (which is fair, its what you do); but you need to understand that AMD aren't. The post i've quoted is the performance that AMD is measuring and truth be told they win.
Its obvious where all the driver development has been, and it ain't games. I do wonder how good these cards can be once the drivers are up to scratch.
Well I wonder if come NAVI gamers will still be second fiddle; hopefully my 970 keeps going strong.
As for the price/performance. Everyone is measuring performance in gamers (which is fair, its what you do); but you need to understand that AMD aren't. The post i've quoted is the performance that AMD is measuring and truth be told they win.
Slower than what you say
Maybe put the Nvidia cards in SLI?
On an unrelated note did you know Nvidia's P6000 costs 5 grand?
If you can use the compute power of Vega then you get such a massive bang for your buck.
So there's a reason for you.
Its obvious where all the driver development has been, and it ain't games. I do wonder how good these cards can be once the drivers are up to scratch.
Well I wonder if come NAVI gamers will still be second fiddle; hopefully my 970 keeps going strong.
550 would not be so bad if it had a decent custom cooler, I can live with the performance and power draw but 600 with a rubbish blower is just too much for me
Soldato
It doesn't matter about where Vega is. I see from the drawing they are saying Vega-Navi is a bigger gap than Polaris-Vega so that's where 50% came from. Why notHonestly not taking the mick, but got to love the optimism in here!
The chart was posted as proof that AMD didn't match their expectations, and then we use it to justify a bright future with the next release. Here's hoping!
Oops. Didn't realise it was performance to Watt ratio on the left. Could just be Vega with way better power consumption.
Associate
Well at least AMD were honest in that slide, it actually says projected roadmap, subject to change. The guy who made the slide for Vega pricing must have forgot to use it on that slide.
Projected pricing, subject to change, aka new AMD tech called Dynamic pricing
Um - there is this slide in the pack that included the pricing, with the magic words "is subject to change without notice":
Yep I think I've lost intrest in the 64, the 56 looks a bit mor promising, custom cooled are going to be no cheaper than the 1070 so maybe 480 ish and wolfenstein thrown in for something like the asus Strix might grab my attention