Caporegime
Gibbo has mentioned it.
-
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.
Where the hell is NAVI???????????
- Thread starter humbug
- Start date
Gibbo has mentioned it.
More likely July earliest, September most likely and worse case November as there has been delays pushing it back further.
Plus its doubtful it will be able to offer Vega 56 performance for less than £200.
The main advantage is smaller die, cheaper memory and most importantly much larger profits for AMD which they desperately need to do in order to survive in VGA game, otherwise just be better to pull out and make CPU's where you make plenty of money, using the CPU business to keep VGA business afloat is very bad practice for long term.
I feel Navi will be good, great value and most importantly AMD's profits will further improve.
AMD needs the GPUs development for the APUs, anyways. For the consoles, too
I don't think so. RX Vega 56 is superior than 1660 Ti in all characteristics. They must keep it alive.
Associate
- Joined
- 17 Sep 2018
- Posts
- 1,432
I reckon Navi is nearer than we might expect and that's why this generations prices are dropping so much
I think it'll be close. Last time AMD haved it's NM process we had the 480 outperforming the 380 by 40%. So if top level Navi does the same with the 580 replacement it'll be on par with Vega 56 and the 2060 performance wise. But the move to GDDR6 should see a bigger gain in theory, so maybe the rumours of 1080 or 2070 performance out the box are true. Plus you get a quieter card. But then again the better it performs the more it's probably going to cost.
I think it'll be close. Last time AMD haved it's NM process we had the 480 outperforming the 380 by 40%. So if top level Navi does the same with the 580 replacement it'll be on par with Vega 56 and the 2060 performance wise. But the move to GDDR6 should see a bigger gain in theory, so maybe the rumours of 1080 or 2070 performance out the box are true. Plus you get a quieter card. But then again the better it performs the more it's probably going to cost.
Soldato
Raw performance, just, a little bit more ram sure, but all characteristics erm no
Soldato
Navi' like Polaris is tweaked GCN , ill expect 1080 performance at 1080 power consumption or a little worse @275-300 GBP. Expecting much more I think people will be disappointed
How is it greed when AMD are selling you a card below what is cost them?
Vega 56 is a $399, yet were selling them at $279 which is pretty much a loss to AMD, as a manufacturer to be truly healthy they should make 50% on the product, to cover R&D, wages, logistics, so how anyone can even remotely utter the word greed towards AMD is nothing but appalling.
They give the gamer so much, during the mining craze, AMD never changed prices, it was board partners and resellers. In fact as the mining hype was kicking off AMD was smashing out HD 7990 cards at massive losses.
"Little bit" more memory is 2 GB more, which is 33.33% more and it's the state-of-the-art HBM2 memory. Raw performance is in another league:
10,566 GFLOPS for the RX Vega 56 vs only 5,437 GFLOPS for a 1660 Ti, which is 100% more.
FP64 performance is 660.4 GFLOPS for the RX Vega 56 vs only 169.9 GFLOPS, which is 288% more.
Texture rate is 330.2 GTexel/s for the RX Vega 56 vs only 169.9 GTexel/s.
Memory bandwidth is 409.6 GB/s for the RX Vega 56 vs only 288.0 GB/s.
Image quality, the geforce can not match, so think once again.
Associate
I was referring to the cards in the £700 plus range, particularly Nvidia cards. I well know AMD loses money on these things, what I will say is that perhaps both companies should focus on maturing the technology before mass producing it, they simply can't keep passing these ever increasing costs onto the consumer.
Associate
I have a 4K monitor (ordered 1440p but Amazon were feeling generous) and I can get my Vega 56 running games native at acceptable frame rates, without needing to break the bank.
Permabanned
So it was okay when AMD were diverting all the resources they could into the cpu side of the business to create Zen but now that succeeded they can't do it the other way round? For the last 6 or 7 years the gpu side of the business has suffered while R&D funds were diverted for Zen, As Lisa Su said some time ago they've been able to increase RTG's budget, so they're in the process of getting RTG back in the game, it just takes time.
Soldato
As someone else mentioned, the only 'good' priced Polaris's are 570 and the lower priced 580's. 590 is now a joke with perf/price.
Vega 56 from OcUK specifically is hell of a deal.
If the 1660 Ti got reduced (it won't I suspect, because they Nvidia keep 1060 prices high even compared to the better and cheaper 580's), then it would be a good purchase.
What I suspect will happen with Navi will just be much better price/perf ratio with low to mid-range products, and finally AMD actually be able to make profit from their products again. They only were profiting due to crypto prices. HBM is damn expensive. There cards are over engineered compared to Nvidia's, and yet cannot keep up perf wise.
They need some good money making cards again, as much as I want them to bring a high-end card.
The waiting is killing me lol.
Vega 56 from OcUK specifically is hell of a deal.
If the 1660 Ti got reduced (it won't I suspect, because they Nvidia keep 1060 prices high even compared to the better and cheaper 580's), then it would be a good purchase.
What I suspect will happen with Navi will just be much better price/perf ratio with low to mid-range products, and finally AMD actually be able to make profit from their products again. They only were profiting due to crypto prices. HBM is damn expensive. There cards are over engineered compared to Nvidia's, and yet cannot keep up perf wise.
They need some good money making cards again, as much as I want them to bring a high-end card.
The waiting is killing me lol.
My crystal ball says Navi = 56 performance at £200, 64 performance at 250-300£ with lower power draw ofc, but even then it might not be that much less compared to undervolted Vega.
Whether it's worth the wait to save £50-100 is up to you, I just got the 56 as I was sick of waiting and it blows through everything anyway. Won't be looking to replace until next gen consoles and the GPUs that follow are out.
Whether it's worth the wait to save £50-100 is up to you, I just got the 56 as I was sick of waiting and it blows through everything anyway. Won't be looking to replace until next gen consoles and the GPUs that follow are out.
Soldato
Reviewers disagree on the " another league". When 6gb becomes issue the performance wont be there like with vega56.
Extra memory bandwidth means Jack if you don't have the performance to back it up (see VII) its well know that AMD designed them self's into a corner after. They NEEDED HBM, not for the bandwidth but for the power saving, the amount of power a 512bit GDDR5/GDDR6 with there current designs would have been so huge that little would have been left little over for the rest of the core in the power budgets.
But ofc power dons't matter does it ?
A pointless metric, AMD gpu's have always quoted higher theoretical figures. Ask your self if V56 has almost double the "Gflops" why is the 1660ti performance.
See above eps in gaming
Again see above, This tells me that extra memory bandwidth is wasted
This old chestnut. Its been donkey's years since there was a difference
No mention, heat, power, die size, card size.
TLDR: I care little for theoretical specs and care for real world metrics personally, if V56 performance was in a different league why did AMD feel the need to drop the price of V56 again so they make loss/heavy loss on $300+ BOM card?
V56 is a great value card ATM saying that but I find the 1660ti more impressive on a technical/engineering level for the Performance per watt and the performance for the die space personally.
Soldato
Vega 56 is the quicker card of the 2 though so the numbers do mean something though it definitely isn't as cut and dry as "Vega 56 has 288% more FP64 so is 288% quicker".
This performance will always be there and helpful for the users in one way or another. For mining, for more work loads, if you wish, etc.
1660ti is on average 8% slower than vega 56
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.techspot.com/amp/review/1797-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-ti/
The other 280% will be lost in heat/inefficiency and must go some way to producing all that extra noise
Having owned a vega 56 they do make sense at their current silly price point but I’m not daft enough like some (not you Sargatanas ) to think it’s the next messiah.
