• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Radeon RX Vega thread

thelastword

thelastword

Banned
ISee said:
Stop this nonsense, there are reasons to get ryzen over intel in certain tiers and for certain builds and reasons to get intel over ryzen in certain situations. One is gaming at very high framerates. The 7700k is currently the best and most importantly the fastest gaming CPU on the market, especially overclocked at 4.8GHz+, which is doable even on air coolers. Ryzen may have been the better CPU for your build, but not for other people where 20%-25% performance gains are needed and they are happy to pay the extra 30€ for it.
Click to expand...
7700k is better in gaming by a margin of +5%, yet costs more..that is (MB, cooling, the cpu itself etc), runs hotter and burns more current and yet Ryzen is superior for background tasks whilst gaming and streaming whilst gaming....

LelouchZero said:
I don't understand AMD's secrecy with Vega, sigh. Why not just show the performance?

I'm expecting the worst now.
Click to expand...

This is only some blind tests prior to the reveal, they're shooting up the price differential between gaming on the two cards....Why is this a bad thing? It's also no secret about vega specs, because they have not been officially revealed. They will not reveal benches to you before siggraph just to curtail or hype your expectations. The product was announced to be fully revealed in 3 days. All we have to do is wait....
 
dr_rus

dr_rus

Member
saskuatch said:
Except if Vega sucks Volta will have hyper inflated prices.....
Click to expand...

No it won't. NV needs to sell new cards to current NV cards owners and due to current market share split this dictates their pricing on new cards way more than whatever AMD is doing. They also have launched new superior cards first several times in the last several years now and there never were any hyper inflated prices besides the questionable FE bullshit with 1070 and 1080.
 
Locuza

Locuza

Member
ethomaz said:
If these rumors ended to be true... why HBM2 for Vega?

Less bandwidth, more expensive, more power drawn... everything is working against this choice.[
Click to expand...
It doesn't because HBM2 offers more bandwidth per watt and more bandwidth per mm².
Which doesn't mean that only because Vega is using HBM2 it will consume 200 watts less and be better than competing products.

Fiji got HBM1 and had also more raw bandwidth than the 980Ti but better memory alone was not enough to beat it in performance or efficiency.
 
A

Aztechnology

Member
PFD said:
That's what people said before the 1080Ti came out, expecting it to sell for anywhere from 800-1000$ since there's no competition, but it actually released at a decent price
Click to expand...

The 1070 and 1080 we're both markedly more expensive then their predecessors though. Same with the 980ti/1080ti. About $100 in terms of actual cost to end consumer with AIB's etc typically. I hope we don't see another bump as a reaction.
 
thelastword

thelastword

Banned
What could account for better response, lining up shots, to one of them.... better clarity etc on the Vega config? could it be some of the architectural advances of Vega?

I look at Ryzen and it's pretty close to Intel CPU's with much lower clocks. Could AMD GPU's do the same or even surpass NV GPU's with lower clocks? Seems plausible...
 
D

Durante

Member
thelastword said:
I look at Ryzen and it's pretty close to Intel CPU's with much lower clocks.
Click to expand...
getgraphimg.php

getgraphimg.php
Click to expand...
That's truly a thelastword quality assessment.
 
N

napata

Member
thelastword said:
What could acount for better response, lining up shots, to one of them.... better clarity etc on the Vega config? could it be some of the architectural advances of Vega?

I look at Ryzen and it's pretty close to Intel CPU's with much lower clocks. Could AMD GPU's do the same or even surpass NV GPU's with lower clocks? Seems plausible...
Click to expand...

They already do that, it's just a useless metric because it doesn't take into account the amount of cores. And there is no way AMD is going to beat Nvidia when it comes to performance/Tflop. The way it looks right now Vega seems to have regressed compared to Fiji. I think a Fury X at Vega clocks would actually beat it.

Also Ryzen does not actually have better IPC than Skylake like you're implying. Again you're not taking into account the amount of cores.
 
F

FlyingTeacup

Member
napata said:
They already do that, it's just a useless metric because it doesn't take into account the amount of cores. And there is no way AMD is going to beat Nvidia when it comes to performance/Tflop. The way it looks right now Vega seems to have regressed compared to Fiji. I think a Fury X at Vega clocks would actually beat it.

Also Ryzen does not actually have better IPC than Skylake like you're implying. Again you're not taking into account the amount of cores.
Click to expand...

I suppose ryzen+Vega is a terrible idea.
 
D

Durante

Member
Rushersauce said:
Oh, look, it's actually pretty close! Even performing better than Skylake x at the same clocks.
Click to expand...
Yes, it's pretty close at the same clocks in some applications (which is a massive step up from AMD's previous architecture). Now compare and contrast that with the amazing insight I quoted.
 
Z

ZOONAMI

Junior Member
ISee said:
1.) 4.8GHz on a 7700k vs 4GHz on a 1700(x) (+20%). Doable overclocks on both CPUs and single core performance is currently still king for gaming performance.

2.) CPU heavy gaming benchmarks like Watch Dogs 2 where a stock 7700k (4.5 GHz) is able to beat an overclocked 1700 (4 GHz) by 30%.

https://abload.de/img/r7-1700-watch-dogs-2xpy8e.png

But you can also take a look at Witcher 3, GTA V etc. Maybe the average performance plus for the 7700k isn't exactly 20% on average, but it is still a better estimate than the 200% price premium nonsense.

Again: if you want a good PC for a low cost the r5 1600 is currently the best choice. If you need to handle gaming and heavy cpu workloads the 1700 is a very good choice. But if you only care about the best gaming performance the 7700k is the best choice out there.
But no, there is of course no reason to get intel over amd currently, because only AMD buyers are able to make educatated and reasonable decisions. Because everybody has the same needs when building a gaming PC.
Click to expand...

I don't think 4.8ghz is really a typical OC though for a 7700k. It is a hot chip and most people aren't going to be doing that on air. Or I at least wouldn't be putting all cores that high. Maybe a turbo boost 4.8 core 1, 4.6 core 2, 4.4 core 3, 4.2 core 4. You can get a ryzen 5 1600x to 4.0ghz easily on air. If you looked at above 7700k set up vs a 4.0ghz all core 1600x, they would be pretty damn close in gaming, and the ryzen besting the 7700k in pretty much everything else, for less $. More future proofing too with more cores and lower utilization. If I was budding a gaming pc right now I'd go with the ryzen 5 1600x over any other chip on the market. It's impossible to beat the perf/$.

Sure a watercooled 7700k will beat a ryzen 5 1600x in gaming, but it costs twice as much for that set up.
 
J

JWiLL

Banned
Aztechnology said:
The 1070 and 1080 we're both markedly more expensive then their predecessors though. Same with the 980ti/1080ti. About $100 in terms of actual cost to end consumer with AIB's etc typically. I hope we don't see another bump as a reaction.
Click to expand...

I think one reason people are able to forgive Nvidia a bit is that they actually back up their prices with performance.

The 1070 outperformed the previous generations Titan card, for example. The performance boosts have been significant.

Quite the contrast to what we see from Intel on the CPU side.
 
D

DieH@rd

Banned
Since miners have wrecked prices in my region, I just purchased RX460. I will switch to something beefier [Vega or gtx1170] when prices normalize.
 
ISee

ISee

Member
ZOONAMI said:
I don't think 4.8ghz is really a typical OC though for a 7700k.
Click to expand...

So far I've overclocked four 7700k and delidded two of them (all from very different production dates). All four were able to reach 4.8GHz @ 1.29V-1.32V and cooling was doable with dual tower coolers (~75°C-80°C at load). Only two were able to go for 4.9 GHz without having to go for more than 1.35V and only one was able to hit 5GHz at 1.36V. So 4.8 GHz seems like the general go to and reachable OC to me, but I understand the criticism; four is just a lead and not enough for a study. Some people will also of course have trouble to even reach 4.8 GHz, that's the way of the silicon lottery. I also never understood the harsh Kabylake critique. The 7700k is mostly based on Skylake and the 6700k had problems to go higher than 4.5GHz on air, while the 7700k is guaranteed to at least reach that. I think most people are just unhappy because 5GHz aren't doable on a regular basis or need extreme measures like delidding (which I don't recommend doing!).

You can also find more data on various enthusiast forums like overclock.net, but most of them delidde, use enthusiast levels of cooling or only post if they reach 'good' results, so...

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NoxceLMU9dnVev8QmYmBT16fnjwrGkwdIRjTQzzKaVk/edit#gid=0

And no 4GHz isn't easy to reach on ryzen at all, not even on X variants.

PFD said:
Why are we still talking about CPUs


Also, another potential L for Vega, the APU version is slower than the Intel graphics equivalent

https://videocardz.com/71232/amd-ryzen-5-2500u-with-radeon-vega-graphics-spotted
Click to expand...

This must be a low level prototype or something. Being slower than Intels iGPU is to bad to be true.
 
U

Unknown Soldier

Member
dr_rus said:
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 coming in two variants
Click to expand...

AMD doesn't seem to know how to name products.

Nintendo 64 was 20 years ago now. The "Product Name 64" naming scheme passed it's heyday decades ago.

Not that it matters, they could name it AMD Radeon RX Vega vs. Capcom 2 Turbo Hyper-Fighting and it would still be a turd.

What's going to be hilarious is when people who bought Freesync monitors trying to pinch pennies now have to pay a huge tax for very limited availability AMD Vega 64 (AVAILABLE FOR YOUR HOME IN 1995, ONLY ON NINTENDO ULTRA 64). They should have just bought into the superior G-sync technology to begin with and they could have been enjoying 1080 and 1080 Ti for over a year now instead lol.
 
ISee

ISee

Member
Some german sites begin to report that RX Vega is going to cost at least 750€. I still refuse to believe it. A price like that would be ludicrous. You can buy a 1080Ti for that.

Edit: what's going on? 1080 and 1080Ti prices are also extremly high. I bought my asus strix 1080 for 560€ about 6 months ago from amazon. The thing is now listed as 730€. I thought 1080s/Ti were uninteresting for miners.
 
K

Kuosi

Member
ISee said:
Some german sites begin to report that RX Vega is going to cost at least 750€. I still refuse to believe it. A price like that would be ludicrous. You can buy a 1080Ti for that.

Edit: what's going on? 1080 and 1080Ti prices are also extremly high. I bought my asus strix 1080 for 560€ about 6 months ago from amazon. The thing is now listed as 730€. I thought 1080s/Ti were uninteresting for miners.
Click to expand...

The prices seem all over the place in Finland too atm, can get gigabyte 1080 for 599, while on some other stores you can get 1070 for 570 and it's a crappy dual one, 1060 for 400 and so on. Nvidia cards are very uninteresting for miners, but so should the hbm2 vega rx cards be.
 
S

Sir Abacus

Member
ISee said:
This must be a low level prototype or something. Being slower than Intels iGPU is to bad to be true.
Click to expand...

When you have a massive process advantage you can slap in things like a massive register file and a giant L4 cache on the package and have it clock at well over 1GHz.
 
Locuza

Locuza

Member
dr_rus said:
AMD Vega 10, Vega 11, Vega 12 and Vega 20 confirmed by EEC

Vega 20 = HPC exclusive chip with 1/2 rate FP64 and 4096 bit bus (same as GP100/GV100 basically)

Vega 11 = Likely a replacement for Polaris 20 although I wonder if this would even make any sense

Vega 12 = Probably a Vega based GPU to be used in APUs.

There's a big list of all leaked variants through the link.
Click to expand...
It would make sense if Vega 11 is between Polaris 10 and Vega 10.
There is a huge difference between 232mm² and >484mm².

Vega 12 could represent a direct performance replacement for Polaris 10/20.

The graphics core in APUs have their own codenames, Raven1X was mentioned in the OpenCL driver.
 
P

PFD

Member
dr_rus said:
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 official pictures leaked

So apparently there will be two RX Vega 64 air cooled models, a regular one (below) and a Limited Edition one (through the link, leaked earlier), with the same clocks but different coolers - is this AMD's approach to FE bullshit?

Z90c.jpg




Vega 20 being HPC oriented was kinda known for some time now.
Click to expand...

What happened to the badass Vega cooler design? (Similar to Frontier Edition, but in black and red)

This looks practically identical to Fury X
 
B

badb0y

Member
?

>:)

Member
Shin

Shin

Banned
Unknown Soldier said:
I think at this point with the rumors of very high pricing and also this that we can safely assume Vega will be treated as a failed product and sent out to quickly die so everyone can forget about it and go back to Ryzen.
Click to expand...

Except they are stuck with Vega until Navi (2019/2020), we're going to have a Vega refresh (7nm) next year and possible rebrand.
 
dr_rus

dr_rus

Member
First AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Limited Edition shown

7E0c.jpg


Unknown Soldier said:
AMD confirms they will not be livestreaming from SIGGRAPH (Vega launch event):
https://mobile.twitter.com/RadeonPro/status/891109514845372417

I think at this point with the rumors of very high pricing and also this that we can safely assume Vega will be treated as a failed product and sent out to quickly die so everyone can forget about it and go back to Ryzen.

My condolences to all 8 true believers that waited all this time for Vega.
Click to expand...

RX Vega lineup will start at a price between 1070 and 1080. And for those eight there will be a $700 SKU, yes.
 
U

Unknown Soldier

Member
michaelius said:
This really sucks for next gen consoles - through I guess die shrink of Polaris is an option for them with added bonus of easier BC.
Click to expand...

Well I mean Nintendo Switch uses Nvidia. Next-gen MS and Sony consoles could also use Nvidia, the power of ARM64 when you give it a lot of electrons is pretty close to x86 and the modern ARM64 cores humiliate trash like Jaguar today already.

Space_nut said:
So with the architecture updates in vega, it's not much of a change from the previous gcn?
Click to expand...

If anything, clock-for-clock it even looks like a regression from Fiji.
 
M

michaelius

Banned
Space_nut said:
So with the architecture updates in vega, it's not much of a change from the previous gcn?
Click to expand...

We don't know yet. But with how bad it performs it looks like they indeed did major changes which backfired badly.

Unknown Soldier said:
Well I mean Nintendo Switch uses Nvidia. Next-gen MS and Sony consoles could also use Nvidia, the power of ARM64 when you give it a lot of electrons is pretty close to x86 and the modern ARM64 cores humiliate trash like Jaguar today already.
Click to expand...

That would mean no BC and would kill any new console since we moved to iterative platform model and people expect their games will work on next machine.
 
dr_rus

dr_rus

Member
Space_nut said:
So with the architecture updates in vega, it's not much of a change from the previous gcn?
Click to expand...

It's a change in feature support at least since GCN5 finally support DX12 FL12_1 features. This is arguably the biggest change since GCN introduction as GCN1 was pretty close to supporting FL12_0 as all the rest of GCN versions do.
 
M

Mailbox

Member
Those integrated graphics prospects don't look good.
I was excited to see what AMD was doing on the integrated front, but if it is indeed worse than intel integrated, that's a damn shame.

:(

Here's to hoping that Navi isn't a damn dud.
 
M

Mr Swine

Banned
Unknown Soldier said:
PS4 isn't backwards compatible with PS3. I don't see any reason why we should expect PS5 to be BC with PS4.
Click to expand...

Sony and devs would probably love to resell all their PS4 software on PS5 as remaster with true 4K resolution, AA and such.

I do hope that Vega is competitive enough to give an Nvidia run for its money
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Radeon RX 7900 GRE - Review Thread
Analysis Hardware
28
2K
Gaiff replied
Radeon RX 7600XT 16GB - Review Thread
16
2K
winjer replied
AMD Radeon RX 6500XT and RX 6400 to be the first 6nm graphics cards
10
2K
Xyphie replied
AMD Publishes More Radeon RX 6900 XT, RX 6800 XT & RX 6800 RDNA 2 Graphics Card Benchmarks in 4K & WQHD
2 3
147
14K
Kazekage1981 replied
AMD's latest driver update fixes a bunch of bugs, including more Radeon RX 5700 black screen issues
1
708
D.Final replied
Top Bottom