ASUS Radeon RX 7600 STRIX OC review
Corsair RM1200X SHIFT 1200W PSU Review
Intel NUC 13 Pro (Arena Canyon) review
Endorfy Arx 700 Air chassis review
Beelink SER5 Pro (Ryzen 7 5800H) mini PC review
Crucial T700 PCIe 5.0 NVMe SSD Review - 12GB/s
Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 PULSE review
Gainward GeForce RTX 4060 Ti GHOST review
Radeon RX 7600 review
ASUS GeForce RTX 4060 Ti TUF Gaming review
Tech preview: AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 and 64
Posted by: on: 07/31/2017 04:27 AM [
50 comment(s) ]
In this technology preview we'll have a closer look at the now announced AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 and 64. AMD is to release three models for the consumer market, two air-cooled versions and one liquid cooled product. Wanna know more? Read all about it here.
Read article
Advertisement
Tagged as:
radeon rx vega,
amd
pages « < 7 8 9 10
Denial
Senior Member
Posts: 14092
Senior Member
Posts: 14092
Posted on: 08/01/2017 02:00 PM
How do you know performance would be the same? AMD's entire problem with GCN is feeding it. It's why they redesigned the front end nearly three times now. Its why DX12 makes such a huge performance increase - because it reduces idle bubbles in the pipeline. Increasing the size of the pipeline isn't going to magically increase performance to the same degree if you drop the frequency. It's just going to create more idleness.
The other problem is - AMD would have had to make this decision like 3 years ago. Everyone in these threads sit here and always say "why didn't AMD do this" "why didn't AMD do that" it's all easy to say now, after the card is launched. But three years ago, when you have your engineers telling you "Hey we can build this Vega at 4096 cores, clock it to 1.6 and as long as we feed it we will get roughly GP102 performance by 2017, we should be good" why would you say no to that?
Performance would be same, but power consumption would be lower. So we are getting to main question - why are they saving? Do they have sale bonuses for effective costs or what? Managers are ready to kill the company in favor own bonuses?
How do you know performance would be the same? AMD's entire problem with GCN is feeding it. It's why they redesigned the front end nearly three times now. Its why DX12 makes such a huge performance increase - because it reduces idle bubbles in the pipeline. Increasing the size of the pipeline isn't going to magically increase performance to the same degree if you drop the frequency. It's just going to create more idleness.
The other problem is - AMD would have had to make this decision like 3 years ago. Everyone in these threads sit here and always say "why didn't AMD do this" "why didn't AMD do that" it's all easy to say now, after the card is launched. But three years ago, when you have your engineers telling you "Hey we can build this Vega at 4096 cores, clock it to 1.6 and as long as we feed it we will get roughly GP102 performance by 2017, we should be good" why would you say no to that?
JamesSneed
Senior Member
Posts: 1680
Senior Member
Posts: 1680
Posted on: 08/01/2017 09:43 PM
I still contend they had Navi in mind when building Vega so there are some sacrifices in Vega so they don't have to start over for Navi. The Vega dies with minimal changes on the 7nm process, glued 2 together via there Infinity fabric then some of it makes since on die sizes frequencies and why HBM2 was used. I'm sure they didn't want to do this but as small as AMD is I would bet someone a Coke this is the approach even If I did't nail the specifics.
I still contend they had Navi in mind when building Vega so there are some sacrifices in Vega so they don't have to start over for Navi. The Vega dies with minimal changes on the 7nm process, glued 2 together via there Infinity fabric then some of it makes since on die sizes frequencies and why HBM2 was used. I'm sure they didn't want to do this but as small as AMD is I would bet someone a Coke this is the approach even If I did't nail the specifics.
Arbie
Senior Member
Posts: 169
Senior Member
Posts: 169
Posted on: 08/05/2017 09:01 PM
Why is it that no matter what a manufacturer does, someone tries to make it sound like an evil plan? AMD announced Ryzen and later announced ThreadRipper. Do you really think they gave up months of selling the latter in order to sell more of the former?? If you don't really think so, then why say it?*
I'm a very happy 1800X owner. I couldn't use more cores, RAM, or PCIe lanes if I had them. Thank you, AMD, and good luck.
*Edit: Sorry; just noticed you're a Trump supporter. That explains the behavior.
Wow how disappointed are Ryzen 1700/1800 builders right now? A threadripper with 8/16 got snuck in. I'm sure they kept that quiet to keep selling the Ryzen.
Why is it that no matter what a manufacturer does, someone tries to make it sound like an evil plan? AMD announced Ryzen and later announced ThreadRipper. Do you really think they gave up months of selling the latter in order to sell more of the former?? If you don't really think so, then why say it?*
I'm a very happy 1800X owner. I couldn't use more cores, RAM, or PCIe lanes if I had them. Thank you, AMD, and good luck.
*Edit: Sorry; just noticed you're a Trump supporter. That explains the behavior.
msroadkill612
Member
Posts: 64
Member
Posts: 64
Posted on: 08/09/2017 05:59 PM
Well done Hilbert.
The most exciting thing about amd is fabric, and vega is the first fabric gpu.
Good to see some cover on HBCC, but I seem to be the only one suitably excited about using nvme as cache.
A; quad, striped, samsung 960 pro array has similar bandwidth to system memory to a 16 lane discrete gpu card.
Vega specs even include ports for dedicated nvme arrays on vegas local fabric, which bypasses the system bus limitations completely, as seen on the new $7k vega pro ssg.
Doesnt anyone think the prospect of ~unlimited gpu cache/memory/workspace has interesting possibilities, even if not right away (its too new a concept for apps as yet)?
Well done Hilbert.
The most exciting thing about amd is fabric, and vega is the first fabric gpu.
Good to see some cover on HBCC, but I seem to be the only one suitably excited about using nvme as cache.
A; quad, striped, samsung 960 pro array has similar bandwidth to system memory to a 16 lane discrete gpu card.
Vega specs even include ports for dedicated nvme arrays on vegas local fabric, which bypasses the system bus limitations completely, as seen on the new $7k vega pro ssg.
Doesnt anyone think the prospect of ~unlimited gpu cache/memory/workspace has interesting possibilities, even if not right away (its too new a concept for apps as yet)?
pages « < 7 8 9 10
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 558
Performance would be same, but power consumption would be lower. So we are getting to main question - why are they saving? Do they have sale bonuses for effective costs or what? Managers are ready to kill the company in favor own bonuses?