Patriot Viper Venom DDR5 6200 CL40 review
AMD Ryzen 9 7900X processor review
AMD Ryzen 5 7600X processor review
AMD Ryzen 7 7700X review
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X review
DDR5 Ryzen 7 7700 DDR5 memory scaling review
Seasonic Arch Q503 chassis + Connect PSU review
GeForce RTX 4080/4090 announcements (preview)
Corsair HS55 Wireless Core Headset review
TerraMaster F4-423 NAS Review
AMD Vega 10 GPU Name Accidentally Confirmed as Radeon RX 490 gets 8GB
Well, it's not like it was exactly a secret but thanks Bethesda for confirming it. Bethesda announced it will release a new HD Texture Pack for the PC version of Fallout 4. To prepare PC gamers for this upcoming pack, Bethesda revealed the system requirements for it, and guess what they listed?
And it appears that the big publisher has leaked the name and the amount of graphics memory (8GB) that AMD's upcoming Vega10 GPU will feature. According to Bethesda, these are the official requirements for Fallout 4’s upcoming High-Resolution Texture Pack.
Recommended PC Specs
- Windows 7/8/10 (64-bit OS required)
- Intel Core i7-5820K or better
- GTX 1080 8GB/AMD Radeon RX 490 8GB
- 8GB+ Ram
Meanwhile in a new updated HBM2 specifications document released by SK Hynix they confirm HBM2 specs and availability of 4 gigabyte (32 Gbit) HBM2 stacks in Q1 2017. If you look at the photo below you can see two HMB2 stacks :) Radeon "Vega" thus indeed has 2x 4 GB HBM2 stacks, 8 GB of total memory.
If you dig a little deeper into the document you'll notice SK Hynix H5VR32ESM4H-H1K at 1.60 Gbps (per pin), with a cumulative bandwidth of 205 GB/s per stack. x2 is 410 GB/s of memory bandwidth, if AMD sticks to the reference clock on this memory
AMD VEGA10 Graphics Card Photos - 01/09/2017 01:11 PM
Over at CES AMD has been showing a thing or two gaming wise, the DOOM 4K demos for example. These all have been run on a VEGA10 graphics card, a photo now has surfaced....
AMD Vega 10 and Vega 20 Slides Revisited - 01/07/2017 10:17 AM
You can't say that AMD hasn't got little media attention the past few months. A new set of slides surfaced at the usual suspect, this round a set with VEGA 10 and VEGA 20 slides....
Preview: AMD VEGA GPU Architecture - 01/05/2017 04:46 PM
It is time to talk through a few mysteries from the AMD VEGA graphics processor architecture, join us in a preview architecture breakdown of what is to be expected with AMD VEGA graphics processors. R...
AMD Vega to likely get added to new Mac Pro - 12/08/2016 03:37 PM
Yesterday some info appeared in some forums, as it seems a beta version of MacOS Sierra 10.12.2 shows references to several new AMD video cards. Vega 10 is spotted inside the driver as well as Polari...
AMD Vega 10 - Vega 11 and Vega 20 GPUs Mentioned - 09/20/2016 03:24 PM
In an investors event AMDs CTO mentioned AMD Vega 10 - Vega 20 and Vega 11 GPUs. Not just that, some specs are shared as well....
cryohellinc
Senior Member
Posts: 3509
Joined: 2014-10-20
Senior Member
Posts: 3509
Joined: 2014-10-20
#5387077 Posted on: 01/31/2017 08:46 PM
Fingers crossed that it will be at least as competitive as gtx 1080, otherwise big disappointment.
Fingers crossed that it will be at least as competitive as gtx 1080, otherwise big disappointment.
serbicu
Senior Member
Posts: 2338
Joined: 2007-10-20
Senior Member
Posts: 2338
Joined: 2007-10-20
#5387080 Posted on: 01/31/2017 08:58 PM
If it's on par with gtx 1080, and so late released, that will be a big disappointment!
The only thing that will make people buy it will be the future performance increase due to drivers and better dx12 support, but by then NVIDIA will have another card out.
It has to be on par with 1080ti or big Pascal to be a game changer.
Fingers crossed that it will be at least as competitive as gtx 1080, otherwise big disappointment.
If it's on par with gtx 1080, and so late released, that will be a big disappointment!
The only thing that will make people buy it will be the future performance increase due to drivers and better dx12 support, but by then NVIDIA will have another card out.
It has to be on par with 1080ti or big Pascal to be a game changer.
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 6830
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 6830
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5387092 Posted on: 01/31/2017 09:15 PM
I don't get why people think this. Unless you have a 144Hz 2K monitor (or some other uncommon monitor setup), the 1080 doesn't make sense: it's not good enough to play most modern games at 4K with max detail, meanwhile the 1070 can play just about any game above 60FPS at 2K with max detail. I'm all for healthy competition but the 1080 is niche even for enthusiasts.
What I think is more important is if it can handily outperform the 1070 while using at least 50 fewer watts. A GPU that can outperform the 1080 would only be worth buying if it can do 4K gaming, which for AMD would be a weirdly huge performance gap between the 480 and 490. Even the performance gap between the 460 and 470 is uncharacteristically large for AMD. If AMD makes another Fury, that I think is what should focus on outperforming the 1080.
Anyway, if you don't have an obscure display setup, then clearly all you care about are getting bigger numbers for the hell of it. If that's the case, why don't you personally have a better CPU, or 2+ 1080s?
Fingers crossed that it will be at least as competitive as gtx 1080, otherwise big disappointment.
I don't get why people think this. Unless you have a 144Hz 2K monitor (or some other uncommon monitor setup), the 1080 doesn't make sense: it's not good enough to play most modern games at 4K with max detail, meanwhile the 1070 can play just about any game above 60FPS at 2K with max detail. I'm all for healthy competition but the 1080 is niche even for enthusiasts.
What I think is more important is if it can handily outperform the 1070 while using at least 50 fewer watts. A GPU that can outperform the 1080 would only be worth buying if it can do 4K gaming, which for AMD would be a weirdly huge performance gap between the 480 and 490. Even the performance gap between the 460 and 470 is uncharacteristically large for AMD. If AMD makes another Fury, that I think is what should focus on outperforming the 1080.
Anyway, if you don't have an obscure display setup, then clearly all you care about are getting bigger numbers for the hell of it. If that's the case, why don't you personally have a better CPU, or 2+ 1080s?
Ryu5uzaku
Senior Member
Posts: 7247
Joined: 2006-09-24
Senior Member
Posts: 7247
Joined: 2006-09-24
#5387108 Posted on: 01/31/2017 10:30 PM
Price wise, Vega 10 is basically capable to be cheaper than Fury X to produce. (Bigger margins.)
Take it this way:
While it has 8GB of HBM2, it needs only 2048bit IMC instead of 4096bit IMC on Fury/Fury X. (And yet it has same basic bandwidth.)
And that means bit cheaper interposer too.
My humble guess is that RX-490 will have 225W Power consumption and will run at 1350~1400MHz.
With changes in architecture I expect it to be up to 45~50% faster than Fury X (Mostly due to clock.)
And Power efficiency improvement: 1.5 / 1 * 300/225 = 2
So I expect 2x performance per Watt over what Fury X delivers.
Tbh if it is 12tflop part it will be somewhere around 1500mhz no way around that. Also it should have better IPC then Fury or Polaris cards. And all in all improved anyway.
Price wise, Vega 10 is basically capable to be cheaper than Fury X to produce. (Bigger margins.)
Take it this way:
While it has 8GB of HBM2, it needs only 2048bit IMC instead of 4096bit IMC on Fury/Fury X. (And yet it has same basic bandwidth.)
And that means bit cheaper interposer too.
My humble guess is that RX-490 will have 225W Power consumption and will run at 1350~1400MHz.
With changes in architecture I expect it to be up to 45~50% faster than Fury X (Mostly due to clock.)
And Power efficiency improvement: 1.5 / 1 * 300/225 = 2
So I expect 2x performance per Watt over what Fury X delivers.
Tbh if it is 12tflop part it will be somewhere around 1500mhz no way around that. Also it should have better IPC then Fury or Polaris cards. And all in all improved anyway.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 11809
Joined: 2012-07-20
Price wise, Vega 10 is basically capable to be cheaper than Fury X to produce. (Bigger margins.)
Take it this way:
While it has 8GB of HBM2, it needs only 2048bit IMC instead of 4096bit IMC on Fury/Fury X. (And yet it has same basic bandwidth.)
And that means bit cheaper interposer too.
My humble guess is that RX-490 will have 225W Power consumption and will run at 1350~1400MHz.
With changes in architecture I expect it to be up to 45~50% faster than Fury X (Mostly due to clock.)
And Power efficiency improvement: 1.5 / 1 * 300/225 = 2
So I expect 2x performance per Watt over what Fury X delivers.