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
MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X TRIO review
GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8GB (FE) review
Preview: AMD VEGA GPU Architecture
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.
Read the editorial right here.
Preview: Desktop Kaby Lake Core i5 7600K CPU - 12/17/2016 12:31 PM
We look at the Intel Core i5 7600K processor, a respin from Intel based on the 14nm node; these processors are more energy friendly. For this review we look at the performance of this processor in a w...
Preview: AMD Radeon R9 NANO - 08/27/2015 01:56 PM
At the launch of the Radeon R9 Fury and Fury X AMD also announced something that caught the interest of many, a small form factor yet high-end graphics card aimed at powerful small game and HTPCs, yes...
Denial
Senior Member
Posts: 14091
Joined: 2004-05-16
Senior Member
Posts: 14091
Joined: 2004-05-16
#5378514 Posted on: 01/05/2017 06:42 PM
People said that when the Original Titan launched, GTX 780 as well.
Then 290x dropped. And lets not act like the Fury X didnt stay within reach of the 980ti and even beat Titan X at higher resolutions or non nvidia games at times before Vram limitations.
Besides these are non even finished retail samples and you are saying AMD is already dead.
There is more to it than just performance when it comes to a company "winning". The Fury X was far more expensive to develop and manufacture than the 980Ti (HBM/Watercooling). That's not to mention that the "within reach/beat" stuff you mention were vs stock. Nearly every single Ti I've seen can overclock to 1500 if not more. That's a 30% increase over the average base boost of a 980Ti.
And while Vega is doing a lot of great stuff architecturally - the end product doesn't appear to be worth the nearly year long wait. The Doom clip they shown looks about ~65fps average - that's only roughly 5 fps over what a FE 1080 gets. You can make the argument that the Vega drivers aren't finalized and engineering sample - I'll agree with that stuff - but then i'll make the argument that AMD's marketing team is dumb. Potential customers aren't going to do potential FPS projections based on FineWine™ tech - they are going to say "damn that's roughly the same as a 1080, might as well buy a 1080 now".
People said that when the Original Titan launched, GTX 780 as well.
Then 290x dropped. And lets not act like the Fury X didnt stay within reach of the 980ti and even beat Titan X at higher resolutions or non nvidia games at times before Vram limitations.
Besides these are non even finished retail samples and you are saying AMD is already dead.
There is more to it than just performance when it comes to a company "winning". The Fury X was far more expensive to develop and manufacture than the 980Ti (HBM/Watercooling). That's not to mention that the "within reach/beat" stuff you mention were vs stock. Nearly every single Ti I've seen can overclock to 1500 if not more. That's a 30% increase over the average base boost of a 980Ti.
And while Vega is doing a lot of great stuff architecturally - the end product doesn't appear to be worth the nearly year long wait. The Doom clip they shown looks about ~65fps average - that's only roughly 5 fps over what a FE 1080 gets. You can make the argument that the Vega drivers aren't finalized and engineering sample - I'll agree with that stuff - but then i'll make the argument that AMD's marketing team is dumb. Potential customers aren't going to do potential FPS projections based on FineWine™ tech - they are going to say "damn that's roughly the same as a 1080, might as well buy a 1080 now".
negachampa
Member
Posts: 61
Joined: 2013-11-09
Member
Posts: 61
Joined: 2013-11-09
#5378525 Posted on: 01/05/2017 07:04 PM
Good Point. Not sure why AMD would be showing VEGA only being equivalent to a 1080. If VEGA is only as good as a 1080 which will have been a year old by the time VEGA is on the shelf we are all in for a big disappointment, depending on the price that is, but for enthusiasts who want the best looks like AMD will be coming up short.
Finders crossed that Zen will be able to compete with Intel. We need some sort of competition for Nvidia and Intel. This is just getting ridiculous.
Good Point. Not sure why AMD would be showing VEGA only being equivalent to a 1080. If VEGA is only as good as a 1080 which will have been a year old by the time VEGA is on the shelf we are all in for a big disappointment, depending on the price that is, but for enthusiasts who want the best looks like AMD will be coming up short.
Finders crossed that Zen will be able to compete with Intel. We need some sort of competition for Nvidia and Intel. This is just getting ridiculous.
Deleted member 164252
Unregistered
Unregistered
#5378535 Posted on: 01/05/2017 07:34 PM
Also don't forget that NVIDIA already has their first chip with Volta architecture in their Xavier AI. This just doesn't look very bright for RTG.
Also don't forget that NVIDIA already has their first chip with Volta architecture in their Xavier AI. This just doesn't look very bright for RTG.
Denial
Senior Member
Posts: 14091
Joined: 2004-05-16
Senior Member
Posts: 14091
Joined: 2004-05-16
#5378546 Posted on: 01/05/2017 08:05 PM
They aren't shipping the Xavier SoC unit until Q3 2017. Pretty sure that chip he held up was a wood screw placeholder. Big Volta is shipping in Q3/Q4 too for the Oak Ridge Super Computer.
We won't be seeing any consumer Volta chips in 2017, I don't think and if we do it's going to be more towards Q4.
They aren't shipping the Xavier SoC unit until Q3 2017. Pretty sure that chip he held up was a wood screw placeholder. Big Volta is shipping in Q3/Q4 too for the Oak Ridge Super Computer.
We won't be seeing any consumer Volta chips in 2017, I don't think and if we do it's going to be more towards Q4.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 5844
Joined: 2003-09-15
Well I'm kinda puzzled now. Is that really all? They didn't even show the card? Just GPU with HBMs? For me this is even bigger disappointing than the NVIDIA Keynote.
I guess everybody understands what this means. AMD is now whole year behind NVIDIA in enthusiast segment.
Also... If that sealed PCs were running this 500mm2 GPU, with performance very similar to GTX1080, that would be really sad.
If they sell this for around <£500 they'll be ok, that's assuming Nvidia doesn't come along and kill the party. However, if Nvidia cuts £100 off the price of GTX1080 when Vega releases, then, AMD would be in trouble.
For people with GTX1080 or better...nothing to see unfortunately.