Will it flop?

>>59612649
I'm not even asking for 1080ti performance, just get us to 1070 territory at a good price and we'll go from there.

>>59612649
1070 performance at 250$ and ill stick one up my ass

>>59612774
Don't be a moron, 300-320 minimum

>>59612774
seconding this

>>59612649
probs slightly

nobodies buying a fucking 700 dollar 1080ti so if it's the right price it will sell like hotcakes

File: 03_big.png (49KB, 849x621px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 849x621px

Seeing how AMD basically raped intel with the R7s, I think so, yeah.

pic related: electrical consumption at different voltages.

>>59612865
>nobodies buying a fucking 700 dollar 1080ti

they are selling like hotcakes and are better bang for buck than the 1080

>>59612649

It can hardly flop, as long as the price-performance is right it will be good.

>>59612900
Lol, raped who and how? The single thread performance isn't even on par with Haswell

Is it HBM2? (if yes, there is a chance)
Will Nvidia's next architecture have HBM2 and a transistor shrink? (if yes, there is no chance)

>>59612649
This ain't my first rodeo. Yes.

For me, AMD could release a better card than the 1080TI for $500 and I still wouldn't buy it. All the 'goodies' you get with NVIDIA are adding up to be too much. Superior H265 encoding, infinitely better for emulating, fastsync, HBAO+ optimizations, etc.

But I'm glad people buy AMD in spite of it being the worse option, it keeps NVIDIA on their toes so they have to provide me with better stuff.

>>59612865
The founders edition literally sold out within minutes.

>>59612914
700 dollars for 10 frames is not value for money

>>59612933

What's it like being so insecure and easily triggered?

It's IPC is broadwell level.

>>59612961
>Geforce Experience

>>59612961

Looking forward to gamedontworks DX12!

>>59612649
it will sell if the price is right, even if the card is less efficient or performs slightly worse whatever it's targeting. amd will probably make sure it has a premium feel to the build quality as they have been going at lately.

>>59612987
I ran it in an API monitor, turns out it doesn't really spy on you. It's a meemee.

>>59612978
What's it like being a brainless fanboy? AMD-senpai will never notice you by the way.

And it's Its*

>>59612961
Shitty drivers, geforce facebook experience, cards being nerfed after a year, etc.

Seems like both sides have their pros and cons. Personally i'm with AMD for the freesync and card longevity

>it's called Vega
>there's no promotion with the cyborg boss guy from D44M called 'Vega'

Why

>>59612975
>>10 frames
>>Vidya
Please go back to /v/

>>59612975
10 frames in games where it becomes a CPU bottleneck but in games where you get 100% of your GPU you get more for your money with the ti.
Even if you don't like NoVideo you can't deny the ti is a huge success.

>>59613021
it's still garbage

>>59612865

>>nobodies buying a fucking 700 dollar 1080ti
>I'm broke, so everyone else must be as well!

File: Screenshot_20170327-191323.png (148KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 1080x1920px

>>59612933
Yes it is? It only does bad in games because they're heavily affected by cache timing.

Here is a single threaded a benchmark, 1800X runs at 4ghz single core, 6600K single core runs at 3.9ghz, and 7600K runs at 4.2ghz single core. It's pretty much evenly spread here. 4790K is at 4.4ghz single core, and 7700K at 4.5ghz.

And this is with 2133mhz RAM, worst case scenario for the CCX.

>>59613131
>Synthetic benchmarks

lol

>>59612649

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtyaGppWknE

no

>>59612942
Vega will be be like Ryzen: surprisingly improved perf, better than the competition in some but definitely not all areas, and more focus on professional/enterprise stuff than gaymen lovers would like.

It's a bigger ASIC than TXP/1080Ti, but a lot of the silicon is going towards things completely separate from pure rendering, like HBCC.

>>59613131
Ah yes, let me just boot up LAMMPS Molecular Dynamics Simulator v1.0, my favorite application that I enjoy using. This is the only thing Ryzen performs well in so that's why I like it

>>59613030

Only thing brainless is the way you suck dick.

Apostrophe "s" to denote singular ownership.

http://data.grammarbook.com/blog/apostrophes/apostrophes-with-names-ending-in-s-ch-or-z/

Broadwell IPC with MUCH faster SMT.

>>59613182
>Only thing brainless is the way you suck dick.

You are so mad

>Apostrophe "s" to denote singular ownership.

Proper use in the sentence you used was "Its" you moron, go finish high school.

If it has 1070 performance, I'd be willing to pay up to 300 USD, which is what the 1070 should have been priced at, to begin with.

File: 1475751846038.jpg (28KB, 680x583px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 680x583px

>>59612649
It better fucking not!

Otherwise I'm switching back to ngreedier when volta drops.

>>59612942
>Will Nvidia's next architecture have HBM2 and a transistor shrink?
Volta is a Pascal refresh with HBM.

>>59612649
It will flop like every other AMD GPU.
The 1060,1070, and 1080 out sold every AMD GPU.

Steam survey shows the 7000 series is still more popular than the 200,300 and ex series.

The fact that nvidia sold 7 times as many $700 gtx1080s says a lot.

>>59612900
kys trip fag

>>59613248
Source: your ass?

>>59612649
Even if it doesn't take the performance crown, I'll still get it as long as it's reasonably priced. I'm not giving any more money to Nvidia and their shitty business practices.

If it is a total failure, I'll just stick with my Fury for a while.

>>59612649
probably around a trillion flops

>>59612969
>>59612914
I would take that with a grain of salt, Nvidia never actually reported the numbers just that they sold out, they could have only had 500 for sale and sold out for all anyone knows.

You are just automatically equating success to Nvidia reporting that they sold out which is incredibly presumptive and simply based off of a controlled press report.

File: 16864507_157461171431464_2077513617122007159_n.jpg (25KB, 385x385px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 385x385px

>>59612774
The Nitro Fury is on sale for 235 at newegg again kek
>tfw I paid 350 in August

>>59613394
Are we still memeing that the fury is in any way equivalent to the 1070? Because it's not even close.

File: Screenshot_20170327-194030.png (147KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 1080x1920px

>>59613146
>>59613172
Ah but first let me recompile my kernel

>>59613095
Don't be ableist.

>>59613416
>Linux
>Relevant

Pick one

>>59613300
Top Volta SKU already confirmed to be 13tflop, GP102 is at 11.8tflop

Does AMD have something similar to NVIDIA's CUDA?

>>59613411
http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Radeon-R9-FURY-vs-GeForce-GTX-1070
Big whoop, nigger.

>>59613500
>gpuboss
really makes me think

File: 1460439408553.jpg (36KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 640x360px

>>59613394
>TWO 8 pin power connectors

>>59613394
you paid extra to use it earlier, thats how it works.

>>59612649
It flopped by being a fucking year late and letting Nvidia make billions from 1080s selling like hot cakes with no competition.

File: a498e19ea036d0243de1b40697ca62b9.png (393KB, 448x567px) Image search: [Google]

393KB, 448x567px

I don't even care. Give me 980ti-1080 performance, whatever. I just need a modern AMD card for freesync. The 480 isn't enough for my games at high refresh, nor is the fury X.
I think vega will be the start of great things, AMD is undoubtedly doing better than they have in the past so they will continue to build on top of vega. It's a whole new design basically, first gens dont have to be the best. They don't need to come at every segment just rebrand the 480 and throw us 144hz or >1080p people a upper mid range bone. The money saved from not buying gsync is worth it alone to me personally.

I'd also really appreciate a totally unlocked card. None of this pascal encrypted bios exactly 10% "overclock" on every card bullshit. Let me crank the power limit and volts and push a 280mm rad to 70c.

Why are the intel shills so incredibly rampant and savage? They really can't accept that Intel is not the only fucking option anymore. It's like they enjoyed getting sold 4 core chips for a decade.

>>59613500
>gpuboss

Please tell me you're joking.

>>59613675
Ryzen sucks for gaming, that's a fact.

>>59613584
then buy ryzen if power consumption is a issue

>>59613941
and you suck at shilling, that's a fact and im still buying ryzen

>>59613990
I literary couldn't care less

>>59614137
you replying seems to say otherwise

>>59614152
It's my thread, I'm just using your fanboyism to bump it. Say some more dumb shit, I'll reply later.

>>59614170
>intel fanfag calling others fanboys

>>59614170
i got ryzen too

>>59614185
Ryzen loses to Intel's same priced alternative every single time when it comes to gaming. These are facts.

Yeah, vega will probably flop. It will be 10-20% slower than the 1080ti for the same price most likely.

AMD falling behind in the GPU market is much better than them falling behind in the CPU market, so hopefully they're investing more R&D into future successors to Zen so that they remain relevant and can return to profitability instead of trying to regain share in the gaming market, which is relatively smaller than the entire x86 CPU market.

File: eyJ1cmwiOiJodHRwOi8vaS5pbWd1ci5jb20vYldRVVgwTy5qcGcifQ.jpg (22KB, 374x468px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 374x468px

>>59613394
>Paid 250 for it in december.

It will be ryzen all over again
It will be advertised as the fastest thing on the market*
* - only in benchmarks that no one but shills care about

>>59614724
Claim to beat intel in Cinebench, come out and beat intel in Cinebench

wew lad

but but my GAYMING

>>59612649
>inb4 it's slower on windows 10

Nothing wrong with GPU boss, it objectively compares the stats of two card. What more did you want?

>>59613030
ITT: People not knowing that IPC != clock speed, typical /g/ AMD vs Intel threads

>>59613941
>Ryzen sucks for gaming
This isn't /v/ so why should anybody here give a shit?

>>59614137
Doesn't look like you're that literary anyway

It should be okay. People will think it flops because AMD will throw out the usual cherrypicked benchmarks and the AMD hype machine will roll on, and then it comes out and it's exactly what everyone was expecting there will be a flood of AMD IS FINISHED threads, made by the same people who were making up 'leaked benchmarks' showing it beating the 1080ti or some shit.

>>59612774
between 1060 and 1070 performance at $450

"they bought our 1800x they will eat this shit up"

File: 1466179044929.gif (128KB, 160x120px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 160x120px

>>59613394
wow you mean When I needed a GPU at that price I would have needed to wait nearly 2 more year?
>mfw my r9290/r9 390 was $280 2 years ago

discrete cards will be shit but hopefully they'll be cheap shit and possibly beat out 1070 in price/performance. the integrated apus on mobile ryzens will blow intel the fuck out.

>buy RX480 on Black Friday because it has a decent price
>dead after three months
>replaced under warranty
>new card crashes every so often, most likely defective as well
Not buying AMD again in the near future. And Ryzen would be good if it could easily reach 4.5-5Ghz

i hope it's great.. I already bought a 1080 because i waited enough.
But Nvidia needs some competition in the high end

>>59615228
>I bought a shitty (probably fucking ANUS)480
>waaah more ghz make longer pipeline moar pls Intel pls

File: Capture.png (8KB, 374x177px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 374x177px

>>59614838
Do you see anything wrong with this?

>>59615228
>what is IPC
4GHz Ryzen whacks the shit out of +5GHz delidlakes.

>>59615313
No, unless the workload is properly threaded, where yes, superior SMT whacks the living shit out of Intel.

>>59614251
compare it to the 6900k faggot

>>59615320
its better in almost every single regard

>>59615334
Nah, Zen has ~7% lower IPC than delidlakes and can't achieve higher clocks even at lower core counts.

im sure it will do great in asses of singularity

>>59615360

You do realise IPC is not fixed and varies depending on the workload in question? There are ways to make Intel's IPC crumble if you hit the hardware the wrong way.

>>59615394
You need some serious pajeetcode to make it crumble though.

File: Saeko-stare.webm (642KB, 500x280px) Image search: [Google]

642KB, 500x280px

Anons, stop parroting retarded prices.
It's a big die with HBM2, there is no way it's going to be cheap. At least $400 and I'm being nice. Realistically, it's probably going to be at least $500.
That being said, I might buy regardless to upgrade from a 970 and grab a freesync monitor while I'm at it.

>>59612649
If it's between 1080 and 1080ti for $500-600.
I will buy it. It's a theme with AMD, r7 1700 is between i5 and i7, 1800x is between 6850 and 6950. They hit market properly.

>>59615407

Anything that doesn't fit in a given chip's cache will murder performance - its why xeons have huge amounts of cache per core and i3's do not. It doesn't take much to cripple and i3 or pentium and is why clock for clock i7's pull away from i5's, the extra cache really helps.

>was saving up for a vega card
>realize i hardly need a beefy card
>decide to use my money on work out equipment and a used 1080 instead
it's unfortunate because i wanted to support AMD but they just took way too long. i doubt what ever $450 card they release will match a heavily overclocked 1080s performance.

>Will it flop?
To not flop they have to lead in performance by a huge margin to the point Nvidia would have to lower prices their cards to mid tier junk and on top of this amd MUST convinces more devs to use their software tools more for their games.

If vega can lead for 2 generations of GPUs right out of the gate and hold it there maybe it wont flop

>>59615479
you know they throttle heavily as well?
You don't play games just for 15 minutes, right?

>>59612900
>pic related: electrical consumption at different voltages.
electrical consumption is not an actual word for anything
what are the values in the table, watts or amps?
is that system load or just the cpu?

>>59615496
i'm planning on buying the best AIB card for this reason alone, i haven't started planning or searching for which one that is yet but i'm definitely not cheaping out on the brand this time around.

>>59612649
Yeah 12 terraflops

>>59615519
Don't think you'll get one used for cheap enough.

>>59615479
>decide to use my money on work out equipment
just collect bricks/rocks,
put them in backpack
do pushups/sit ups/squats

equipment is a meme

File: 1488424875808.jpg (271KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

271KB, 1600x900px

>>59615528
fp16 is 25 I think

Not as badly as Ryzen I don't think, I like AMD's GPUs

>>59615559
Aren't workstation cards usually clocked lower?

>>59615587
Yes, in case of AMD it's 10% lower.

>>59615565
>Ryzen
>flop
They will make a shitload on the enterprise. It's also nice how you will be able to pick up a quad core for less than $150, opening up a little market for cheaper builds.

>>59615565
only flopped part is 1800x
1700 is still nowhere to find, and only a few 1700x around

>>59614662
Just wait till I get home fucker ill show you shaving cream cunt

If it can get 2-3x more then fury in crypto, it right it would sale alot regardless of it gaming performance

>>59612657
its already 1080 performance

>>59613013
problem is it won't, it could be 10 generations ahead of nvidia in performance for a penny, and people would just say

"Thank god amd is competing, finally nvidia will bring their prices down"

The consumer market for amd is a lost cause, but because the market is still worth hundreds of millions, they find it to be worth investing into, as it gives them better apus, and with vega, will be a side effect of the enterprise market, they only really stand to gain.

>>59613279
>The fact that nvidia sold 7 times as many $700 gtx1080s says a lot.

that nvidia fan boys got their wish, a monopoly

>>59613441
One shekel was deposited into your account goy.
Thanks for helping us leap forward!

>>59613625
If amd shit out a better gpu than nvidia, and they did with the 480, what do you think happened? people buy nvidia regardless.

Why? Fuck knows why. the mid range is where most gpus are sold, and the 480 is the best mid range card, with the 470 being the best mid range value.

>>59615616
>1700 is still nowhere to find

- https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113428

Been in stock since release day. Two weeks ago there was a $30 rebate and (you) could have had one for $299.99 including shipping.

Only reason I didn't is I'm not planning a new system until the end of 2018.

>>59613941
>muh gaymen
It's only 13%. I doubt you need 450 fps in 800x600 lad.

>>59615711
480 got bad rep after 1060 release
580 rebrand has perfect timing, no 2060 part from nvidia in sight
all the benchmark reruns on new drivers, better clock, lower power it will stomp 1060 at least 15%

>>59615748
And people will continue to buy NVIDIA.

>>59615731
1700 got sold out here day 1, when they come they sell on preorders
enough 1700x/1800x though
seriously tempted to get 1700x/taichi/3200 LPX for measly $800

>>59612649
Will it flop?

Card is a fucking monster being aimed at enterprise first, It likely wont flop there, and that's what amd cares about.
Consumers are going to get chips that weren't good enough for enterprise or embeded, ever notice how there are 480 chips that draw 160 watts, and then there are others that draw 90 watts to do the same task? shit was binned for enterprise first for a long fuckin time, then either the process got good enough that amd could give binned to xfx, or enterprise stopped buying them up at record speed and it freed up some of the lower high binned stuff.

What will it cost, between 350 and 550, if they do another watercooled only version than 650 If they only go air, I would not be shocked to see them cheaper then 500 considering we are getting basically failed silicon, and before one of you fuckers says it, because you say it every time, HOW MUCH DOES HBM COST?
Is it 80$? is it more? You hear its more expensive, but we have not once ever been told the cost, all we have to go on is when they were getting next to no good dies per silicon, nvidia were selling their next to no good dies per silicon chips with hbm at 20 grand a gpu.

If amd takes this as a potential way to get market share in consumer gpus, and seeing as all silicon consumers are going to get would be failed for enterprise anyway, they could write a large portion of the dies cost off as a loss, and sell it at a recup price, i'm betting between 350 and 550 with it potentially being 450-500 for top end 8gb at launch, depending on enterprise demand, possibly a binned sku like the nano, or a 16gb variant.

I honestly believe that amd can give users a better overall experience then nvidia, and if they give them a powerful card, then when amd starts the gpu mcming they will be able to pump out skus that are really fucking powerful, at non write off prices, and still come out as if not cheaper then vega.

>>59615790
if at least 10% of people will buy AMD its a win for them, they already got 10% of market back last year
it's easy to lose marketshare hard and slow to get it back

>>59615748
>580 rebrand has perfect timing, no 2060 part from nvidia in sight

'Oh look, amd put out a new card, now nvidia will hopefully lower the prices'

Do you not realize what people say? They arent fucking joking, many people never considered amd an option, and they get legitimately pissed when amd does not compete because nvidia raises the prices.

>>59612900
>1 volt at 3.4GHz 8cores
what kind of miracle is this?

>>59612900
3.7GHz 1.1V 79W is the best setting

>>59615850
Naples fuel-quality chip. You'll never get one though.

If it can do 4k60fps or 144hz gayming I'm sold.

>>59615848
I don't get this retarded logic.
PC parts is not some philosophy exercise, you get what has better numbers withing price range.

>>59615874
Get 1080ti. It does exactly that.

File: 1487801840365.png (189KB, 348x310px) Image search: [Google]

189KB, 348x310px

>>59612649
>Pooga

>>59615889
>144 at 1080p
nope.

>>59615889
Too poor, currently got a 1060 6G and I think my i5 6600k will bottleneck it

>>59614662
>nivea
>even have kikery writings on it.

>>59615907
It will, 6600k is threadlet-tier CPU.

>>59615907
*the 1080ti

what's the hold up with vega?
i bet it's the driver.

>>59613279
Yeah, Nvidia is the Apple of GPUs. Their customers are sheep.
Not that Pascal isn't good, because it is, it's just frustrating. AMD should have better day 0 drivers, that way even some sheep might reconsider paying less overall with freesync and a nice card to top it off.

>>59615884
the issues is from the 4000-7000 range amd was better in performance and price, and with the 200 series they are again better, but coin miners bought everything for a solid 5 months takeing away the price win.

Amd was only arguably behind after the 900 series came out.

And as philosophy, no, but spite, fuck yes.

Intel dicked me over fucking hard a number of years back, along with nvidia doing it many times over, I refuse to buy from either of them so long as there is an alternative, it's part of the reason I am still on a 955, Im waiting on a motherboard and I'm getting ryzen as its not only better for my needs, will also server me better then intel will to boot. thankfully amd has always been competitive with nvidia if not beating them so I had no issue there.

Really wish we had a third competitor.

Bullshit, if anything the 960 was a flop. I paid $200 for one at bbuy and it barely ran DOOT in medium!

>>59615902
how in the fuck is a card gonna be capable of 4k60 and not 1080p144 when the former is MORE DATA

>>59615819
some fucking fagot on ebay is buying taichis and selling them for double the price.

>>59616020
>third competititor
Holy VIA will save us.

>>59613443

Confirmed by wccftech?

>>59616022
>paid $30 for a used hd7770
>overcock to 1.16GHz
>30fps on some koei tecmo game
their engine that is not DOA suck donkey dicks.

>>59615884
Nvidia are total assholes and are cancer to the PC community especially with their gameworks bullshit making things more closed and dependent on their hardware plus their stupid premium on gsync instead of adopting the free standard. I also dislike their scummy practices to cripple the competition like over tessellating with their *works having no visible improvements and let's not forget not seen water on the bottom of a map just to fuck both AMD and their previous hardware up. Using shit like shadowplay from Geforce Experience requires an account for some reason and the tech retarded will just sign in to get what they want. Finally, they refuse to cooperate with the open source community and make things overly complicated for the guys working on it, nouveau lost its entire purpose now that it functions with signed blobs; might as well grab proprietary drivers instead. Fuck Nvidia.

>>59613169
>and more focus on professional/enterprise stuff

It will be amused to watch that crash and burn. Literally no one is using their GPUs for workstations, every market of software from encryption, hashing, video editing, modelling, rendering, texturing has several major packages (Worth major note for market share are Redshift and Substance) that have either shit OpenCL performance compared to CUDA, or none at all and CUDA only.

Can't speak too much on the video editing side, I haven't done much there, but having worked both in texturing with Substance tools and rendering with VRay RT, Redshift and Octane; I would rather cut my testicles off than use an AMD card for these packages and increase my render times by 650%

>>59616080
It aimed mostly at machine learning market.

>>59616023
point is: 1080p is worthless.

>>59616024
here in slavlands it's from retailer for $260, compared to asus crosshair for $316 it's pretty cheap i'd say.

>>59616171
>260
Teбя нa КУ зaкaзывaть нe yчили?

>>59616178
нe люблю зaмopoчки c гapaнтиeй, caм знaeшь кaкoвo y нac вoзвpaщaть чтo либo
я лyчшe пepeплaчy 2к чeм бyдy пoтoм бeгaть пo пoчтaмтaм

>>59616207
Ta нy нaхyй ~50 бaчeй мecтным бapыгaм нaкидывaть.

>>59615450
you fail once again to take into account anything consumers get would be thrown away otherwise, what the fuck is 600mm worth if its unsellable?
It has hbm2? GIVE ME THE FUCKING PRICE FOR IT
Some sources tell me chip of gddr5 is 1-2$ a chip, but for consumers, that price is marked up to 10$ a gb, Now if you take the ram out of oem hands, and its sold along with the gpu, its less for the oems to gouge you for, it may very well cost amd significant amounts more, but its less oems can gouge you on.
This argument that amd has to sell it for a lot is so retarded to me.

The pc gamer market is lucrative, if amd sells the vega cpu as a write off, they either throw the cup away, or they crank the voltage to unacceptable for enterprise levels and sell it to consumers. Amd needs market share to stave off gameworks bullshit from going to far and effectively locking them out of the gaming market, you could see thise as a loss leader just to pick up market share and so long as nothing completely fucking bad happens, most consumers will decided to go with amd again, by that point amd should be mcming gpus so they don't need to sell that power as a profit recup price.

Though it is smaller, the consumer gpu market is still massive.

>>59616224
я в cитилинкe бepy, в cpaвнeнии c днcoм eщe пo бoжecки для мoeй пpoвинции

>>59612649
Yes

>>59616258
>кopмить cpycнявoгo жидa
Hy я б вce paвнo нa КУ взял.

>>59616288
чe тaкoe КУ? paзъяcнитe для yмcтвeннo oтcтaлых

>>59616312
Кyдaхтepюнивepc. Cхoди в /hw/.

>>59613279

Let's not start with Steam surveys again. I've said this a few times already, and my opinion still stands: my bet is more than half of the Polaris cards went into cryptocurrency farms and never saw a single game on their lives. Fuck I know of single people that hoarded 100+ of them in the first few weeks.

>>59616064
>and let's not forget not seen water on the bottom of a map

That's a developer problem, the engine should be occluding.

>>59616064

>Finally, they refuse to cooperate with the open source community

Considering how whiny and entitled you fucks are (your post being proof enough) I would do anything in my power to spite you children as well.

>>59616421

>My bet is whatever conspiracy helps me pretend AMD is more successful than it is

>>59616456

Solid argument there buddy, you sure showed me.

>>59616421
No one uses GPUs for cryptocurrency anymore and for quite a while now. No one who can afford to buy dozens of GPUs and manage that size of currency farm would be uninformed enough on the subject to be using GPUs at all.

You're imagining a fantasy situation that suits your delusional beliefs of AMD superiority and a magically invisible market where they totally have 50% of the market you just can't see it because muh buttcoins.

>>59616477

Anon you know there are currencies other than the already dead buttcoins, right?

>>59616456
>whatever conspiracy
you know about financial reports right?

File: muh ryzen.png (28KB, 403x402px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 403x402px

>>59615711
>If amd shit out a better gpu than nvidia, and they did with the 480
Yeah, 6 months after when AMD finally fixed their shit drivers, it was equal to 1060 performance.

At launch, the 1060 was about 10% faster than the 480, you had the PCI slot power debacle and there were no custom cards for like two months, while the 1060 had AIB models like 2 weeks after launch.

AMD botched the launch of the 480 harder than the Ryzen launch. At least Ryzen has the core performance with some memory issues, the 480 was just straight underperforming. Typical with AMD, they never seem to get a launch right.

>>59616555
shill back to the DESIGNATED shitting streets

>>59612649
>will (A)NOTHER (M)ASSIVE (D)ISAPOINTMENT flop

geee I wonder...


lets pray for the poor mobos it will burn.

File: amdrones.png (42KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 653x726px

>>59616589

>>59616555
>memory issues
how so?

>>59616658
Fast speeds not working at launch which is a big deal considering speeds matter on Ryzen.

>>59616703
the mainboards where released less then a month ago on a completely new platform. i dont know if you remember the last time intel released a new chipset but that also wasnt a breeze. being realistc in 2-3 months you can really look at the whole am4 story for what it is. right now its kinda early if you are serious about what you want to say.

>>59616727

X99 or z170? The z170 not so much, but the x99 at launch, jesus that thing was a mess.

>>59612649
It's AMD of course it will!

>>59616748
Oh yes, ANUS x99 launch was legendary. I love me some cooked HEDT CPUs.

>>59616703
Literally every new architecture EVER has had such bugs on launch. Stop acting like intel has never had launch bugs on windows.

>>59616748
CpuSupportsFMA3=0

i dont really think its a good idea to messure a chip on its release day performance. both intel and amd sport them every release.

Things that /g/ claims all the time that aren't true outside of this board:

- 20xx is the year of AMD/Linux
- RX480 is better than 1060
- Fury X is as good as 1070/980Ti
- AMD has good drivers
- Ryzen destroyed Intel
- Nvidia is gimping drivers
- AMD is always cheaper
- AMD is competitive with Nvidia.
- Vulkan is the future and DX12 is DOA.

>>59616788
>AMD has good drivers
the open source drivers for linux are better then the nvidia drivers

>>59616788
All of this is true except loonix whatever.

>>59612657
this. if it gets at lest 1070 proformance i'm sold on vega I'm not expecting amd to win anytime lol
But if it beats the 1070 then I don't even care.

if you want the best and don't mind high degrees and a hot card then nvidia is ya card.

But to be honest guys i think 14nm is a very hot node anyway so i'm not expecting a cool card.

>>59616793
Closed source drivers for Windows are also better than NVIDIA turd.

>>59616798
>14nn LPP is hot
What?

>>59616837
google hot node
be suprised

>>59616727
>>59616777
Anons, calm down. I'm only pointing out facts. It's much better right now and I'm glad they're slowly sorting it out.

>>59612961
>Superior H265 encoding
it's not rubbish like their h264 encoder?

>>59615147
m8, a Fury, hell even an overclocked RX480, is between 1060 and 1070.

>>59615884
You have to have legitimate brain damage to be a fanboy of a company that has a borderline monopoly like Intel or Nvidia

>>59615911
Writings are in russian.

>>59614662
Is this the beginning of advertising memes?

>>59612900
do you have that image for 7700k?

>>59612865
yes they are, and if they can't afford it they have 1060, 1070 and 1080 as alternatives, amd vega will probably have similar price/performance as nvidia but with drawbacks such as no simultaneous multi-projection

>>59612961
this

>>59616054
Nah, IBM put out a press release detailing their new supercomputer design. Stated TFLOP per box as well as contents of each box. People worked backwards from there.

File: aHR0cDovL21lZGlhLmJlc3RvZm1pY3JvLmNvbS9KL0EvNjMzMTQyL29yaWdpbmFsL2ltYWdlMDE5Yi5wbmc_.jpg (47KB, 755x566px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 755x566px

>>59617085
Nah but I have this

File: 1490632352923.png (1MB, 1110x5110px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1110x5110px

>>59617085
>>59617250
And this

File: 1481449760973.jpg (156KB, 550x1539px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 550x1539px

>>59617085
>>59617250
>>59617259
Btw the first one is measured at wall, but the second is direct from the motherboard. The 57 watt power delta from the first one can be applied to the second measurement because the only change is in the CPU clock speed. 170~ watts out of a quad core is terrifying.

>>59617250
>>59617259
So Intel is back to square one: MORE NIGGAHURTZ.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_JizmoKdKc

>>59617259
JEWTEL HOUSEFIRES

>>59617348
on side note: what I got form this is that HBM cache controller is EXternal
which is interesting on its own

Nope.
AMD is currently beating Intel in TDP numbers, and beating it badly.
For some consumers it might be irrelevant, but in business and server space it is very much relevant.

>>59617457
Same goes for GPU's. Nvidia will have a hard time.

I know cryptocurrency is ded for the most part but how VEGA still be superior to NVIDIA's solution in that regard?

>>59617483
Yes, as always.

>>59617483
>cryptos ded
lolno

>>59617483

Depends on what you are mining. First, contrary to what the /g/ manchildren want you to believe, cryptocurrency isn't dead, it's just buttcoins that aren't worthwhile mining anymore. The current hotness is Ethereum, and that also goes well with AMD. But up until a while ago (pre-Polaris), Zcash would do slightly better on Nvidias.

>>59617466
>Same goes for GPU's
for enthusiast desktop pc gaming, not even remotely

>They waited 1 year for AYYMD HOUSEFIRES when GTX 1080 was available in May 2016

TOP KEK

>>59618035
In the past no.
In the following years, yes.
AMD is going bonkers with TDP, and
that's the most obvious change i can
point out which changed in the company.

Every release has been a flop under Pooduri

I already ordered the 1080ti.

Simply because it's the best and nothing can compete right now and at a reasonable price

File: 1422405481496.png (310KB, 691x591px) Image search: [Google]

310KB, 691x591px

>>59612961

>>59612657

And that's exactly what AMD will always be. One step behind, priced for the poor.

>>59613339
12.6 trillion times per second

>>59613941
>sucks
>marginally worse at certain resolutions

There's literally 0% chance Vega will match a Titan X

It will most likely be somewhere between a 1070 and a 1080

>>59618342

>1070 is a poorfag card

Ok

>>59615047
it also isn't /tv/ so why should anybody here give a shit about video encoding which is one of the areas where ryzen has a legitimate advantage over intel

>>59618427
>one of the areas
supposed to say one of the FEW areas

>>59618342
>if you actually have a life and can't be arsed to spend an entire paycheck on a PC with two 1080Ti's and a 6950X to fap to micronesian conch porn then you are a poorfag

>>59618420
if you weren't a poorfag you would just buy a 1070 and be done with it instead of waiting in hopes that amd will make a similar card that's a little bit cheaper

>>59618342
>being economical now means your a poorfag

>>59618500

Nigger I'm perfectly fine with my 970. Unlike you I don't pretend to be rich by buying shit I don't need.

>>59618658
Should have told us earlier.

If you are looking for a graphics card we assume you don't have one or have a really old one

>>59618658
then you don't need amd vega either

>>59618846

Yes, and?

>>59612649
Fury 2.0

>>59612649

AMD should fire that pajeet and hire someone with new vision, the branding and image is just terrible. That won't happen because pajeets operate like a mafia of castes sending remittances and they have significant leverage over the industry workforce in general

>>59618908
so what are you even trying to argue

1070/vega is for people like you, maybe not literally you since you already have a 970, but for the same reasons that you bought a 970 people are buying 1070, it's the same tier of graphics card

>>59613462
No, they're more focused on perfecting OpenCL and standardized compute functions than creating a new API entirely

File: d29[1].png (34KB, 610x260px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 610x260px

>>59619033
> the branding and image is just terrible
Let's see you grit those teeth!

Not sure why people flip their shit when they see the "disappointing" benchmarks. The only thing I see is that there is hardly any reason to upgrade to any somewhat new platform if you already have an i5 or i7 and don't need more than 4 cores.

It is hard to justify getting a new set of motherboard, RAM, and CPU when the performance difference in tasks that require at most 4 threads is so small.

I do feel like I need more than 4 cores, but for me it might be better to get an old Z420 workstation for 300 dollars than brand new ryzen or broadwell-e parts for 600-1000 dollars.

>>59619061

Oh, I thought you implied
>What are you even doing here

I like to discuss new and upcoming tech, so here I am

>>59616788
>- Fury X is as good as 1070/980Ti
Literally no one has ever seriously claimed it was as good as a 980Ti, the Fury X is a somwhat more powerful 980, with the Fury either being 15% less performance, depending on how many cores yours can unlock

>>59618417

Except the benchmarks showing its faster than a 1080? With alpha drivers?

Will the top end be faster than a Titan or 1080ti is the right question, and for what price.

>>59613941
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMNFoNtKCR8

>>59619264

The first benchmarks showed it between the 1070 and 1080, and besides we've all seen this story before: the 480 started as a better 970, and before we knew it, it crept up to better than a 980, and then to a 980ti killer.
My money is on small Vega at 1070 level, maybe a bit above, and big Vega trading punches with the 1080. Then it all comes down to what they'll cost.

>>59613230
Yes that's gonna happen

>>59612649
Like every other AMD, yes.

We need a team of brave anons to remove Nvidia so we'll be good with our cards for a few years until AMD becomes the new Nvidia

File: 07.png (29KB, 600x233px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 600x233px

>>59617085

File: 08_big.png (21KB, 900x350px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 900x350px

>>59617085
7700k

File: 09.png (34KB, 600x233px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 600x233px

>>59620843
tdp

File: 10.png (43KB, 600x233px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 600x233px

>>59620843
tdp 7700

>>59620831
>>59620843
>>59620862
>>59620894
This graph pretty cool. why stop at 4700ghz

>>59621182
believe it or not but not that many 7700K can go beyond 4.8, and if you don't OC it with specifically binned review sample it can't reach 5.0

>>59621426
it's not that rare

>As of 2/22/17, the top 78% of tested 7700Ks were able to hit 4.9GHz or greater.
https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all/products/7700k49g
>As of 2/22/17, the top 59% of tested 7700Ks were able to hit 5.0GHz or greater.
https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all/products/7700k50g

>>59621182
looks like they're using a stock cooler assuming those are temperatures in celsius in >>59620843

>>59621426

Iirc, according to silicon lottery 70% of the 7700k's clock to 4.8. That's already a sizable amount.

>>59620011
I will keep buying the 200 USD options if it doesn't. Not all of us are consumerist whores, anon.

>>59615506
It's not that hard to read man. Y axis is volts, x axis is megahertz, numbers in the table are watts.

>>59615850
A fairly easily reproducible one. Though I get errors in prime95 doing it.

>>59622088
What frequency and voltage do you normally run yours at?

>>59622113
Haven't had it for long enough to have a 'normal' but I've had good results with 3700 @ 1.2

>>59622162
noice

File: 1489882762383.jpg (104KB, 803x688px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 803x688px

>>59620894
Those Tdp

>>59612933
Clock for clock?

Hah...

Vega will blow the competition at 4K

I'm curious if AMD is going to make some lower current ones like Nano. Priced right, I could consider two of those (for less than $800 for the two cards before blocks)

With enough bandwidth, you could run multiple cool cards and get far better performance for 4K than just one 1080 ti.

>>59621553
Because overclocking is all about clocking to 5ghz.

No, you need good power phases, VRMs, contact, conduction, airflow, proper voltage, perhaps a bus clock.

Yo

>>59623260

Siliconlottery's testing is also rather limited - they only bench for about an hour. Anyone who knows anything about cpu stability will tell you you need much, much longer under torture loads to be considered stable.

>>59623348
it's still not that rare

>>59623567

You have no way to make that claim. An hour's testing and calling it good can dramatically skews results given it often takes longer than that for a chip/core to fail. Christ you should see the sort of clocks a top cooled 8350 will push for an hour, but trying to keep them stable for (say) 8hrs at well over 5ghz can kill a motherboard.

>>59623660
Do a Google search man.
Fuck ton of 7700k stress tests at 5.0ghz
Almost all 7700k can hit 4.7
And more than 60% can hit 5.0

>>59623198
>multiple cards
>cool
Yeah just don't.

>>59613416
The best option for gentoo users.

>>59623698
And they use upwards of 200 watts doing so

>>59616916
More like between 1080 and 1080 Ti. They better price it properly.

>>59618500
>what is freesync
>what is better driver support
>what is less/no datamining

>>59615658
>is
>not even released
kys

>>59624015
And that matters why?
Power consumption is a retarded argument.
Intel guys only used that to make fun of AMD
If you cooler can take the heat output, it doesn't matter.

>>59623198
>linked gpus
>implying any game other than typical benchmark games properly support crossfire
>implying no microstuttering hell
nigger KYS

4K is proper 4K when a single gpu can run it without necking itself, and no current-gen cards are capable of this

>>59624279
>what is freesync
Pointless and stupid (gSync owner)
A gaming gimmick

>what is better driver support
AMD has improved but it still take them 6+ months to optimize their drivers.

>what is less/no datamining
AMD still data mines you retard.

Nvidia and AMD are both jewing you.

>>59624395
>4K is proper 4K when a single gpu can run it without necking itself, and no current-gen cards are capable of this

Well ur in luck because the 1080ti can run 4k 60fps in a LOT of titles.

File: old man huang.jpg (25KB, 475x324px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 475x324px

>>59624427

I support this post.

>>59624427
>Pointless and stupid (gSync owner)
Of course it's stupid and pointless to someone butthurt over the fact that they spent something like $150 extra over a freesync monitor.

>AMD has improved but it still take them 6+ months to optimize their drivers.
On Linux maybe, Windows drivers are only a week behind Nvidia these days

>AMD still data mines you retard.
Less mining is still better than more mining

>Nvidia and AMD are both jewing you.
Doesn't mean that you should support the bigger jew

File: 1486154653543.jpg (26KB, 411x412px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 411x412px

>>59624460
You should read my comment again.
GSync is also a pointless gimmick
Both freesync and gSync are designed to keep you from buying a GPU from the competition.

I've done blind tests with my roommate and brother, and none of us could tell the difference

>>59616555
>driver issues
the nvidiot mantra.

>>59624502
Took 8 months to get the rx480 to it's real potential
Their drivers support is still lacking

>>59624533
>Both freesync and gSync are designed to keep you from buying a GPU from the competition.
holy shit how retarded can you possibly get

>>59624560
no piece of hardware will ever achieve its "real potential"

it took roughly two months before the 480 overtook the equivalently priced 1060 and rendered it obsolete (unless on sale)

anything after that is a bonus

>>59624560
total bullshit.

>>59621548
https://www.overclockers.ru/lab/81581_2/vstrechaem-intel-kaby-lake-obzor-i-testirovanie-processora-core-i7-7700k.html#5
water

>>59624451
A lot doesn't mean all.

2160p will be worthwhile when it reaches the same level as 1080p is now: Getting skullraped by even mid-range cards on 99% of titles, while high-end cards obliterate every game.

>>59624460
heil huang

>>59624533
>Both freesync and gSync are designed to keep you from buying a GPU from the competition.
>Open standard any vendor can adopt is supposed to lock users in
The only way I can see someone being this dumb is that they don't know FreeSync is an open standard and Nvidia just refuses to implement it as they instead want to sell their own monitor controller hardware to monitor vendors rather than support a standard that can do the same thing in software.

>>59624533
Nothing except hardcore jewery is restricting Nvidia from using Freesync as well. That shit should be the universal standard. Intel already started using it btw.

>>59624759
Part of the problem is that G-sync is an entire platform/ecosystem whereas FreeSync is a composite thing build on top of something else (VESA Adaptive-sync).

Nvidia could/would never actually ship products labeled as "FreeSync compatible", so they'd have to make their own platform of G-sync 2 or whatever build on top of A-s. Nvidia can obviously do whatever they choose, but AMD helped create a marketing situation even further discouraging them from adopting the open standard.

>>59624881
get your shit together tyrone.

>>59613652

You'll be getting all of that really soon, my friend. [spoiler]Maybe not the unlocked part though.[/spoiler]

>>59613652
you dont know how to unlock the voltages? bruh.

>>59624560
How can you make continuous driver support sound like a bad thing...?

>>59626246
they think optimization is an indicator that the drivers were bad to start with. which is not true. its nvidia think.

>>59624578
Are you clinically retarded?
You cannot mix free sync and gSync

You have to use an AMD GPU for Freesync and Nvidia for Gsync.

It's a way to lock you into one GPU manufacture.
As monitors can last a long ass time.

>>59626246
The 1060 had 100% performance on day 1, the rx480 took 8 months.
The 290x tool more than a year
The furyX also took a year.

AMD needs to get their drivers ready before releasing

>>59626399
>100% performance

you mean nvidia does not optimize their drivers.

>>59624295
do math, amd's literal worse case scenario, they need 33% more power then nvidia to match it, puts vega right above a 1080

>>59626399
Or another way of seeing it is that Nvidia couldn't be fucked to improve performance on a mid tier card.

Like do you think that the 1060 can't be improved on any further?

>>59626419
or nvidias drivers are so optimized that they cant take it further.

You are going to need amd to come out with a gpu that is more flops efficient than nvidia first to prove that, everyone else just takes nvidia cards as dx11 asic

File: hipsters.jpg (59KB, 832x960px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 832x960px

>>59626471
wewlad

>>59615506
>are the values watts or amps?
>values beyond 160

Come on now don't be stupid.

>>59626489
you cant deny nvidia drivers are a step above amd when amd needs a gpu to be 20%~ more powerful raw flops to match nvidia, along with nvidia plays nice with older cpus, whereas amd does not.

so long as amd is competitive I buy amd, but at least know reality.

>>59626521
source. if you can prove this without using nvidia partnered gimpworks titles I may change my mind.

>>59613584
Its actually 8+6 pin.

T, user

>>59626555
whats to prove? the 1060 is a 4372 flop card when boosted, the 480 is a 5834 flop card when boosted

If amd was firing on all cylinders, it would be 25% faster then a 1060 in every game, not just matching it. hell in raw flops, a 480 is faster then a base 1070, and a 1400mhz oc on a xfx gtr puts it as faster then a 1070 even boosted.

We all know that isn't the case.

Then we see amd get steadily boosted significant percentages over the year, look at nvidia and dx12 where their drivers arent up to par yet, they improve but dx11 largely doesnt outside of specific games where bugs needed to be worked around.

This just makes me believe nvidias dx11 driver is as good as it can get, there is no room for improvement, and it would take amd beating a 1060 by more than 25% in dx11 to make me believe otherwise, dx12 they are likely able to do that just because hardware has some shit in it that nvidia doesn't, so nvidia takes a penalty compared to 11.

>>59626753
thats not how that works. gg though. if you look at titles that use vulkan you can see how much more powerful it really is using a proper api though.

>>59626784
http://wccftech.com/rx-480-gtx-1060-dx12-vulkan-tested/

Shit benchmark I know but fuck knows I'm not searching hard for it, the only game that gets amd roughly 25% performance over a 1060 would be doom, literally the only one.

dx12 has a showing of 15% power over a 1060

everything else is neck and neck or in tomb raider nvidia is better.

taking nvidia gimped bullshit out, and you have a gpu that is barely pulling ahead of a 1060 when every game it should consistently be 25% better if the drivers were worth a damn.

Again, not looking it up as you can readily find it, on older cpus, amd takes a disproportionate hit due to driver overhead, so much of the performance lost on amd is due to inefficiencies in the driver rather then a poor hardware decision that lead to poor saturation (though this is also the case to a great extent)

Again, I take nvidia as having near if not perfect dx11 drivers, while amd does not, doom kind of proves this as the gpu is fully utilized without the 11 driver overhead, you see it 25% ahead of a 1060.

>>59623348
If I get an error in Prime95 but the system doesn't completely shit itself, is that considered stable?

>>59626957
looks fine to me teraflops dont equate performance directly. but if the title is AMD optimized you do get the full 25%.

>>59626471
>or nvidias drivers are so optimized that they cant take it further.
every single driver improve performance slightly you dumb shit

>>59626964
no

>>59626419
I mean Nvidia squeezed 100% of the performance before releasing the GPUs.

>>59626441
I think there like 5% hidden somewhere, but Nvidia does a damn good job at optimising their hardware.
The 980ti vs furyX is a good example

>>59627859
no they used brute force power to not have to optimize. everything they do with their drivers and gimpworks programs is the opposite of optimization.

>>59627977
Checked
And you just proved my point, thank you.

>>59612649
Yes, several thousand gigaflops

>>59628939
proved your point? how?

>>59627031
Doom isn't even amd optimized, every gpu gets a boost on vulcan, if anything its the least biased game on the market, oh, and in amd optimized as /g/ likes to call it, ashes is no 25% better than nvidia.

teraflops are peak theoretical math output, take a look at the halo wars beta benchmark that put a 780ti above a 980 in performance, flops are a fantastic measure of performance for cards, the issue is drivers, nvidia holds old generations back, while amd has issues with overhead and ability to saturate cards.