AMD Radeon RX Vega Specs Leaked In Linux Patch

tldr

worse than nvidia

Uhh.. We've known the 64CU configuration for over a year.

AAYYYYMAAAAD IS FINISHED AND BANKRUPT

File: 1493613845846.png (259KB, 463x533px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 463x533px

They gonna release a $300 card or what?

1070 can't do BF1 or Battlefront at 4k60fps

the leak is either garbage or small Vega

still wont buy nvidia because freesync

Even that's too much cores, Vega needs to fix the bottlenecks in Fiji and raise clocks, that's way more important than letting shaders sit idle

>same amount of cores as 28nm Fury X
>twice the transistors

Really makes you think

>>60192124
>buy AMD CPU
get haswell 4 years late
>buy AMD GPU
get 1070 1 year late

well at least it's cheaper and they are the good guys right? because multi-billion corporations can be saints. smdh

>>60192284
Show me that 8 core 16 thread 65 watt haswell, pls.

>>60192284
yeah, a big corporation can be Good and they often are

curse this shitty society for turning its youths into jaded cynics

>>60192284
>buy 1070
>Fury X + 10% performance 1 year late

The 1070 is such a shit GPU for anyone that has a 980/390X or higher from last gen

>>60192338
If they can deliver a 1070 equivalent for a price/performance ratio that doesn't hover around "fucking awful" it'll be a win for gamers. And I really doubt even this newest "driver leak" is going to be 100% accurate or have all information.

not having to buy a shitty g-sync monitor is a win/win though.

>>60192258
All-new frondtend. I wonder how it'll perform in games.

>>60192379
There's no 1070 Vega competitor, Vega is 15% bigger than GP102

>>60192216

They can do both.

>>60192406
They did both. Also what the fuck are primitive shaders.

>>60192124
>Vega 4096 cores = 570 crossfire (2 x 2048 cores)
kill yourself
t. 1080ti owner

>>60192406
There's no need, you either make more cores or make the cores individually stronger.
Even Nvidia's highest end card tops out at 3900 cores, there's a limit to how much even video games can spread the workload on that many cores.

>>60192451
>limit to how much even video games can spread the workload

No
Also you either make gpu with more coars or you squeeze the highest clocks. Amd do the former nvidia the later. And this is why amd gpus age slower and have higher theoretical compute power.

Vega with gtx1070 performance and gtx 1070 or lower price is all i need and want but i doubt its their highest model

>>60192524
Yes, the Fury X is a good example, it had a shitload of cores but in plenty of cases they were left SITTING IDLE, this is a well known fact you can Google right up.

tl;dr there's either a bottleneck somewhere else, or the command processor on Fury X never managed to find a way to feed all the cores with data at once.

>>60192557
>tl;dr there's either a bottleneck somewhere else
Of course there is, and it's piss easy to guess where.

>>60192416

>primitive shaders

Think rasterization and culling.

>>60192124
>One of the configurations for AMD Radeon RX Vega Specs Leaked In Linux Patch
Here you go sweetie, fixed that up for you.

>>60192124
> Vega 4096 cores = 570 crossfire (2 x 2048 cores) Which is = 1070 performance as leaked 3dmark claim
> Vega 4096 cores = 570 crossfire (2 x 2048 cores) Which is = 1070 performance as leaked 3dmark claim
> Vega 4096 cores = 570 crossfire (2 x 2048 cores) Which is = 1070 performance as leaked 3dmark claim

holy fucking kek. now that's what i call FAKE NEWS

>>60192216
>Vega needs to fix the bottlenecks in Fiji

They already doubled up the rasterizing power, Polaris is as good as Hawaii with half the ROPs, if Vega has that then it will be almost twice the power of Fiji.

>>60192124
According to OP, the Titan XP is 3-4 times faster than the 1060

>>60192379
>If they can deliver a 1070 equivalent for a price/performance ratio that doesn't hover around "fucking awful" it'll be a win for gamers.

Vega will cost $500 minimum due to HBM being a pain to manufacture.

File: Sys-plus-1.jpg (78KB, 748x469px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 748x469px

>>60192770
Even HBM1 with 4 stacks isn't all that much more expensive, it matters little on $400+ GPUs

File: 1492955193013.jpg (29KB, 512x384px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 512x384px

>>60192757
>Titan X (Pascal)
>Titan Xp
which one is it? better release a new Titan...

>>60192800
XP, it has more than three times the cores.

>>60192793
Fuck me HBM makes PCB so much smaller.

File: 1489530100391.jpg (156KB, 633x758px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 633x758px

>>60192129

File: 1482143902562.png (262KB, 416x577px) Image search: [Google]

262KB, 416x577px

>>60192800
>Titan X Big Peepee
>Titan X Small Peepee
Is NVidia trying to tell us something here?

>>60192831
No, only that they didn't have the full GP102 ready until a month or two ago.

File: aaa.jpg (232KB, 1162x778px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 1162x778px

>>60192831
>Is NVidia trying to tell us something here?
A N O T H E R O N E
N
O
T
H
E
R

O
N
E

>>60192889
>have we started the fire

>>60192545
So why not get a gtx 1070 then

>>60192124
Wtf, amd said vega would do 4k@60hz. Why would they lie to us?

>>60192913
FreeSync? FreeSync.

File: amd.jpg (138KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 653x726px

>>60192124
NOOO

File: fire.jpg (139KB, 800x571px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 800x571px

>>60192897
>yes, the fire rises

>>60192770
You are retarded. Amd always releases a range from 125 - 500. This, likely ONE of their weaker cards, is beating the 1070, and will cost at least 20% less than the 1070 which would be in line with amd trend of equivalent tech for a lower price.

>>60192124
hbm2 or gddr6

>>60192913
Card costs $100 more, monitor (vsync vs freesync) costs $100 more, electricity per year costs $50 more.

Because I will save $300 in 2 years if I go vegeta.

>>60193005
HBM2.

>>60193005
>GDDR6

Might as well be another housefire fairytale until March 2018

>>60192979
>Amd always releases a range from 125 - 500

They already released cards from $100 to $300, see Polaris.

Vega cannot be manufactured cheap because of HBM. This is a fact. They will sell it for $500, it will be 1070 level in normal games and normal resolutions, and equal the 1080 only in 4k + Vulkan. It will be the same goddamn thing as Fiji was.

>>60193066
>it will be 1070 level in normal games and normal resolutions, and equal the 1080 only in 4k + Vulkan.
Small Vega aka 1070 competitor? Yeah.

>>60192124
>4096 cores = 570 crossfire (2 x 2048 cores) Which is = 1070 performance
that's not how it work

What's with this
>HBM costs more then decent GDDR5 setup
meme? Even fucking Fiji with 4 stacks was relatively sane and Vega is only two.

still no reason to upgrade from sli 980ti

>>60193117
>stutter

Inb4

>I DON'T SEE IT LALALALALALA

>>60193066
>They will sell it for $500, it will be 1070 level
Seeing as the cheapest 1070 you can get right now is on sale on Amazon for $335, that would be market suicide. Somehow I doubt they would do that, seeing as the rest of their product range is very reasonably priced.

>>60193112
>Even fucking Fiji with 4 stacks was relatively sane and Vega is only two.

its the last talking point of a nvidiot, wait till you see the price dont get fooled

>>60193075
this IS small Vega. Vega 11 is big vega, and Vega 20 will be Vega 10 respin.

File: 3EA6387F00000578-0-image-a-18_1490532200017.jpg (54KB, 634x634px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 634x634px

>only 64 ROPs

WHAT THE FUCK?

>>60193066
You're making too much ridiculous assumptions, even two Polaris 10 strapped together have more performance and Vega is 15% bigger than two Polaris 10 strapped together.
You're not taking into account clockspeed nor architecture changes.

>>60193143
Vega20 will be FP64 Vega.

File: AMD-Vega-architecture-1000x505.png (218KB, 1000x505px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 1000x505px

>>60193147
>only 64 ROPs

pic related

>>60193139
It's like they hate smaller PCBs and lower power consumption.

>>60193147
That's what L2 cache and Tile based rendering is there for.

>>60193147
L2 caches and tile based rasterizing.

>>60193143
No, Vega10 is big Vega, just like Polaris10 was a big one.

>>60192193
aren't these dx12 games? amd always does well in these games because of the hw scheduler. i wouldn't be surprised if it is on par/slightly slower than the 1070 in most games but pulls ahead by like 10% in dx12 games just like the 1060 vs 480.

>>60193232
DICE uses shitty DX12 wrapper instead of properly writter DX12 rendering pipeline. It makes like no difference.

>>60193051
>The new memory type would replace GDDR5 and GDDR5X by providing much higher data rates (up to 16 Gbps) while operating at a lower voltage

https://videocardz.com/68948/skhynix-gddr6-for-high-end-graphics-card-in-early-2018

>>60193232
DX12 in BF1 is a joke.
also
>Vega is Fiji : The post


Wow, we really need some kind of entry test for this board, this is almost too retarded to be real

>>60193280
>Wow, we really need some kind of entry test for this board, this is almost too retarded to be real
Captcha that requires you to install gentoo.

>>60193269
I know what it means, but HBM2 has been shipping for a year already and it tops out at 1TB/s, which is still faster than GDDR6, that also uses a shitload of PCB space and more power than HBM2.

tl;dr GDDR for <400$ cards, HBM* for $400+

>>60193147
>>only 64 ROPs

64 [email protected] = 96 GP/s = 96.45x overdraw of colored pixels for UHD@120 fps, plus ~386x overdraw of depth/stencil testing.

Even if you're abusing the pipeline with tons of 1px tessellated triangles, the geometry setup will choke much, much sooner than the ROPs.

>>60193288
Captcha that requires you to write the Captcha software.

>>60193405
Captcha that requires you to write IDE to write captcha software.

>>60193147
>>60193152
>amd, can we have 96 rops?
>64? Whats you need is 32 rops good goy

jew_who_run.jpg :3

>>60193419
Captcha that will require you to write the Operating system that IDE will run on.

Without the comparable to CUDA libraries software support for GPU programming, it has no use for straight people. It can be useful only for gaymers.

>>60193372
But the lack of ROPs was why Fury X was slow

>>60193455
No, it was slop due to shitty geometry engines.

>>60193451
2008 called, they want you to come back.

If the 2x geometry throughput per clock is true, then that means a straight up 3x improvement over Fiji at 1550MHz+

Which is more than enough fight Nvidia's geometry throughput

I wonder what the fuck HBCC is. Looks like purely enterprise thing.

>>60192124
>So Vega 4096 cores = 570 crossfire (2 x 2048 cores)

who is the clever guy that said that? CF is barely 80% scaling, well maybe only in ashes it got to 100% but we know that ashes is not very good way to check performance

>>60193600
The bigger issue is that you can't compare Polaris cores to Vega cores. It's a new architecture. They sticking fuckhuge caches on there and whatever other new features they're doing. They addressed the bottlenecking in Fiji, but you can't even compare Vega to Fiji properly, because they also addressed issues in Fiji where cores would be active even when there was no work.

>>60193596
memory cache?
they demoed MD with 2Gb of RAM with and without cache

basically it's x2 minimum fps and RAM doesn't matter anymore, if we ever live to games needing more than 8Gb

>>60193700
So it turns HBM stacks into fat slices of L3? Man that sounds VERY nice.

File: furyx.png (515KB, 1228x1268px) Image search: [Google]

515KB, 1228x1268px

>>60193455
no, fury had a ton of problems, and ROP count was probably the most minor.

The biggest was that the memory crossbar was underpowered and couldn't deliver aggregate bandwidth close to the ~500 GB/s offered by the HBM1 (also making color compression in the RBEs/ROPs almost worthless), but it could also easily be choked in the geometry/rasterization setup stage as well.

>>60193734
>nvidia strong with BLACK TEXTURES
>nvidia not strong in random textures

Really makes you diversify

>>60193700
>>60193729
It's probably not true L3 for at least any appreciable size, since all the tags and line state flags would need to go on the GPU and would take an enormous amount of space.

At best it will be something like a transparent page cache (i.e., entry/"line" sizes in the kB range) for read-only/noncoherent art assets, which would be vastly cheaper to implement on silicon as well as addressing the core functionality of what 99%+ of customers really want anyway.

>>60193262
No one can write DX12 at its full potential because microsoft didnt release the SM6 that have everything good that DX12 can do.

>>60193887
That's why Vulkan exists.

>>60193893
Thats why we saw the leap of performance in DOOM. Vulkan have nothing to strain what it is capable of doing, but you need people who know what they're doing.

>>60193913
>you need people who know what they're doing.
And that's not the case for 99% of game developers.

Why not just release a fucking 3DTimeSpy or any gaming benchmark leak instead? I can't imagine how powerful Vega is if it shares the exact same amounts of shaders, texture units and ROPs with the old Fury.

>>60192913
Freesync

>>60192124
So You're trying to tell me that Vega is just a slightly faster Fury X? I have some major doubts here

>>60194749
protip: the fallacious argument relies on the reader believing that multi-GPU scaling is 100% efficient.

File: rx580-crossfire-sniper-4k.png (66KB, 928x498px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 928x498px

>>60194841
It is in some benchmarks, deux ex mankind divided, and sniper elite 4, in sniper 4 it's faster than a 1080

although that's 2 full polaris 10 GPUs naturally

in any case it'd be idiotic to think AMD is releasing a card slower than a 1080 minimum when they know they're a dying company if they don't perform

>>60192124
That's not how it works m8.
Vega has a significant clock advantage over Polaris and a total front end overhaul.

>>60193927
If I'm not mistaken Quake Champions will use Vulkan. I bet there will be some more classic titles coming out with Vulkan support.

>>60196113
Croteam will also port Serious Engine to Vulkan. It grows, slowly but steadily.

>>60194174
Because it has the same shader/rop/TMU count as Fury, it's beyond fucking easy to guess its performance.

Why? Because you know the clockspeed already, even without the massive architecture changes like the 2x geometry throughput per clock, tile based rendering , primitive shaders and configurable precision rate, it would be some 10-15% slower than a 1080ti at 1600MHz.
But those massive features will change everything, just look at the difference between kepler> maxwell with just tile based rendering alone.

>>60192284
>smdh
back to black people twitter with you

>>60192124
Please no...

>By comparison, Polaris 10 Pro the GPU powering the RX 470 has exactly half as many stream processors, half as many texture mapping units and half as many render output units. Polaris 10 Pro is a slightly cut back variant of Polaris 10 XT which powers the RX 480. Vega 10 has double the render output units of Polaris 10 XT, can execute double the number of work threads and features 78% more stream processors and texture mapping units

>early gaming demos of Vega showed the GPU slightly outperforming Nvidia’s GTX 1080

Sadly this card will never beat the 1080ti

>Vega 687:C1 kill NVIDIA GTX 1080
https://hardwaresfera.com/la-amd-vega-687c1-destroza-la-nvidia-gtx-1080-sombra-la-nvidia-gtx-1080-ti-compubench/

>>60197129
This is based on Polaris scaling, Vega isn't Polaris obviously or they'd already have Polaris^2 out already.

>>60192124
>So Vega 4096 cores = 570 crossfire (2 x 2048 cores) Which is = 1070 performance as leaked 3dmark claim
That's not how it works, you dumb fuck.

>>60197145
>>Vega 687:C1
>still 1200MHz like it was months ago

I'm convinced more and more this is "small*" Vega


*anything from 10-30% shaders cut

>>60197129
I think anyone that wanted a 1080 ti or 1080 ti level performance already has one. There really isn't a huge market for these top level, ridiculously expensive GPUs.

>>60197185
But what if it has more performance?
What if the lower card has 1080ti performance?

This can go both ways, Vega is a pretty huge mystery

What if Vega is the biggest leap in a generation for AMD/ATI.
What if...

>>60197301
Not gonna get my hopes up on that one. At most, we're going to see it compete with the 1080 on performance and the 1080 ti on price. But I wouldn't count on it even beating the 1080 except on price.

File: images.jpg (6KB, 188x183px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 188x183px

I really hope vega performs, otherwise intel/nvidia will just chokehold them and we'll be cucked on hardware pricing for the next decade
>tfw

>>60197460
The jury's still out on R5, but R7 already demolishes current Intel HEDT in perf/$, and 16c Ryzen HEDT will likely destroy Skylake-X in similar fashion.

But yeah, unless Vega produces, the future's gonna be filled with $700-for-GTX1080 tier releases.

F U R Y X 2 . 0
U
R
Y
X
2
.
0

>>60197927
Why?

>>60198018
The # of cores

>>60198065
And? It's GCN, it's fucking dense yet its ~530mm^2 with ONLY 4096 ALU. Said ALUs are probably bigger, but they left a lot of die space for frontend.

>>60198065
theyre big cores

>>60198109
For (you).

>>60198109
4u

>>60198117
26 seconds

im fairly impressed

>>60198065
Would you rather they make the cores more powerful or just keep adding more of them? Architectural changes are far more interesting than pump n dump moar corz on a dieshrink

>>60198151
Depends on how much more cores they could have put in compared to how big they can make them.

Though admittedly AMD's problem wasn't in the throughput of their cores, but in other areas like the frontend

File: sniper ghost warrior 3 1080p gpu.png (206KB, 548x629px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 548x629px

>>60192338

>+10%

You wish the 1070 was that fast.

>>60198192
More recently this is shown in the new Warhammer game.

Eh, but they're outliers that take advantage of AMD's arch, the 1070 is indeed around that faster than a 1070

>>60198192
>290x STILL kicks ass
Holy fucking shit poor keklers.

File: 1346156139121.png (76KB, 231x260px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 231x260px

>>60192124
Damn it AMD sort it out. If big Vega doesn't surpass the 1080 we're gonna be stuck with Intel/nVidia bullshit pricing for years.

File: Dawn of War III 1400p gpu.png (152KB, 548x629px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 548x629px

>>60198211

Whatever sniper ghost warrior and dawn of war III are doing GCN sure loves it.

>>60198222

Unyielding, unforgiving, unstoppable he was named the Titan Slayer and thus did the demons know fear.

File: welp.png (536KB, 1899x524px) Image search: [Google]

536KB, 1899x524px

>Live in third world Canada
>Can't wait for Vega anymore
>Didn't know what video card to buy
>Retailer made the choice easy

70 dollars for 25-30% more performance...

>>60198279
980ti is no slouch either, whatever the game is doing is probably running completely off the ALUs without major frontend concern like most games.

Pretty much a tflop benchmark.

>>60198192
that game is highly unoptimized, I have no affiliation with either company btw, I just know that game is total fucking garbage

>>60198307
That's like choosing between rape with lube or rape with no lube.

>>60192124
>So Vega 4096 cores = 570 crossfire (2 x 2048 cores) Which is = 1070 performance as leaked 3dmark claim>>
>Vega is cut Polaris in xfire
just stop posting.

File: 2015-08-12-image-19.jpg (355KB, 800x620px) Image search: [Google]

355KB, 800x620px

>>60198245
Regular Fury (nonX) at 1450MHz has pretty great graphics performance at those clocks, even if Vega is just Fiji at 1600MHz it would do fine.

>>60198312

>Pretty much a tflop benchmark.

Given how the coards are arranged almost entirely in order of compute performance yeah, its a very GCN friendly workload.

>>60198410
I'd still prefer lube.

File: bomb.png (27KB, 640x400px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 640x400px

>>60198307
$1000 gpu to turn settings up in games? I can afford it but why? Guess I'm not that dedicated.

>>60198434
That's pretty encouraging.

>>60198468
And Vega is not just a dieshrink with higher clocks. It's something very different compared to previous iterations of GCN.

>>60198459
I can't even tell between ultra and high, or high and medium, unless i pause the game and stare at the screen. Guess I'm just a pleb.

>>60198434
I see the memory overclock is crazy, how much does bandwidth affect the score on that chip?

>>60198543
Hear me out, this sounds pretty crazy, but what if AMD was hiding a 16GB HBM Vega?

>pajeettech.com
When will g learn

>>60198568
4 stacks? Maybe some FP64 ML monster. Certainly not for consumers.

>>60198568
A enterprise card that we'd never see because they'd never have enough wafers for it.

>>60198594
4 stacks for the bandwidth alone would be great, 8GB stacks are apparently on their way as well, but I'm interested in higher bandwidth.

>>60198598

If it can be the half precision monster it claims to be AMD could do what Nvidia does - sell it for megabux to the real big players who don't care if its 10 grand a chip. Basically the sort of people who look at IBM's offerings and consider them a bargain.

File: Screenshot from 03-05-2017 23:13:23.png (20KB, 618x245px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 618x245px

>>60198543
Lets say worst case it's improving the score about 15%, that's still 10k Firestrike Extreme.

Too bad it's not with a Fury X, but it looks pretty good and it's at aprox 130-200MHz lower clocks than Vega (300W?)will be

File: 968768483435.jpg (566KB, 2100x1500px) Image search: [Google]

566KB, 2100x1500px

>wccftech

>>60198717
My favorite part is the comments section. I think there's more trolls than actual discussion.

>>60198745
>reading comments on anything but RWT

>>60192858
What do you mean, it was out in the workstation card for a while

>>60193009
wow, a whole week of a minimum wage paycheck! In 2 years no less! Sure was a great idea to spend that money on an upper midrange gpu.

>>60198745
it's probably just /g/ shitposting some more

File: AMD-Vega-GPU_2.jpg (46KB, 630x354px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 630x354px

>match a 1070
AMD cant just match nvidia it doesn't work when your the one behind
>4k shaders
It's fiji+ with better memory?

>>60200673
No God fucking dammit it has nothing to do with Fiji except having 4096 ALU.

>>60200673
>4k stream processors*

>>60193066
>HBM can't be cheap
Errrrrrm.. >>60192793; it's not that different in price by the looks of it.

>>60193214
>>60193152
>>60193143
Vega 10 is the big one of this gen.
Vega 11 is the small one of this gen.
Vega 12 is some super clocked Polaris or something.

Vega 20 is NEXT gen that's not even in the prototype die stage yet, just drawing board and prep work as of now.

nVidia shills get your bullshit straight.

>>60201275
Vega20 is FP64 version of Vega for enterprise. Sorta like GP100.

>>60201322
All the leaks I've seen shows Vega20 being a shrink from 14nm too 9nm (or was it 7nm?), and a doubling of the on board HBM2 RAM. Besides that not much change from Vega10.

Surprised nobody posted AMD slides yet.

>>60201492
>"Leaks"
As valid as woodscrews.

File: 1353844681623.jpg (21KB, 429x410px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 429x410px

What if these new leaks are of the APU
Ryzen combined with vega on an APU

If they are claiming 12.5t flops it means the chip has to be clocked at 1550mhz or higher based on the 4096 core count

Leaked tests show 1200mhz
My guess if the small vega will be something like 3000~ cores and 1500mhz while the big vega will be 1650mhz with 4096

Ryzen APU combined with vega onboard might be 2000 cores with 1200mhz clock

Could also be a mobile version of Vega

>>60201811
Raven Ridge tops at 4 Zen cores and 11 Vega NCU. So no, it's definitely not 2000 something ALU in APU.

>>60192284
I don't see the problem desu I hold onto hardware for years my i5 is already 4 years old and my 390 over a year.

Probably won't get a new gpu till mid next year and CPU well after ddr5 dropz

File: 1438276276325.jpg (17KB, 316x239px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 316x239px

>>60201830
Pinnacle ridge is an 8 core version of Zen. Should we expect 22 vega units onboard?

If raven ridge is 4 ryzen cores and 11 vega cores that would put it near RX560 performance with a i5 7600 or so

>>60192124
>half size transistors mean nothing
>architecture means nothing
>memory size/bandwidth means nothing
OP sucks cock, as usual

File: 1493564216410.jpg (57KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 500x500px

post yfw one VEGA graphics card will be 40% faster than 2 GTX 1080Ti using SLI

>>60202002
Pls don't sexual assault the Sagiri

>>60201958
Pinnacle Ridge is successor to Summit Ridge, it has nothing to do with APUs.

>>60192284
You realize Kaby Lake is like Haswell + 5% right?

>>60198307
1080s sells for 600 dollars in canada now you fucking retard.

>>60203413
Still 800 bucks unless you are some mongoloid who doesn't mind a reference card.

>>60203501
Just kill yourself my dude.

https://www.reddit.com/r/bapcsalescanada/comments/66qrmr/gpu_gigabyte_geforce_gtx_1080_windforce_oc_8gb/

Non reference 1080s have been regularly going on sale for sub 700 dollars in the previous months.

File: cool deal.png (96KB, 1075x525px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 1075x525px

>>60203595
Cool deal

>Sites source
>Some fucking unknown shit refurb seller probably
>Page unavailable

Do your parents know you're such a failure?

>>60203666
It's almost as if deals expire.

>Some fucking unknown shit refurb seller probably
It's almost as if canada computers isn't one of the biggest brick and motar electronics stores in Ontario. Do you even live in Canada?

But here, let me satisfy your autism.

https://ca.camelcamelcamel.com/Gigabyte-GeForce-Windforce-GV-N1080WF3OC-8GD-Graphics/product/B01IR6LMLO

The same card I linked above, except it's sold by Amazon Canada, and fulfilled by Amazon Canada.

Oh but wait, it actually went on sale for $630, which is EVEN CHEAPER.

Holy fucking shit dude! 999.99 for a 1080 at mikes! HURRRR I'm a fucking retard with my money.

>>60203753
Now you're linking to some camel jocky site? dude get over it 1080 is the shittiest card in the stack.

>>60200673
Nigga why is the die split?

>>60193173
They do, they actually want Fermi back

>>60203844
HBM stacks