/w4v/ - Daily Wait for Vega Thread - 16 GB CONFIRMED

>>60403755
Stop trying to hype shit up. Hype only leads to disappointment.

>>60403755
>16 GB

There's no way that's a consumer card.

>>60403784
Well, since 1080Ti is 11GB, they should come up with something, maybe for a special price.

Yup, leads me to believe this is Mi25 with 8GB HBM2 stacks, the clocks fit as well.

Which means consumer models should clock even higher

>>60403784
>be amd
>get cucked by gameworks
>become mad
>make superspeed 16gb graphics ram
>push games into super hardcore textures 'n shit
>11gb slow ram gets cucked beyond recovery

File: 1458848012974.gif (1MB, 300x169px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 300x169px

>>60403870
Don't you mean 0.5 GB of slow RAM?

>>60403902
>ayymd top card barely beats meme 970
really makes you think how pathetic that is

>>60403755
Yet another PCI ID and HBM configuration nobody saw coming.

AMD has really got management this time.
Now get a proper marketing team

>>60403923
Considering that GCN is shit...

Yeah

File: 1482074319184.jpg (138KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 653x726px

>>60403957
>GCN
>shit
DELET

File: 1493845223881.jpg (355KB, 800x620px) Image search: [Google]

355KB, 800x620px

>>60403755
There are benchmarks of a Ln2 Fury (non X)at 1450MHz, its graphics score is staggering.

>>60404014
That graphic score makes no sense, that's close to a 1080ti

>>60404095
It's a 50% overclock of a GPU that already had significant frontend bottlenecks. This score actually makes sense when the clocks alleviate some of that bottleneck.

>>60404136
Also that HBM overclock contributes to some 10% of that score.

https://devblogs.nvidia.com/parallelforall/inside-volta/

THANK YOU BASED NVIDIA

Damage control already?

>>60404173
Still don't see this being any more than 25% faster over Pascal. A good boost for mid-range maybe, but not worth selling your shiny new 1080 ti for.

>>60404314
It won't be, what NVIDIA did was pretty much "MOAR CORES" and that meant that it's a fucking thicc die.

>>60404314
anon how much will it cost for same perf as gtx 1080?
Doubting they'll reach gtx 1080ti levels. Maybe with closer with a ryzen cpu though

>>60404095
Dude 4096 ALU at insane clocks lmao.

>>60404402
If you turn the shadows back on on the 1080 the framerates sink to AMD levels anyway

>>60404425
Regular Fury is 3584

>>60404173
Wow a bigger Pascal with integrated ASIC? Lmao.
>>60404445
EVEN BETTER.

>>60403755
Poolaris is only 1400MHz, this is fake

>>60404468
Vega has longer bibeline.

>>60404468
Good thing this isn't Polaris you fucking idiot.

AMD makes two architectures, one for highend and the other for mid range and lower, next year Vega arch will be in mid range and Navi will take the high end spot.
It's not one arch across the board like Nvidia or old AMD.

>>60404502
Poolaris and Vega are 14nm, my point stands, don't expect 1600MHz from Vega because there isn't such a Vega

>>60404531
Vega has longer bibeline, moron.
>>60404502
Navi will take every spot because
>lol MCMable GPUs

>>60404502
>AMD makes two architectures, one for highend and the other for mid range and lower
This doesn't seem like a very efficient use of resources.

>>60404531
Good god you fuck, 28nm was used for like 4 years and the difference between 2011 and 2015 GPUs is over 200%

Please be retarded somewhere else

Right around the corner guyz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_ZMOn0X6jw

>>60404560
It's the truth, AMD has little money, and that's not enough money for a full Vega lineup.
Polaris was made as a finfet stopgap to sell cheap performance, its perf/watt isn't much better than Fiji which was a 28nm design.

If AMD gets money more than likely the generation after Navi will have a full lineup of Navi+1

Also as I mentioned, this allows them to reuse a perfectly fine arch next year for mid range.

>>60404595
>believing Raja's lies

>>60404595
Nobody cares about your nigger channel, nigger.

>>60404615
Begone Huang, you have no power here

>>60404595
fuck off inbred russki, don't need your backwards nazi language on this board

>>60404604
>the generation after Navi
I hope they can hold out that long because Nvidia is absolutely killing them.

>>60404625
>Russians
>inbred

>>60404615
Huang pls, you memed enough already.

>>60403923
Lmao my 175 bucks RX 470 doesn't even perform far off the 970.

>>60404632
Kek, where are you looking? Their computing and graphics divison grew 30% year over year.

>>60404623
Hunag actually delivers new products. Poojet only shits out turds once in a blue moon.

>>60404674
>new
>products
>8800 dieshrink-refreshes
Lmao.

Lol, Ln2 benchmarks! AMD is so desperate we already have proof that Vega can barely go over 1200MHz

>>60404010
GCN Is shittttt. That's why i'm waiting for Vega. Let's see what there new architecture can do.

>>60404682
Whatever makes you take a dump, poojet.

>>60404693
>we already have proof that a 7 month old ES can do 1200MHz

Nice.
Zen will barely clock over 2.9MHz, eh Juranga?

>>60404693
>Lol, woodscrews. NVIDIA is so desperate we alreadt have proof that Fermi does not exist
>>60404695
It's still GCN.

>>60404710
>It's still GCN.
isn't is called NCU? A whole new kind of house fire.

>>60404738
Are you fucking retarded?

>>60404752
yes, i am

>>60404738
You seem quite unread concerning this subject, you should go consult Google rather than asking here.

>>60404752
>>60404761
I'm just trying to make friends.

File: vega hype.png (40KB, 1268x902px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 1268x902px

>>60403766

File: rm.jpg (15KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 250x250px

>>60404635
>yes?

File: wheresmymic.gif (2MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x240px

>>60404623
>>60404637
listen here you li - LISTEN HERE YOU LITTLE SHIT.

>>60404839
Porkshoulders guy pls

>>60404839
Woodscrews dude pls.

rx 580x2 16gb ram. 8gb per gpu

amd is the king of rebranding rebrands.

amd on suicide watch

https://www.techpowerup.com/233325/entire-amd-vega-lineup-reportedly-leaked-available-on-june-5th

Not entirely convinced on that naming scheme, calling bullshit for now. Still, it's rumors, could have come out of something concrete.

>>60404872
Then it wouldn't have 1600MHz clock or 4096 cores, you fucking tard.
God, it even says gfx900 there, which is Vega.

Why is this board so retarded?

>>60404889
this
I think it's most likely overspill from a ryzen thread where throttlefags once again failed to convince anyone that throttlecore is good
So they come to flame where no facts exist to stop them

>>60404889
>gfx900 there, which is Vega.
Source

>>60404886
Looks like things could get interesting. Unfortunately I'm afraid most people who wanted 1080 ti performance already went out and bought a 1080 ti.

File: AMD-Vega-16GB-1600MHz.png (269KB, 1460x4308px) Image search: [Google]

269KB, 1460x4308px

>>60404950
It's right there next to CL_DEVICE_NAME

>>60404969
Most people don't have $1000 spare, especially considering how fast amerifacist private economy is failing

>>60404889

900 series were geforce cards you dumb nigger fuck

File: Screenshot_20170515_132311.png (257KB, 1179x354px) Image search: [Google]

257KB, 1179x354px

>>60404950
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=AMDGPU-LLVM-GFX9

>>60404998
gfx9 is internal AMD codename for Vega, anon.

>>60404998
Nobody's talking about marketing names you clown.
Also that's GTX, not GFX

File: ohGodRetarded.png (9KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 300x300px

>>60404998

>>60405023

GTX, GFX and GPU are used interchangeably. Asscloun

>>60405061
It's time to stop posting.

>>60405061

>Inb4 I was only pretending

Anyone seen AMD stocks? It's crashing harder than a number 2 in THE LOO

POO IN DA LOO

>>60405017
No, gfx9 is not an internal name for VEGA that would be greenland.

gfx9 is core IP version, and only core IP, which is mentioned in whitepapers, manuals and register specifications

Proper successor to the RX480 when? AMD should have a mid-range Vega to replace the rebrand 580.

>>60405106
No it shouldn't, fuck off.

>HEDT 16 core at 3.6 base
>Vega at 1600+

Kek, that Nvidiot/kike is literally foaming from rage

>>60405146
Imagine ALL the asspain if Vega is remotely good.

>>60405111
Yes it should pajeet. The 1160 will be out soon and AMD will have no competing product you street shitter.

File: OTwSU5M.jpg (108KB, 1472x645px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 1472x645px

so whatever happened to this?

>>60405176
>soon
>a year away
>still spamming "poo" memes like a 12 year old

Just fucking kill yourself already.

>>60405194
Fake, but at least someone tried.

>>60405176
AMD doesn't even care about 1070-tier performance, as evidenced by no Polaris or Vega SKU targeting it.

JustWait

>>60405209
t. poojet

File: 1487730850625.jpg (20KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 480x360px

>>60405209
>why are you still trying to spread misinformation, irate shill?

>>60405194
Does that look real to you?

>>60404839
kek

>>60405194
This was posted before titan xp was even available for purchase, you fucking retard.

>16gb of HBM2

I fucking wish. No way it's going to be a consumer card, but one can dream.
>tfw been waiting for a few months for Vega now with 1k burning in my pocket to blow on the top Vega card or a 1080ti

>>60405286
Kill yourself.

>>60404839
Nvidia driver

>>60405387
650m poojets shitting on the street isn't a meme.

>>60405375
just buy hookers and booze

>>60405176
1160 is just going to be a 1070 rebrand

>>60405714
Not a rebrand, but it will have 1070 performance.
Every Nvidia gen a new lower tier SKU fits in the slot of the old higher tier SKU

1160 = 1070
1170 = 1080

>>60403817
>Well, since 1080Ti is 11GB, they should come up with something, maybe for a special price.
But 8GB HBM2 is like having at least 12GB of GDDR5X. It already has more.

>>60404095
And? That makes perfect sense. Vega will be even more powerful. It'll surely poop on the Titan Xpp at least in 4K.

>>60404314
It's literally exactly 25% faster.
But consumer cards probably won't be, as that would greatly increase costs.
It's only 25% faster because it has 25% more cores. Lmao. They aren't going to put 25% more cores on consumer cards because it costs too much.
I mean they COULD, but Nvidia enjoys their absurd margins in the gaming sector.

>>60404531
And Pascal is 16nm yet clocks to 2150. The fuck does that matter? It doesn't. Vega is a different arch on a different process that just happens to be the same 14nm node size.

>>60405758
That is not always the case. I'm expecting the 1160 to fall between the 1060 and 1070 next time.
I don't think they'll make the die larger. At least not significantly. Stock clocks will be higher due to the updated process being more energy efficient, though.
Nvidia isn't giving you hand outs.

Volta was a lie. It's not a new arch, it's just an updated process like the RX580 though a bit more significantly so.
When Nvidia talked all those years on their roadmap with Volta and this MASSIVE like fucking 2x leap in performance they were targeting with Volta like it was some amazing new arch... it was a lie. "Volta" it turns out was really just the combination of Keplar+Maxwell+Pascal+Volta combined over the years for that performance increase. LMFAO all that just wait for nothing while AMD actually delivers.

>>60405789
>It's only 25% faster because it has 25% more cores. Lmao. They aren't going to put 25% more cores on consumer cards because it costs too much.
So what's the speed boost on consumer Volta, then?

>>60405169
IF Vega is remotely good it's going to be a P.R. disaster for both Intel and Nvidia when Ryzen + Vega shows massively better results than Ryzen + Nvidia GPUs since AMD's drivers are apparently much better multi-threaded than Nvidias.

>>60405895
Or a few people will cry foul and Nvidia will shrug their shoulders and not give a shit like usual.

File: fuuka.jpg (117KB, 1008x403px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 1008x403px

>>60405375
>No way it's going to be a consumer card, but one can dream.
they might go full nvidia on this and release a 16GB version for like $1000 or something.

>>60405885
No one can do anything but speculate.

And the last time Nvidia did a paper launch like this, with GP100, it took a year for it to actually exist.
Consumer Volta may come faster since it's just a new process.

I would guess that consumer Volta will be 8-20% faster. Though not awful on the high end there, but that'll be the smallest increase in performance in a long time. The 1070 is over 25% faster on average than the 1060.
Usually the next generation Nvidia card is as fast as the previous model above it. I don't think that's going to be quite the case this time around.

>>60405895
lol what.
AMD drivers aren't multithreaded for DX11/OpenGL.
Nvidia's are, but they have much higher overhead and don't always thread well.

>>60404991
what is this website?

>>60406080
https://compubench.com/device.jsp?benchmark=compu20d&os=Windows&api=cl&D=AMD+6864%3A00&testgroup=info

>>60406016
AMD's DX12/Vulkan drivers are much better multi-threaded than NVidia's are. It's already been well established that Nvidia's DX12/Vulkan drivers bottleneck Ryzen CPUs.

A half decent Vega should lift Ryzen's DX12/Vulkan performance considerably vs. the 7700k compared to a 1080 or 1080ti (if Vega is good enough).

How much time should I wait, and the expected prices for the high end model?

>>60406138
$1090

>>60406125
>AMD's DX12/Vulkan drivers are much better multi-threaded than NVidia's
{citation needed]
Also it's much easier to write a dx12 driver than dx11/ogl because you dump everytihg to the developer.

>>60406138
TITS AND GTFO

File: qmv3fjDc7O3IDMeJMOnibpiu3g7Z4oA5LRWXy5Myq70.png (76KB, 650x674px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 650x674px

>>60406191

File: 1491062981332.png (130KB, 1597x634px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 1597x634px

>>60406191
>>60406200

File: NvidiaCuckold.png (168KB, 1010x802px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 1010x802px

>>60406191
>>60406200
>>60406209

>>60406195
Suck them daddy

>>60403755
Why video cards have to much VRAM? my old video card has only 1gb but I can run some well optimized games at 50fps high/ultra settings, so how come they need 10 times more RAM than me?

>>60406326
Because this video card is for enterprise that would gladly take 1TB of VRAM(no, not NVRAM) if it was possible.

>>60406326
>optimized
You mean that washed out texture and those ten objects you can fit into your pathetic 1gb? Why do you want see progress stagnate just because you are satisfied with today's equivalent of tetris?
Seriously, we will never get more interesting things in gaming if we limit the max available object/texture output.

>>60406326
textures
4k gaming / VR / AR

>>60406326
textures

>>60406326
High res 4k textures in an open world game can take up a fuck load of memory.

http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-rx-vega-cards-reportedly-launching-june-5th-lineup-includes-3-skus-priced-at-599-499-399/

>599 USD

it will be slower than the GTX 1080TI

>>60407315
also no drivers

>>60407315
>wccftech
why is this even allowed

>>60407315
>reportedly

And even if it was $700 nobody would buy it even if it was faster than the 1080ti

>>60407315
This is straight up rumor mill bullshit. Can't find a single half decent source anywhere.

>>60407358
https://www.techpowerup.com/233325/entire-amd-vega-lineup-reportedly-leaked-available-on-june-5th

>>60407640
Then you click on their source, and it's some literally who site Digiworthy. Then you click on their source, and oh wait, there fucking is none. Then you google "RX vega nova" trying to find even one legitimate source and SURPRISE there fucking isn't one.

>>60407315
>>60407359
I want it to be $700.
It's probably Titan Xp performance.
I want to pay $100 more just so I can feel more superior JUST WAITING

>>60407640
>>60407315
I'm pretty sure that the 5th is fake because AMD almost always launches stuff on Tuesday, which would be the 6th.
I'm pretty sure it'll be the 6th or 13th.

>>60407738
It's also likely that only the more expensive card or two will launch initially, and the cut down cheaper one won't arrive for a month later.

Comment I saw on hexus:

>Friend that works at Amazon germany claims MSI is lowering their price of the flagship MSI 1080Ti Gaming X just to lower their overall stock of 1080Ti ahead of VEGA release just because they know the performance of VEGA and that it will disrupt the high end market. (Price @Amazon.de is 780 Eur incuding shipping)

As usual, it confirms nothing, don't start jumping in your chairs just yet, but I'll be staying sharp if the 1080ti gaming x does drop in price on germany or not, that might confirm if this is legit or not.

>>60407686
it was reddit. reddit mods deleted the discussion.

I hope Vega delivers because Volta is a fucking joke.

>>60408102
Volta does have a few new features. Not major ones. But meh.

I'm super Vega will deliver, but Volta won't be terrible especially if Nvidia lowers prices the next time around and finally starts supporting Freesync.

>>60408187
Consumer Volta is simply bigger dies, Kekler refresh style. Oh and faster memory I guess. Meh. And I don't think green jew will support FreeSync up until FreeSync2 kills every goysync monitor for good.

>>60404010
GCN had a good run, but it has run its course. It's time to pass off the torch to the next generation. I hope NCU inherits it with pride.

>>60408251
>NCU
It's simply new CUs. Vega is still GCN.

>>60408041
Well that sounds promising.

>>60408251
Vega is as much GCN as Fermi is Pascal, but at its base it's still GCN and Fermi respectively.

>>60408236
There is NO confirmation of that. It's only an ASSUMPTION based on GV100 having a 25% larger die than GP100.

It is incredibly unlikely that Nvidia will make all consumer dies so significantly larger. That's a 25% cut of their profits.
For GV100 it makes sense because 8 of them costs $149,000. Making the die they sell for $40 to board partners 25% larger, on the other hand, does not make sense.

MAYBE 10-12.5% larger dies, but probably no increase at all, and probably 5-10% higher clocks, plus the handful of new arch features which aren't game changers.

>>60408251
Vega is still GCN. Just the largest arch update to it since its inception. The Pascal is to Fermi as Vega is to GCN analogy is fairly apt.

>>60408291
kek

>>60408422
They need bigger dies to keep the momentum. The moment Pajeet actually delivers Navi it's probably all over for NVIDIA up until they come up with their own scalable interconnect.

>>60407686
>all news than I dont like are FAKE NEWS

>>60408577
Drink bleach. Go play in traffic.

>>60408539
If Nvidia can afford a 815mm2 die, AMD can afford to 4x 200mm2 die MCM for the gaymer market

>>60408632
Bigger dies means lower yields thus smaller margins. And 815mm^2 Volta is for enterprise only where margins are stellar anyway.

>>60404531
>this other thing that has one similarity should be the exact same as this new thing
Like the other guy said, look at 28nm. A bigass GPU like the 980ti was able to hit 1500MHz pretty easily, you'd think 2-3 years later that would be just as possible on 14nm, right?

Core < 1070 = Eclipse < 1080 < Nova < 1080ti < Titan X pascal < Corex2 < Titan Xp

>>60408806
You base this off?

>>60408823
>You base this off?
He thinks Vega is Fiji.

>>60408835
I don't know what he thinks but how can Vega, which has 50% more transistors than Fiji, be Fiji?

>>60408835
It is

>>60408868
Retards see 4096 ALU. Fiji had 4096 ALU.

>>60408632
I think you mean 4 400mm2 dies to be that same area. Which would cost a fraction to manufacture.

>>60408868
ITS NOT THE WAY IT'S MEANT TO BE PLAYED WHAT DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND

>>60408835
>b-b-but pascal is maxwell

>>60408917
Consumer Pascal is Maxwell on 16nm FF+.

>>60404760
/thread

>>60408930
Why Vega is not Fuji @ 14/16nm?

File: nvidia milk.png (226KB, 600x905px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 600x905px

>>60408930
Pascal has way better compute performance than Maxwell's gimped compute, and a better memory controller that doesn't completely shit itself when it runs out of VRAM like previous cards.

The GTX 1080 has 60% higher TFLOPS throughput compared to the 980Ti. Though generally just about 30% better gaming perf.

Pascal were really the first GPUs Nvidia released since the 8800 GTX which weren't steaming piles of garbage.
Yet people still bought those steaming piles of garbage.
Saying they are the same is really ignoring how garbage they used to be if you think they were good before and nothing's changed.

>>60408977
Because it has a fuckload of architecture changes, you retard.

>>60408977
Because Polaris is half-Fiji on 14nm.

>>60405176
But why do you even care? You'll just buy whatever GPU you see more headlines about anyway

>>60408992
>>60409003

So Vega is not GCN?

>>60409045
Vega is as GCN as Pascal is to Fermi.

>>60409045
Vega is as much GCN as Pascal is Fermi.
They are arch updates, not new archs, but they are huge changes. Vega is even bigger changes than Pascal+Maxwell combined were.

>>60409071
Vs Fiji what are the changes?

>>60409108
fuck off. go to school. google it.
I'm not spoon feeding you.

>>60409123
The GPU is not out, thats why I ask you this question. Vs Fiji, what are the changes?

>>60409181
You can literally Google them.

>>60409071
>>60409123
The source is my ass: the post

>>60405968
Not him, but I would actually consider buying this if it was DUAL GPU rather than single.
I would be all over it, in fact. Would make for a nice Fury X replacement.

>>60409222
Can you give a good source pls because a lot are fakes/'leaks'.

File: 1494609991324.jpg (165KB, 879x981px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 879x981px

>>60409192
>use google

>>60407315
>dat low price

Get ready for Another Massive Disappointment. Fury X 2.0 tier!

>>60407315
>399$ for 1070 competitor
>€450 in germoney

nope, not gonna happen, this is more expensive than the 1070 and on par with the 1080 on sale

File: circlejerk.jpg (49KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 600x600px

>>60409327
>>60409373
Sure love that rumor mill circlejerk. It was a fucking deleted comment on leddit you useless faggots. About as legit as Source: My Ass.

>>60409460
you can circlejerk my dick fucker

>>60409501
No thanks, I think you've already got your hands full.

Ok, here's the actual actual source. A chinese rumormill clickbait site. You can all taste chinaman's teeny weenie now. http://www.expreview.com/54070.html

>>60409520
what, that doesn't even make sense

>>60409534
Since clock rates are usually conservative on test samples I suspect it will boost somewhat higher than 1600.

File: 1482515713843.jpg (184KB, 1125x1119px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 1125x1119px

>>60410158
>mfw Vega hits 1800Mhz wastercooled

File: SK-Hynix-HBM2-Q2-2017-1000x191.png (40KB, 1000x191px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 1000x191px

https://videocardz.com/69504/sk-hynixs-updated-memory-catalog-features-hbm2-and-gddr6

>SK Hynix still can't make HBM2 faster than 1.6GHz

Enjoy your 408GB/s memory bandwidth 2 stacks, LESS memory bandwidth than a Fury X 512GB/s, AYYMDPOORFAGS

>>60410200
If it's 16GB then it's clearly not 408GB/s since 8GB stacks aren't out yet.

>>60410200
>Assuming that Radeon RX Vega was to feature HBM2 from SK Hynix, then we should expect a minimum bandwidth of 410 GB/s. Of course, this is just an illustration, Vega could easily have 4 stacks which would double the bandwidth and capacity.

You don't even read the links before you shitpost.

File: AMD-Vega-GPU.jpg (49KB, 602x339px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 602x339px

>>60410313
It only has 2 stacks, FAGGOT

>>60410361
You have mental issues. Real, serious mental issues that require to you seek a medical professional for diagnosis.

>>60410361
Then it doesn't have 16GB, retard.
Could very well be Vega 11

>>60405789
>But 8GB HBM2 is like having at least 12GB of GDDR5X. It already has more.

Stop. Fiji already shown this isn't the case.

>>60410361
is...is this the power of novideo?

>>60410200
But it's 4 stacks. 916GB/s.

>>60410307
4 x 4 = 16. I suppose that they could use more than the two HBM2 stacks in the shown die pics. Fiji had four HBM1 stacks if I remember correctly.

>>60410386
We have confirmation of both 8GB and 16GB models, 16GB won't be limited to enterprise, I guarantee it, but 16GB and the resulting bandwidth is rather pointless for gamer cards unless you're into dick waving

File: HBM2-GDDR6.png (43KB, 1502x285px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 1502x285px

>>60410200
fresh HBM memes

>>60410200
20% drop, new efficiency improvements which happened since Fiji can more than make up for that

File: best_o24[1].jpg (35KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 500x375px

All I want from vega, rx, gtx, whatever, is a future-proof card. I wanna spend the next decade at 1080/60 comfortably, and not caring about 4k. I was aiming for a ryzen 5 1600 + rx 580, but the vega + ryzen 5 seems more future-proof, with me only needing to get a ryzen 7 if anything goes wrong. I'd just go R5 + 1070, but there's been reports of bugs in games and I really don't wanna risk compatibility fuckery. what do

>>60410965
>future-proof
no such thing in tech

File: 73wdq[1].jpg (280KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

280KB, 2048x1536px

>>60411009
nonsence

>>60410965
In 2 years $600 Vega will be slower than $170 low-midrange cards.

>>60410307
>since 8GB stacks aren't out yet
just because they're not mass produced doesn't mean they don't exist

>>60411058
They're not in mass production ergo they might as well not exist for us.

5nm also "exists" but it's somewhere in 2021

>>60411034
lol that's really similar to my first windows 95 machine

>>60411047
well, it's been two years since fury x, its around 1070 for $400

>>60411047
the sad thing is that even if 2 years seems like too little time chances are your estimate ain't too far off. should I just go with a Ryzen 5 + RX 580 then?

>>60403755
To anyone who actually understands GPU hardware beyond frequencies and gigabytes.

Is Vega any good? I compared leak to TitanXp and TitanXp just seems better.

File: 1485670419392.jpg (26KB, 294x290px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 294x290px

>>60405194
>"embargo" May 8th
>May 15th today
What do you think happened, idiot?

>>60411133
It's at least on par.
You compared OpenCL to CUDA without even knowing OCL driver situation.
Compare it again to something older AMD like 480 or Fury X, you'll see there's not much of a difference in that particular test.

>>60407315
they gonna wipe the gtx 1080ti market for same or above performance at $100 less. Hoping some 100hz 3440z1440 freesync monitors come out for vega

>>60411168
I was talking more about info tab than results, Xp looks to have almost everything double than Vega.
because I'm not good with GPU hardware is why i'm asking

>>60411321
Those are incomparable, and where would Xp have more than Vega particularly? certainly not in shaders or clocks.

>>60411355
>CL_DEVICE_IMAGE2D_MAX_HEIGHT
and all the sisters

Thing is, I don't know shit about GPUs

>>60404695
It will always be GCN.

GCN is more like the name of the method used.

Nvidia makes a new design for every architecture. AMD adds in and swaps out modules. GCN is also designed to do most of the work not throw it onto the CPU. Thats why AMDs power consumption is high.

>>60403784
Amd always throws lots of memory at their cards compared to nvidia, and seeing as nvidia already hit double digits I see no reason why amd wouldn't hit 12-16 this gen in their top consumer offerings.

>>60411423
Ah, those are programmer numbers for creating 2D/3D images, pretty pointless numbers for us.

Important metrics in this sheet are

CL_DEVICE_GLOBAL_MEM_SIZE
CL_DEVICE_MAX_CLOCK_FREQUENCY
CL_DEVICE_MAX_COMPUTE_UNITS
CL_DEVICE_NAME

>>60404969
But the amd offering will be at most 500 bucks, so there is a much larger group of people willing to spend that much.

>>60407315
Throw them in sli and beat the ti

>>60411582
hm its at $465 now, still very decent for 50% potential 4.1Ghz OC

>>60403755
What is estimated price based on previous amd pricing for vega?

Idk if to buy 580 for 280$ [strix]
or to wait,but if it is gonna be like 500$ it is 2much for me

>>60403766
/thread

>>60411670

Are they adding crossfire and explicit multiadapter support on all games? No? Then it's fucking worthless.

If vega is not faster than a 1080ti it is "another massive disappointment". I don't care how cheap it is. They have had a year. If this is the best they can do, then Radeon needs a GPU architect who knows what the fuck they are doing. And let Raja go back to fucking apple making shit tier mobile GPUs

>>60403766
but thats amd's business model.

>>60411009

Tell that to Hawaii approaching year 5 of dominance.

>>60412134
it has HBM2, pretty expensive shit.
I think it's going to be over $500, similar to fury launch price.

>>60411531
Ok then, thanks for heads up.

>>60412298

Exactly my 290x is working perfectly. It performs on par with a 980 now

>>60412479
Oh please no it doesnt. The 290/X is fucking legendary but its not a 980.

I'm a lot more interested in Navi. MCMing gpus? Imagine what AMD could do. Only making one chip, but sell cards with 1-8 or even more. Nvidia releases new competitor? No problem, just improve the chip design and release a model with 2-4 more chips on it...

People might never need cfx/sli again.

>>60412557
>MCMing gpus
it's assumed that this is the 'scalability' that AMD promised with navi, but this is actually something really difficult to do.
You can split geometry engines with CUs into different dies, but this creates a lot of difficulties. They'll need to have a different chip for the command processor and I/O and that inter-chip communication is going to add a bit of latency.

>>60413018
If it was easy someone would have already done it, practically saying goodbye to reticle limits and bad yield, who wouldn't want it?

It's difficult to do, but AMD with its current cash cannot compete with Intel and Nvidia building 800mm^2 dies, simple as that.
And MCM is way more scalable, there's no actual limit besides PCB size.

>>60411582
They aren't gonna sell 1080 ti performance for $500.

>>60413227
It's also more efficient as it allows them to put chips at their optimal clock/voltage, so you could have something the size of GP104 running at lower clocks vastly improving its perf/watt
And you put several of those together.

>>60413243
Like they aren't gonna sell 6900k+ performance for $300-500 ?

You don't know that, AMD can't afford to price the same as Nvidia even if it is faster.

>>60403923
>fury x gets beat by 970
in your nvidiot cuck shed

>>60413227
>>60413273
it's more realistic that they'd stack it on an interposer rather than MCM over PCB to reduce latency.
There's going to be a lot of limits and if they actually achieve it, it's going to be very small scale at first.
As for efficiency, sure there's that, because they could use different processes for different parts, saving money, die space and power.

File: frust4.jpg (51KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 640x480px

>>60413320
calm down poojet

>>60403923
Only in very terribly optimised games, or terribly optimised zones of games - like Fallout 4 in Boston.

>>60413320
but it does poor poojeet

>>60408292
>>60408422
>>60408280
Ah okay, I see. So basically just pipeline adjustments and other optimizations? If it ends up being that significant of a jump over GCN in terms of front-end and geometry (ie. Tessellation which even my 290s get destroyed on in TessMark by my old 680 hilariously) then that would be pretty fucking cool. Definitely doesn't hurt to have the upper hand in Vulkan and DX12, I can see why they kept most of GCN for this.

Also can't the similarities between Pascal and Fermi be traced back even to Tesla when they first implemented CUDA cores? Seems like most of what has happened (looking at paper specs) is die shrinks, increased core counts, and clock speed increases/power reduction since then.

Guess who woke up.

File: 1491061268381.png (85KB, 800x726px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 800x726px

>>60413644
>>60413619
samefag

>>60413291
Nvidia's price gouging is nothing compared to Intel's. The 1080ti is nowhere near as overpriced as the 6900K.

>>60413682
Further back. The base Tesla design started with G80 and the start of the unified shader model.
Tesla added some better compute capability (including double precision).
Fermi improved scheduling and added even more double precision (for GF100). V1.1 Fermi altered the ratio of SP:DP, adding one more bank of SP shader processors per SM, and added some improvements to the front end. This would be further refined with Fermi V2 (GTX 500 series).
Kepler dropped the bulk of the DP units (ignoring G1 Titan for the moment), killed the hot clocks, and quadrupled the shader count.
From there it was simply increasing shader counts, improving getting shit to and from them, and other general efficiency improvements.

File: frust5.jpg (48KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 640x480px

>>60413915
>Implying

>>60414033
>But the 1080ti price wouldn't have been lowered if vega wasn't around the corner

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

566KB, 2100x1500px

Apologize.

>>60403755

WAITING PATIENTLY, OFFICIAL ANNOUNCEMENT TOMORROW

>>60414967
>OFFICIAL ANNOUNCEMENT
Computex is 10am May 31st. Release should be late June if they follow the same route as their RX400 computex announcement last year

>>60415292

Yeah but apparently AMD are releasing some information tomorrow

http://www.tweaktown.com/news/57406/amd-detail-vega-next-gen-navi-gpu-tech-16/index.html

File: poo.png (312KB, 595x654px) Image search: [Google]

312KB, 595x654px

>>60415505
>AMD are releasing some information tomorrow
vega is vega

It will be the same as the furyX
Tons of potential power with zero optimizations.
Will lose to the gtx1080ti
Then 1 years later when AMD finishes a proper driver, it will be a bit faster.

But by then the 1180 will out and noone will care..

>>60415505

The same vague and shitty information they released almost a year ago gets another rehash, fantastic.

>>60415505
DELETE

>>60411521
This

File: 29BBF7EA-1AD4-4DC7-9A92-93D5F3762BB0-551-000001E0C93311D7_tmp.jpg (21KB, 384x384px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 384x384px

>>60404531

>>60412530
Motherfucker it is.

File: 1493700780100.png (156KB, 295x357px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 295x357px

Still waiting

Can you overclock HBM?

>>60403755
considering that there's talk of a dual GPU card, I wouldn't be surprised if that's what the 16GB is from

>>60418615
but a dual GPU card would have more than 64 CUs

>>60412530
>implying
The 390x DEFINITELY is, if not 290x

File: perfrel_2560_1440.png (33KB, 500x850px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 500x850px

>>60412530
boker face

File: monopoly.png (847KB, 1485x296px) Image search: [Google]

847KB, 1485x296px

>>60405375
>>60405375
Literally the same I have all my Canadian Monopoly money ready to go as soon as I get some news.

>>60406209
>>60406216
Anyone dumb enough to run a fucking CF/SLI set up these days doesn't deserve their money anyways.

>>60407315
>>60407454
The source was literally the r/amd sub.... "My friend works at amd and here is the info he game me!"

>>60420170
Uh, the point of those tests was to show that Nvidia's drivers were gimping DX12/Vulkan performance on Ryzen CPUs. Notice how the Ryzen CPUs get way better fps using AMD GPUs?

>>60418516
You gotta do some shit first on Fiji to bypass a driver lock, but yeah, it's possible to bump your HBM to 600MHz: https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/overclocked-hbm-its-true-and-its-fast.213875/

>>60420199
Mods deleted this thread thankfully. It was compete bullshit

>>60421820
>thankfully

That should only matter if you browse Reddit, anon.

When is the announcement for Vega again?
If I'm not mistaken, a couple months ago I read some anon say that it was 16/18 May, don't remember which of the two.

>>60423004
There is something tomorrow but apparently it's more for roadmapping future products

File: Vega Final Presentation-29.png (2MB, 2666x1500px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2666x1500px

Polaris 4 ops/clock
Vega 14 ops/clock and 360mhz higher clock

It'll Poor Volta

>>60423168
>taking a non-technical slide literally

This time last year I never thought I would buy another AMD product, now I have a 1700 and considering Vega since my 1070 is pretty inadequate for 3440x1440. Hoping based Raja can deliver, I want to believe.

>>60415505
>tweaktown

Into the trash it goes

File: 2017-05-16 09_01_02.jpg (531KB, 2502x1099px) Image search: [Google]

531KB, 2502x1099px

Speaking of AMD master race

which CPU temperature is correct? (i' using a ryzen 1700 which doesn't have an offset)

>>60420661
>Nvidia's drivers were gimping DX12/Vulkan performance on Ryzen CPUs.
I don't think you're reading those right. They actually show AMD cards perform poorly on DX11 when paired with intel CPUs

The most interesting aspect is that the lowest tier RX Vega CORE model is only going to be 399$

so you have a direct competitor with the 1070 which means that the 1080 will drop to 400$ to match it probably.

Im guessing the lowest speed HBM2 with 8gb and likely a cut down 3500-shader variant of the vega 10 chip. Now if this thing is running a boost clock in the 1600mhz range on the REFERENCE model then I am very suprised.

Obviously the pipeline has been elongated in vega to push clocks higher than polaris.

So raw 3500 shaders at 1600+mhz going against a gimped 1070 with only 1920 shaders and even the 1080 with 2440 shaders.

That is some serious power and compared to the new NCU arch which is going to reduce idling/bubbling in the piepline the raw AMD shader performance will translate into a more accurate in game FPS performance over older polaris.

Its not quite the stripped down speekfreak of pascal architecture but its close enough that AMD should be able to smash out pascal in that performance bracket with sheer numbers of shaders.

I expect the 400$ vega to destroy the 1070/1080 in 4K performance and match or run slightly behind the 1080 in 1440p/144hz performance. So fat neckbeards will still want the 1080 because it does 4-5fps more on their fast resfresh panel. But vega will make more sense for regular gamers because of its performance on 4K televisions and the potential for freesync over TV HDMI which will never happen on G-sync.

My end game card is Ultra 4K performance at 60fps on a TV with adaptive refresh which i can build in a miniITX PC box. Vega will be the first card to meet that spec at 400-500$ beating out the 700$ 1080ti and while being half the physical size due to HBM2

As long as 4K performance is between 1080-1080ti and its sub 500$ AMD has the better card.

>>60423004
Financial Analyst day for AMD is tomorrow around 1ET I think. We'll find out then.
I also wonder if that Intel/AMD partnership is possibly legit, would be nice if they bring that up tomorrow.

>>60423740
1070 is 1920
1080 is 2560
1080 Ti and Titan X is 3584
Titan Xp is 3840

>>60423784
my mistake on the 1080 shader count.

But Im guessing the shader count for the cut down vega will be identical to the 1080ti at the 3500-3600 range.

So shader to shader its a match and the difference will come from Three things: clockspeeds, efficiency of the SM/NCU and Driver optimization.

For the sake of argument i tip all of these in the direction of nvidia so assume the cut down 3500 shader vega will not match a 1080ti when both are at 1600mhz core clock. I fully assume and expect the 1080ti to pull ahead

However when you pair the uncut 4000-shader vega with better binned HBN modules at higher memory clocks thats where this gets interesting. The faster memory and 10~% more shaders gives it the bump it needs to close the performance gap at least at 4K. at 1440p and 1080p Im doubtful that Vega will keep up. I would loved to be surprised though

>>60423917
Vega will absolutely demolish NVIDIA though. You're still thinking Vega is duct taped Fiji.

>>60423667
Those are all reading 50C you dingus

>>60403755
>Volta is literally another non-improvement
NVIDIA really can't let go of G80 can they

File: wew.jpg (73KB, 232x346px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 232x346px

Here is a leaked screencap of vega render that I haxxed
>astonishing

>>60423962
Hey, as long as it works.

>>60424009
If it were up to NVIDIA we'd still be using DDR2 on our GPUs

>>60424036
Well, they are always the last to adopt new stuff.

>>60424052
That's because they've had a competitor to do the R&D for them

>>60414937
Is he the guy who invented the suitcase clock bomb?

>>60424063
Sometimes NVIDIA tries, but it results in something like HMC.

>>60423953

What is CPUTIN then? The VRM heatsink?

thanks btw my man

>>60424394
CPUTIN is AUX, aka useless reading

>>60423934
I'm killing the bullshit hype train.

The raw performance is a nice improvement but alot of the upgrades in the architecture wont be fully realized in their potential until game engines become more advanced and the vega design gets shrinked to 7nm.

They elongated the pipeline to boost clocks over polaris which is a solid design choice and they have increased the versatility of the Compute units over polaris but FLOPS are FLOPS and there is only so much you can do with the raw floating point ability.

What does interest me is the unique way they handle hair simulation which seems to BTFO the current Hair processing ability of older GCN and current gen Nvidia cards. The biggest problem with Pascal is the FPS tanking when Hairworks turns on. If AMD solved the Hair problem and their solution can run hairworks then in nvidia optimized games with those features running on max we might see a hilarious turnaround with AMD BTFO nvidia.

Who the hell knows though. But if this new card is as efficient as pascal in FLops-FPS then AMD does have a bombshell because the raw floating point on vega is roughly equivalent TitanXP

>>60423934
Vega is less than duct taped Fiji, it's STILL ROP starved

>>60424673
>it's STILL ROP starved
in what way?
even with 64 ROPs, @1600MHz the pixel fillrate would be 102.4 gigapixels per second.
even if you were running an 8K monitor @ 300FPS, only 10% of the clocks would be used on ROPs.

So where's it?

File: amd2.jpg (52KB, 568x612px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 568x612px

>>60426242
Soon
Wait for it

File: 0yKZ3tj.jpg (60KB, 552x661px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 552x661px

>>60426260

File: Comb20042017122425.jpg (586KB, 1920x1754px) Image search: [Google]

586KB, 1920x1754px

>>60423715

>>60426242
probably released @ computex
they're holding a press conference on May 31st
might get some more info today during financial analyst day event

>>60426366
What about may 16 info?

>>60426440
>What about may 16 info?

That's the financial analyst day event. It'll be today at 11PM GMT as I recall.

>>60426440
like I said
>might get some more info today during financial analyst day event
might get some specification about different models and clocks and core counts if we're lucky.

>>60426505
it's 8PM GMT

>>60424036
You think nvidia wouldn't design a newer version of memory as computing power increased to keep the cores fed?

>>60426746

They haven't yet.

When is that analyst day starting?

>>60428235
see
1 PM PT
4 PM ET
8 PM GMT

>>60428321
So in 4 hours and 45 minutes in relative time?

So all memes aside, how will this end up? Most sources say that they'll have a paper launch and limited availability, and poor performance (compared to the 1080).

>>60428423
you mean on planet earth?

>>60428443
Relative time, from now to then.

What's the delta?

>>60428475
i dont know, i think 5hours and 39minutes

new threadwhen

File: 540.png (225KB, 540x402px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 540x402px

Alright no meming pls

I want 1080ti graphics and it's price seems fair for me... will Vega realistically produce 1080ti graphics or close to it and when will aftermarket Vega cards be available? Next year?

Trying to decide if I should wait and switch to an AMD card since I have this freesync monitor that nvidia won't fucking support.

>>60430344
I'm in a similar boat, have a 4K monitor with freesync and an HTC Vive.
1080Ti level performance seems just about good enough for 4K and can squeeze more out of VR with super sampling.
Sitting on a 980 at the moment which is not too bad, can manage fine for most games with a few setting tweaks but is hitting 80 degrees Celsius might need a clean and thermal paste reapplied but I can't be fucked since I will likely be upgrading to vega soon™.

>>60430344
It might be 1080ti levels, it might not

Early results put it somewhere close to a 1080, and since we haven't seen the final results yet the high-end Vega card COULD be as powerful as a 1080ti, don't bank on it though.

There is less than a month until Vega launches, they might talk a bit about it today, and then again at Computex at the end of the month.
Rumours have a Vega launch on June 5th, but that's pretty much baseless so it's anyones' guess.


I'd say wait until June, then make your decision. I was going to buy a 1080ti, but I'm just waiting for more info about Vega, and I'll buy a new card in June most likely.

As for aftermarket cards, no idea, maybe they will have a few select partners at launch. I'm pretty sure one aftermarket manufacturer was already shown with their own Vega card a few months back. A quick google search should probably find you the answer to that question.

File: 0d14cddc7d[1].png (241KB, 616x545px) Image search: [Google]

241KB, 616x545px

>>60430568
>>60430344
Yeah, so here is the aftermarket card I was talking about

It's made by PowerColor, to my ears they are literally whos, but this would imply that they are showing off Vega cards at Computex.

You never know though.

Oh and here's the link to where I got the picture from

https://segmentnext.com/2017/05/09/custom-amd-rx-vega-graphics-cards/

>>60426746
They tried with HMC and failed miserably.

File: 6_540.png (139KB, 540x257px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 540x257px

>>60430568
>>60430653
thanks anon. Guess I'll wait and see. Finger crossed for a ti competitor.

Hopefully it will be better than my current 1070 either way.

>>60430568
>Early results put it somewhere close to a 1080,

You mean 1070.

>blah blah blah that test used low clocks

Because you need liquid cooling to reach the "planned" final clocks, that hit barely 1080 levels.

It will be Fury all over again. Under performing, super expensive cards, in low production numbers and limited availability, that only really equal Nvidia cards in 4k and above, and get trashed in anything lower.