Vega will not "destroy" Nvidia >Nvidia has directly

>>60440271
vega just beat gp100 by 30% 3 hours ago.

>>60440461
Vega isn't even released.

>>60440461
source me nigger

>>60440899
>>60440871
>>60440461

Nothing interesting for your average consumer, it's a workstation card that beat the Titan XP in their benchmarks, which probably are not objective.

It's a good sign I suppose since they have a card capable of beating the XP now, but we still don't know how the "gaming-focused" RX-series is going to stack up.

http://pro.radeon.com/en-us/vega-frontier-edition/

This is the source for their claims.

>Ryzen will not "destroy" Intel

>>60441759
on the gpu side, I doubt amd will destroy nvidia, if only because of the proprietary shit in nvidia's hardware.

Nvidia isn't intel that fired all its qa, and then fired engineers while donating 300 million to social justice.

amd will likely play ball with the 1080ti, and depending on optimization, touch or exceed the titan xp, but I highly doubt amd will destroy nvidia.

>>60440461
I find it funny that AMD is comparing Vega with TITAN XP which comes with GeForce gaming driver (as opposed to one for Quadro) in professional applications.

>>60443335
They compared it to P100, which isn't a geforce product.

>>60444214
yea its faster than gaymurforce

>>60441751
Could they give us an uglier card? I mean fuck I'm not some ricelord faggot but at least try.

It just looks weird

Nvidia fanboys on suicide watch

>>60441751
I wonder how much will it cost.

It seems to be a monster but looks like shit. I hope they wont make it blue in the end.

Neither of them care much about games anymore. GPU compute sales now make up 66% of GPU profits.

>>60440271
>showed it beating the $6000 GP100 handedly
>GUYS you don't understand that's not evidence that it's faster than the slower 1080Ti

Take your cuck fantasies elsewhere, OP.

>>60445919
keep waiting poojet

>>60440271
Vega will provide near 1080ti performance in 4k dx12/Vulkan. Lower in dx11.

Just what i need to play muh gay men on my new sweet 4k panel.

there are only two real scenarios for vega
1.same price and same performance
2.lower price and lower performance
they already showed us that they can't compete when it comes to price/performance and that's pretty sad
rx570 is the only card that has a competetive price

>>60446274
4k 570 equivalent

>>60445919
Just because it's expensive doesn't mean it's any good for gaming performance, which is probably the only thing you care about. GP100 is weak as shit when it comes to gaming, even beaten by the old Titan XP.

>>60446274
>implying 580 doesn't BTFO 1060 on price AND performance

reeee
I just want a good Freesync 2 card

>>60446939
>implying you can buy 580
>implying 580 isn't just a damage control while poojets keep on waiting

>>60446939
If amd gpu wasn't housefire, i would give them the win

>>60445778

If its finished like the current AMD pro stuff its actually nicer in person, bad render doesn't do it justice.

>>60440271
The raw power is high enough to match the TitanXP the question is whether the new arch is more efficient than old GCN. If it is efficient and there are no bubbles in the pipeline anymoe than the Vega10 chip is equivalent to TitanXP and is some metrics faster due to lower latency and higher bandwidth of HBM2

if the architecture still bubbles/idles then it will likely be around 1080 level in speed.

>>60449534
>put pro gpu against gaming card in pro environment because they know quadro shits on vega
>WE WON POOJET
k

>>60446939
I dunno man. Hardware unboxed showed it to be 2.5% faster over 27 games compared to the 1060 but it also costs £10 more.

>>60446939
It's just a 480 overclocked as far as possible, you would have to compare it to an overclocked 1060 to be fair.

>>60440461
>Comparing your top binned professional grade hardware vs competitins low binned consumer grade shit.
Look guys I won by 30%!

>>60449851
also
>pro drivers vs gaymen drivers
amd is a fucking joke