/w4v/ - Daily Wait for Vega Thread - 16 GB RX VEGA, HBM2 OVERCLOCKING,

>>60471315
>COMPUTEX LAUNCH CONFIRMED
More like Founders Edition paper launch confirmed.

Also the fact they try and advertise it to professionals means that they probably wont beat the Titan Xp

File: feels_amd_skele.png (49KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 653x726px

just wait

You could have at least posted the interesting shit he said on libbit

>>60471315
>CANT WAIT FOR MUH VIDYEO GAEMS
Literally all wait-let fags

>>60471346
Hynix could have made enough HBM2 for hundreds of thousands of Vega GPUs just since that rumor started going around.

>>60471346
Who care about Titan Xp? I want a card of 1080/Ti level with competitive price. Its all comes down to the price of Vega gpus.

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

156KB, 633x758px

IM LITERALLY SHAKING

>We’ll be showing Radeon RX Vega off at Computex, but it won’t be on store shelves that week.

POO IN THE LOO
O
O

>>60471315
POO IN THE GPU

>>60471562
>Who care about Titan Xp?
It would be a complete marketing failure to try and sell a 1080ti level GPU after 1080ti release for premium cost with a fucking blower cooler.

File: 1468340221924.png (500KB, 600x580px) Image search: [Google]

500KB, 600x580px

>>60471315

>rebbit

>>60471478

>>60471492
Go to VideoCardz your fucking self, asshole.

Couldn't AMD rerelease Fury something with more clocks and memory in 2016 if they planned for Vega to hit in 2017?

>>60471315
was listening mr Tech Deals and Joker talk about Vega being late and problems with manufacturing. That if they plan to release in June they should have been built 3 months earlier.... And since they already had working units in December that there shouldn't be production issues.

i have no faith in AMD and they will likely botch the release with inadequate supplies, but it would be great for them if they go to Computex and pull an E3 trick. "This is Vega and its available *long pause* now"

>>60472702
>>60471546

>"We’ll be showing Radeon RX Vega off at Computex, but it won't be on store shelves that week"

>>60474361
>Expect Vega on store shelves by December 31, 2017 at the latest!

>>60474361
>>60474527
They've confirmed full release of consumer Vega before the end of next month.

>>60474669
nop

https://videocardz.com/69662/raja-koduri-explains-where-radeon-rx-vega-in-reddit-ama

File: 1494997476724.jpg (966KB, 2661x1638px) Image search: [Google]

966KB, 2661x1638px

>>60471315
AMD knows that the main reason people buy their products is solely because they aren't the competitor. AMD knows that the longer they don't release their product, the less they will disappoint and the more hype they will build up. Then after finally releasing it, and it not meeting expectations at all, they will still buy it because "Well shit I've been waiting a year and a half I'm just gonna get it anyway". AMD will hold this off as long as they can
I've been screenshotting Vega posts since January so this time around those watifags can't lie and say "nobody said it would be X performance, I see nothing wrong here we completely expected Y performance" happens everytime

>>60474697
Yeah, it won't be available for purchase at Computex, which is May 30th. I said by the end of next month, shill.

>>60474794
limited, and why you call me a ''shill''??

>>60474753
Ryzen absolutely blew the fuck out of all expectations. Intel's HEDT lineup is dead, and the only processors worth buying are the 7600k and 7700k. An easy OC on a 1700 or 1600 will give you similar single core performance with twice as many cores.

>>60474753
I've see posts saying both, you can find idiots supporting literally any claim.

>>60474808
>limited
Hey look, it's that same shitty rumor. Hynix and Samsung could put out enough HBM2 for 16,000 Vega dies in a weekend, or less. There will be more than 16,000 Vega cards available at launch and anyone who still believes that rumor is an idiot or a shill.

>>60474826
>Vega is gonna be shit
>R-Ryzen
Ok bud

>>60474847
>16,000 Vega dies
>in a weekend
>in a weekend
>in a weekend

[Citation needed]

>>60474826
>RYZEN WILL BE SKYLAKE SINGLE CORE WITH EIGHT CORES FOR UNDER 400
>I see no issue here we fully expected haswell levels single core performance this is a great deal
Wish I screenshotted those posts

>>60474866
Depends only about the price of this shit.

>>60474880
SK Hynix puts out a million wafers a month. 16,000 Vega dies is 32,000 HBM2 stacks, which is less than 3 300mm^2 wafers.

>>60474922
yeah if this "shit" is gonna be as cheap as ryzen vs intel then It be le interesting hehe :^) lulz memes.

>>60474926

[Citation needed]

>>60471315
AMD WAIT™

>>60474866
The post I quoted was saying AMD never lives up to the hype. Clearly, Ryzen did.

>>60474903
The general consensus was Haswell IPC with 4-8 cores and SMT. No one expected such low TDP or to be able to OC and achieve Skylake IPC or more, and no one expected Ryzen to kill Intel's HEDT lineup.

>>60474970
>no one expected
>no one
I guess someone lost memory of last 365 days...

>>60474970
Ryzen didn't live up to the hype at all
Did you even bother reading the hype about it?
It was supposed to blow Intel out of the water, destroy all of their processors
In reality it did nothing, Intel is still growing strong and releasing fuck all cause they didn't get the competition they should have

>>60471478
10/10

>>60474970
>skylake ipc
It's not even close though are you high?

>>60474970
how do you expect me to bite with nothing good on the hook?
ive got 500 babies to feed raja

>>60474937
Sorry, don't know where I got three from, the number is 50 wafers. HBM2 is 7.75mmx11.87mm die, you can get 650 dies from a 300mm^2 die.

>>60474970
>Ryzen lived up to the hype
Where have you been living these past 5 years?

>>60475009
Did you even read what I posted above? Have you been paying attention? The only Intel processors worth buying are the 7600k and 7700k, and with a slight OC the cheaper 1700 and 1600 match them in single core performance. Anyone willing to do a little bit of research before they buy will buy AMD this generation.

>>60474970
>Clearly, Ryzen did
Stockholm syndrome

>>60475111
The 1700 overclocked does not match the single core performance of a 7700k
Nice try though pajeet, nobody is buying Ryzen outside of AMD fans
AMD needs to do a whole lot better with Zen+, then maybe I'll consider getting a team red account like you

>>60475027
Compare the Ryzen 7 1700 at 4GHz to the 6700k, they trade blows.

>>60475156
zen+ will be zen +5% higher clockrate.
Basically what they did with RX580 and other rebrands

You can expect it to be called Ryzen Radeon X9

>>60475184
No it doesn't

>>60475220
>>60475156
>>60475117
>>60475027
>>60475009
Go to bed, Mr. Krzanich

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1700-cpu-review,5009-3.html

>>60475238
>tom shillware
>relevant source
Pick only one

>>60475238
>more cores beats less cores in physics tests
Congratulations raja what a fair comparison of IPC
Stupid fuck

>>60474837
>>60474903
>>60475009
>>60475027
>>60475087
>>60475117
>>60475248
Oh look, seven entirely evidence free shillposts about Ryzen. Feel free to hop over to >>60466053 for 50+ benchmarks BTFO'ing your kiketel shekelchasing, but I'd prefer not to derail this one into the same argument.

File: Screenshot_2.png (21KB, 773x240px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 773x240px

>>60475238
Cow got your tongue?

File: 7999ceead3c47f872878ffc408b76410.jpg (121KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 800x800px

>>60475291
>Stupid shils JEW JEW JEW
>Links to a thread full of counter shills
Not too bright are you? Gotta have other people make your arguments for you by spamming cherry picked benchmarks like they do every single thread?
>SKYLAKE IPC
>SEE LOOK AT THIS PROOF OF MY ROCKET LEAGUE BENCHMARKS WHERE RYZEN IS 20 FPS BEHIND

>>60471315
>COMPUTEX LAUNCH CONFIRMED

He literally explicitly said they weren't launching at computex and weren't launching the same week as computex.

holy fuck do you people even listen or read

File: enemy_is_weak_to_physical_attacks.gif (1MB, 499x654px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 499x654px

>>60475327
>Yet more evidence free shillposting

>>60472702
I'm pretty sure this is what happened and will happen:

>We'll beat the 1080 with this
>Nvidia shits out the 1080ti
>Holy fuck how did they do that delay delay
>We'll beat the 1080ti with this
>Computex announcement
>launch 2 months later
>Volta arrives same time
>btfo AMD anyways

>>60475291
you know those people literally have a specific folder of cherry picked benchmarks for Ryzen despite every other source showing those benchmarks to be incorrect right
mods are banning these people for de-railing threads and spamming images of the same shit, they do it everywhere
>Post a graph of intel performing better
SHILL SHILL SHILL FALSE
>Post graph of AMD performing better
HAHAHAHA INTEL BTFO

You guys gotta grow up, if anyone is shilling it's you, because you clearly put in alot more effort of spending five hours posting graphs over and over

>>60475390
You haven't posted any evidence at all of the 1700 having the same IPC as a 6700k at 4ghz
Fucking moron, hang yourself back at funnyjunk

>>60475422
check out people running single instructions through ryzen to get the actual ipc

ryzen's equal or beating intel in ipc - the only thing dragging them down are optimizations and intel's compiler bullshit

File: 1471468731427.jpg (295KB, 746x682px) Image search: [Google]

295KB, 746x682px

>>60475403
>volta
>2017
you got to go back

>>60475411
>Posting evidence is bad
>Instead you should make hundreds of evidence free crying wojak "POO POO POO" shitposts a week.
(You)

File: AMD-Ryzen-Vs-Kabylake-Single-THreaded-Test-IPC.png (20KB, 493x280px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 493x280px

>>60475459
Never even said anything about wojaks kid, that was you projecting. Someone spent five hours cherry picking benchmarks and posting them on a columbian thumb wrestling board and you have the balls to call me a shill?
>>60475439
You were right, my apologies, too late to delete my previous IPC posts as to not confuse others

>>60475492
You cannot cannot "cherry pick" 50+ benchmarks showing results in 50-100 different applications. At that point it's simply showing the majority of benchmarked workloads.

>>60474826
Two different products and two different divisions, there is no guarantee VEGA will exceed expectations.

>>60474753
>after finally releasing it, and it not meeting expectations at all, they will still buy it because "Well shit I've been waiting a year and a half I'm just gonna get it anyway"
I'd run of patience and say fuck it when desperate for an upgrade, bought a 980 on impulse because it was on sale and needed a better GPU after 390X(confused with Fury at the time) was delayed, happy I did that at the time considering how long it took to manage to find a Fury in stock and 390X released 2 months later and ended up being very close performance and cost wise so it didn't really matter.

Solid 4K 60fps on Ultra without AA for recent demanding DX11 titles is my desired target, even 1080Ti cannot achieve this level of performance for demanding titles so I don't have my hopes up.
I am not in a rush to upgrade now, so hopefully this time around they'd have enough Vegas in stock at launch. If it fails to meet expectations then there is a fat chance I'd buy their product and just wait on Volta.

File: clock-cb15-1.png (224KB, 602x686px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 602x686px

>>60475530
It's pretty easy to cherry pick 50 graphs out of thousands of benchmarks to prove your point
See here I can show the 7700k beating the 1800x in IPC
It's incredibly easy

>>60471315
Unless you want a gpu for mining, you're in for getting a shiny new GPU with bad drivers that can't play games. Go away corporate shills.

File: deusex-1080p-ryzen-645x448.jpg (37KB, 645x448px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 645x448px

>>60475530
See here too I can show the 7700k shitting on the $500 1800x in an AMD sponsored game
It's really really easy to cherry pick to show what you want. I've gotten to the point where I just don't even fucking listen to any benchmarks anymore, none of them are accurate

File: 1494796051127.png (2MB, 941x6081px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 941x6081px

>>60475559
Next.

>>60475559
So, if your argument is that one can cherry pick and infinite number of benchmarks to prove any point, then there is no point to continuing this discussion since, by your definition, no evidence can be produced to support any argument or conclusion and I have no interest in evidence free screeching.

>>60475600
>4.2GHz base
>3.6GHz base

File: it buugun.jpg (431KB, 1710x916px) Image search: [Google]

431KB, 1710x916px

>gpu thread
>talk about cpu

File: ryzen-r7-1800x-aots.png (130KB, 806x843px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 806x843px

>>60475639
>YOU HAVE TO UNDERCLOCK THE CPU FOR IT TO BE FAIR
No
>>60475636
Yeah, pretty much, all benchmarks are wrong, trust nothing, never ever
>>60475603
Here is the 1800x losing in ashes of the singularity
It's incredibly easy to find benchmarks proving each sides argument of being better. Yet somehow Intel is always the shill and AMD is always the correct side? In reality both are fucking retarded and why are we trusting any of these people if they all get such skewed results?

>>60475676
Look at that, an 1800X at 3.9GHz wins vs. a 7700k at 4.2GHz. That means more ipc.

File: 1494845614088.png (27KB, 517x304px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 517x304px

>>60475676
Why are we talking about games now? We are still on the topic of IPC, aren't we?

Isn't that also a day one benchmark? Keep up with the times, anon.

File: t9icjhfrzdjy.png (93KB, 520x1020px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 520x1020px

>>60475696
Here's another.

>>60475676
Well, when the vast majority of benchmarks show one thing, and a minority show the opposite thing under specific circumstances which can be logically explained, I think it becomes pretty clear who is shilling and who is trying to use evidence to support a conclusion.

File: 1494898081227.jpg (929KB, 3829x1031px) Image search: [Google]

929KB, 3829x1031px

>>60475712
And another.

File: 1494897732170.png (49KB, 464x318px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 464x318px

>>60475727
Last one.

File: 1494877380921.png (2MB, 715x8082px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 715x8082px

>>60475743
Now enough of gaymes. This is /g/.

File: Screenshot_4.png (144KB, 1317x1637px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 1317x1637px

>>60475693
Um read again anon
>>60475696

>>60475754
>>60475743
>>60475727
>>60475712
See, you're doing the exact same thing, posting the exact same cherry picked benchmarks as the other thread
This is just pathetic

>>60475754
lol can you spell "cherry picked"?

but whatever, ryzen is exciting but i built myself a lightroom/photoshop box and intel was better for my situation. still very exciting to see whats coming. cant wait to see intels move and zen2 and how it all unfolds. fucking delicious

>>60475790
Oh vey! There are two shill on this board now, Inshill-kun.

Do you have the benchmarks to prove me wrong?

>>60475721
The vast majority show Ryzen performing worse
Literally the only benchmarks showing Ryzen performing better are posted here on /g/
Surprisingly even r/AMD isn't this bad
>>60475727
Minimum may may
>>60475743
Minimum may may
>>60475754
Conveniently cutting out all the benchmarks from that page showing Ryzen doing worse

>>60475825
[Citation Needed]

File: AMD-Ryzen-7-1700-vs-Core-i7-7700K-DinoPC_GTA-V.png (2MB, 2560x1312px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2560x1312px

>>60475807
And you just resort to the old jew joke and calling me a shill
You are doing an incredibly job at proving every single point I made above
Here is a good benchmark that even disproves your stutter lie

File: 1494898681756.png (44KB, 668x540px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 668x540px

>>60475825
>He wants a stuttering mess

File: deusex-ryzen-1800x.jpg (124KB, 642x661px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 642x661px

>>60475837
Ok here is a citation for you
Or is this incorrect and cherry picked?

>>60475858
>All intel chips using slower ram than their Ryzen counterpart
really joggin my noggin

File: 1495067360747.png (1MB, 769x4257px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 769x4257px

>>60475841
>170 FPS max
>89 FPS average
>38 FPS minimum
>Implying that isn't a stuttering housefire
Kek.

File: 1469845137381.jpg (1MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3840x2160px

>>60475866
>One game
>In DX12
>On an Nvidia card
>Pretending like everyone doesn't already know Nvidia's DX12 driver's bottleneck Ryzen CPUs

File: intel-diversity-fullbleed.jpg (196KB, 1600x917px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 1600x917px

>>60475884
>2400MHz Ryzen still less of a stuttering housefire than a 10-core i7

>>60475909
Buddy, can you relax a little bit? You're starting to act like IMG_xxxx.jpg here, and I don't want to get accused of being you when benchmarks are relevant.

File: 12312512312.png (953KB, 697x569px) Image search: [Google]

953KB, 697x569px

>>60475907
>I'm telling you those evil nvidias are gimping our Ryzen performance
Grow up
>>60475909
Remember when you faggots threw a huge hissy fit over Ryzen using slower Ram in benchmarks

>>60475938
Sorry, I can't help it.

>>60475944
Kek. Seems like it's been switched around.

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

130KB, 1597x634px

>>60475944
See, here benchmarks are relevant because they show direct evidence for Nvidia drivers bottlenecking Ryzen performance in DX12.

>>60475970
Hence my point
I don't give a shit about the memory speed I was just fucking around
Little old throwback to "MUH RAM SPEED"

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

76KB, 650x674px

>>60475944
>>60475995

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

168KB, 1010x802px

>>60475944
>>60476003

>>60475995
>AMD loses FPS when switching to an 1800x too
Seems like Nvidias DX12 drivers are specifically optimized for the 7700k, which is why I never installed them because they fucked up my 6700k performance

>>60475743
Are you really saying that it's more important to peak at a few FPS higher than actually double the minimum FPS?

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

586KB, 1920x1754px

>>60475944
>>60476012

>>60471315

Vega is coming Q3 '17 at the earliest. AMD is behind schedule with HMB2 production problems. Lame.

Fuck it. I'm just going to get a used GTX 1080 at this point.

>>60476012
>>60476003
>>60475995
You guys just look for every tinfoil hat story you can grasp your hands on huh
It's never AMDs fault, it's always 'THU MAN" after your precious lisa. Muh tessellation, muh gameworks, muh backhand tactics.

>>60476041
Are you implying Nvidia drivers aren't shit?

>>60476020
This is really my main interest in Vega, to unfuck DX12 performance on Ryzen at 1080p and above.

>>60476050
No, he's just trying to handwave away the direct evidence I posted from multiple independent sources showing that Nvidia's DX12 drivers bottleneck Ryzen.

>>60476050
Nah they aren't
Compared to AMDs drivers they are pretty damn good
Last couple Nvidia drivers were infact hot garbage though that's completely true, don't know what happened in February and march

>>60476065
>Wanna buy a Ryzen CPU goy?
>Gonna have to get an AMD GPU too
>Those Nvidia people keep gimping our EPYC cpu performance with their drivers
>Gonna have to wait for VEGA goy
>Buy our GPU if you're gonna get a CPU
Who's to say AMD doesn't intentionally gimp their shit to blame it on nvidia and make the competition look evil
>inb4 that would hurt their sales
Clearly not considering most people purely buy AMD because Nvidia and Intel are evil

>>60476087
>Who's to say AMD doesn't intentionally gimp their shit to blame it on nvidia and make the competition look evil
Holy shit, you're as bad as them.

File: 1492981927265.jpg (150KB, 700x1120px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 700x1120px

>>60476087
>AMD writes Nvidia's drivers
That'll be enough of (You), shill.

>>60476109
>Implying that's what I meant
>Implying it's impossible to have microcode that limits a CPUs performance when a specific driver is being accessed
>At the same time implying that Nvidias GPU driver is bypassing every single motherboard feature and limited the CPU while still implying the previous isn't possible
>Saying Nvidia gimps AMDs performance isn't being a shill
>Saying AMD gimps their own performance to encourage the purchase of more of their products is being a shill
aren't you fags the same ones that push the meme that Nvidia gimped keplar to push maxwell sales

>>60476152
Could be true, could be not; but one thing's for sure, Kepler has aged like shit compared to AMD's 200 series.

>>60476152
The difference between me and you is that I posted evidence from four independent sources to back up my claims, and you've don't nothing but make evidence free shitposts.

Please feel free to refer to them again:
>>60475995
>>60476003
>>60476012
>>60476032

>>60476180
That evidence easily backs up my claim too though lmao

>>60476196
How so?

>>60476206
My claim was AMD is gimping themselves to make the competition look evil and encourage sales of their GPUs
Your claim was that a GPU manufacturer gimps the CPU of their competitor GPU manufacturer to encourage sales of another CPU manufacturer

Both involve performance being gimped
Both arguments are supported anon
The difference is mine sounds stupid to you and you believe yours, and both of ours sounds completely fucking retarded to me

>>60476196
Except that the Intel CPUs are also gaining performance under DX12 on the AMD GPUs, just less than Ryzen is. That would seem to preclude the issue originating from the CPU itself and strongly suggests it's a GPU driver issue.

>>60475600
>games
>cpu tests
pick one

>>60476257
Except that the evidence clearly shows both Intel and AMD CPUs getting better DX12 performance on the AMD GPUs, the effect is just much smaller on Intel. That shows your theory is nonsense but doesn't negate the correct interpretation.

>>60476020
>he bought intel
AHAHAHAHAHHJA

Isn't this a Vega thread?

>>60476286
But my point was AMD is gimping their performance on nvidia GPUs to make nvidia look evil and promote more AMD GPU sales
I'm not talking about intel

>>60471346
>Also the fact they try and advertise it to professionals means that they probably wont beat the Titan Xp
margins are much larger in the professional market retard

>>60476305
Perhaps you should read up on logic until you can figure out why the issue also affecting Intel CPUs proves your argument wrong.

>>60476298
There isn't going to be much non-shitposting to do about Vega until Computex, unless the NDA lifts before then.

>>60471315
HOLY SHIT IT BETTER BE GOOD OR I SWEAR TO GOD I'M BUYING A SWITCH WITH THE MONEY.

>>60476323
eh this isn't worth my time I got shit to write
TL;DR nobody is gimping anyone both sides are fucking retarded, nvidia, amd, and intel are all equally shitty faceless companies that don't care about you and we need to purge to get different ones
See ya

>>60476333
Isn't a Fury (non-X) overclocked to 1400MHz reaching 1080-tier performance levels in Firestrike? I don't think it'll take much to at least reach the Titan X (non-P).

Only a guess.

File: IMG_1128.jpg (21KB, 220x300px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 220x300px

>>60476362
Thank you for conceding the argument.

>>60476366
No

>>60476391
No? Can you explain?

File: 1454039405929.png (49KB, 808x805px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 808x805px

>>60476305
conspiracy theory

Reminder that 30% of what you will be paying for a VEGA GPU goes strait into AMD's bottom line.

Reminder that AMD is now targeting the top end of the market exclusively and charging a premium for their Ryzen and Vega products event though these are in reality just mid-range products.

Reminder that AMD has hired a marketing company to shill on this board. You can recognize these shill by the fact that they talk and write like fags and their shit's all retarded.

>>60476413
>A $500 product outperforming a $1,000 HEDT processor is now mid-range
Nice try, though.

>>60476399
A fury at 1400mhz is not matching a 1080
fury-10,000 firestrike extreme
1080-12,000-13,00 depending on aftermarket version

File: 1487720349817.png (492KB, 900x600px) Image search: [Google]

492KB, 900x600px

>>60476413
>AMD has hired a marketing company to shill on this board
see >>60476410

>>60476413
>Reminder that AMD has hired a marketing company to shill on this board
honestly I'm starting to believe this more and more based on the fact that people are spending 5-7 hours posting Ryzen benchmarks

File: 3dmark-x.jpg (101KB, 718x660px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 718x660px

>>60476444
I know it's a FE card, but it's still reaching.

>>60476478
>Unironically spending time and money on a board full of degenerates and autists
Has any company done this?

>>60476517
You would be surprised.

>>60476517
No I was just fucking with you
No company pays anyone to shill on /g/
>>60476493
That's an incredibly low clock for the 1080 there
Not to mention who has even been able to make their fury hit 1400 besides maybe a few

>>60476579
Nevermind just looked up the article
The card was liquid nitrogen cooled

File: Screenshot_20170519-052539.png (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

>>60476428
There's that fagtalk we talked about
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRQijskAMp4

>>60476462
This is referred to as "social media marketing" aka shitposting and it's in their financial statements.

>>60476478
It's really easy to see, if you visit a board a few times a week and there's always someone ready to post the exact same benchmarks / screenshots and reply with the exact same fagtalk regardless of when you visit then it's obvious that someone's running a marketing campaign. These companies usually provide packages so you'll see the same benchmark screenshots and the same fagtalk at redshit and sites like it if you bother to check.

File: nvidiot.jpg (159KB, 1278x770px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 1278x770px

>>60476598
>he read amds financial statements to uncover a shilling conspiracy theory
have you ever gotten laid?

File: Screenshot_20170519-052550.png (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

>>60476714
Yes. Women respond to the results of reading financial statements.

I'm not wrong when I say that Ryzen, Vega and the upcoming ThreadRipper are all targeted at the high-end high-margin market segments. AMD used to be a bang-for-the-buck budget alternative. They've moved away from that and are now all about maximizing their profit margin.

File: 1466617843140 (1).jpg (942KB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

942KB, 3264x2448px

>>60476765
>nvidiacucks
>healthy sex life
choose 1

>>60474826
lol? You have to be a retard to buy a 7600k over a 1600/1600X.

>>60477155
>You have to be a retard to buy a 7600k
Fixed. Anyone that buys Kaby Lake (especially over Skylake) is retarded.

>>60474847
>he thinks 16000 for a global launch is enough

Enjoy getting sniped by bots and miners

>>60471478

did you draw this yourself mate

vega is Not going to beat a 1080ti at all but it will beat a 1080 and 1070 I'm not buying that over hype at all.

Justy like ryzen i'm setting my goals low.
Nvidia cucks getting mad and worried

question to them what does it even matter to you at any rate?

>>60471315
>16 GB RADEON RX VEGA CONFIRMED
>HBM2 OVERCLOCKING CONFIRMED

>16 GB RADEON RX VEGA CONFIRMED
>HBM2 OVERCLOCKING CONFIRMED

This is a very big deal both in single and dual GPU configs

You could only overclock the old FuryX cards by about 10% on HBM to 550mhz but it gave you a significant boost in performance on average and minimum framerates

HBM its very different in its basic functions compared to GDDR spec memory. The huge bus width and smaller signal distance means that it will behave very differently in frame times and minimum FPS and even in extreme workloads where the memory draw is larger than the storage capacity of the card.

After seeing AdoredTV's vid on crossfire performance in DX12 I now know the general direction AMD is heading in and the scalable Navi architecture will be a volta killer.

>>60476493
>1080 is only ~10% faster than a 980ti
and they still had the nerve to charge 650$ for it.

>>60477962
Volta isn't all HBM2 only the top end its more likely to be using DDR6 or DDR5X the top end may have a single HBM titan oor 2080 ti with HBM2 but don't expect much.

>>60475841
>Here is a good benchmark that even disproves your stutter lie
That's not how you display stutter... Barely even how you English either.

>>60475944
Now that's a rare pepe. Also nVidia was busted with having actual shills. And also ripping off their customers with the 970, claiming it had four gb of ram, when it infact only had 3.5. You really think they're trustworthy?

REMINDER
Contact nVidia if you bough a 970 for your $30 money back from the court order.

Is it called the 1080 because it circles the competition or gets circled? LOL

>>60479343
BTW I had the FIRST GPU of this numbering scheme, the GTX 280M. It took Nvidia that long to count to 10, and they didn't even start at 1!

>>60475439
I don't care, anon. No microstuttering or stuttering on Ryzen chips and I get smooth FPS. That's all I care about. Maxed games, smooth FPS and no microstutter.

Intel stutters HARD and this is known. I will buy the CPU that doesn't stutter my games for a decent price.

That CPU is just not Intel.

>>60479343
Because it's barely enough for 1080p.

File: ryzen_stutter.webm (1MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x720px

>>60479462
>No microstuttering or stuttering on Ryzen chips

>>60479911
Cannot even differentiate between normal frame drop and stutter

Intel shill are so dumb

>>60479965
>dips from 100 to 50
>normal framedrop
Yeah, maybe for Ryzen it's a norm.

>>60479965
>framedrops are ok

>>60479975
Not as bad as intel, you got whole screen froze

>>60479991
Intel never goes under 80 in witcher.

>>60479988
Framedrops is normal for both cpu, stutter is intel exclusive
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qswrFCb5sMQ

>>60479975
do the same on Intel and compare, you are showing that your GPU is weak and can't cope with fast panning at this point.

>>60480036
>1080 is weak

>>60480050
Any GPU can be weak if you give it too much to do, it's like you are new to the whole, computers thing.

also stuttering doesn't drop your FPS, CPU processes frame for longer than expected but GPU works fine at the time, this is why frame drop was invented to begin with.

File: N0AY7B1P.png (256KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

256KB, 512x512px

>>60480080
>witcher 3 gives 1080 too much to do

>>60480114
Clearly when there is more than 2 NPCs in wither 3, it struggles, if this is 4k, then this is exactly expected FPS, 50.

>>60480143
It's 1080p not 4k.

File: Sutterlakeagain.jpg (205KB, 1559x977px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 1559x977px

>>60480114
It could your gpu overclock unstable, make side comparison shill

>>60480160
Well, it's hard to tell what is expected frame rate, so until you do this exact same test on other machines you will never know.

i do own a RX480 and im pretty hyped about Ryzen, BUT isnt Vega a fucking rerelease from RX 4 series ?
Maybe i lived under a rock but pls explain this Vega hype.
I mean you can fucking BIOS flash a RX 480 to an RX580

>>60480143
Your interpunction fucks with my head.

>>60471478
AYYLMAO.

>>60480285
Vega is updated Fiji.

>>60480285
RX580 is not Vega. Vega is a completely new chip probably based on buffed up Polaris.

>>60480291
In the video you can see that drop is not random and it has pattern to it, GPU is at 95% of use at all times, this indicates that GPU has no juice left to deal with more polygons that have been presented to it.

>>60476413
>Ryzen
>charging a premium
>just mid-range
Oh look, another evidence free shillposter. Charging $490 for a CPU that beats a $1,000 6900k shows you exactly who the real happy merchants are.

>AMD
>shills
My ass. It's the incessant anti-AMD trolling on this board by you the other assholes making literally hundreds of crying wojak, "POO POO POO", IMG_xxxx.jpg, etc shitposts a week that provoke a reaction from the people you annoy.

I don't even own a single AMD product, I just get annoyed by the evidence free anti-AMD shitposting and enjoy BTFOing those shills/shitposters with actual evidence.

>>60476478
More bullshit. I am one of those Ryzen benchmark posters, and I saved all those benchmarks from here in the first place because the knowing and deliberate lying done by anti-AMD trolls/shills/shitposters annoys me. Spending my time and energy actually typing out replies just to get flippant one line troll responses also annoys me. Being able to drown you faggots in evidence you cannot counter is a quick and easy way to push back against the relentless anti-AMD trolling here.

>>60476413
Nvidia has a gross margin of 59.37%.
Intel has a gross margin of 61.82%
AMD has a gross marign of 33.64%
AMD is not the one charging premiums.

>>60481272
although intel and nvidia do charge a pretty big premium, AMD's low margins are mostly related to semicustom and low/mid-range compute where they sell the majority of their products.
Their high-end products charge a similar (albeit lower) margin to their competitors

>>60475156
Wow, good one!

You should buy some 7th generation Core Solos, single core performance is the only metric that matters!

>inb4 "7700k wins on fallout 4 and csgo by 10% at 720p!"
>inb4 "Nobody runs background processes when they play BF1, its okay to have 90%+ CPU usage!"

>>60471315
>COMPUTEX LAUNCH CONFIRMED

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/amd-to-show-radeon-rx-vega-at-computex-but-no-availability.html

no.

So consumer gaming shit isn't coming until Q3
Volta consumer isn't even coming this year
What the fuck I've been waiting with my 960 for too long

>>60481698
7700k beats any Ryzen CPUU in CEMU, and PCSX2

>>60482822
[Citation Needed]

>>60482822
you make it sound like it's relevant in any way, you can emulate on a freaking 8350 without problems

best cpu for emulation is g4560 by this logic everyone should buy that

>>60482803
Probably late june, it all boils down to HBM2 supply nothing else, rumor of 20k units in May are probably true.

Vega just like my poo! I wait for it to come out and when it come out it poo! hahaha

>>60482822
>CEMU
alpha quality emulator, nobody gives a fuck

>>60482822
>7700k beats any Ryzen CPUU in CEMU, and PCSX2

R7 1700 crushes the Intel chip in RPCS3.

At this point, I don't want a fucking announcement. I don't want a big capsaicin spicy ice cream social. I don't want Raja to come on stage and free flow another shitty presentation.

Just send out review units.

>>60475087
>>60475009
Ryzen made all Intel processors obsolete with the exception of the 7700K and even that is for gaming exclusively, on a dead socket and with overheating problems.

How is that not living up to the hype?

>>60482822
>PCSX2
Will I be able to play God Hand on 1600? It's pretty much the only PS2 game I care.

>>60483073
Underrated

>>60484527

Yes. These memers are probably talking about software rendering or something (2core limit among other things)..

PCSX2 on HW mode with multithreading enabled will run flawlessly.

>>60486205
Who the fuck even uses software rendering in PS2 emulation? So it looks just as crappy as it did on the original hardware? Shill desperation mode is hitting maximum if they're coming up with shit like that.

>>60486288
Ace Combat and some other games(Drakengard*) run like ass without software rendering
At least they did on my GTX 965M

>>60480143
i run witcher on ultra 1080p 1920x1080 with a 1060 6gb just fine

>>60475778
>>60475790
>>60475600
>>60475676

How does this disprove that Ryzen has lower IPC? The original argument concerns that Ryzen has similar IPC to Skylake. In theory, all instructions barring AVX256 (which is supported but runs in FMA mode with two 128-bit wide pipelines) should run at the same rate because they have the same pipeline width, but Ryzen also takes less hits from micro-op scheduling and dispatch than Intel's offerings. The process for AMD is not doing any benefits as far as overclocking goes but it seems to be doing wonders for power consumption.

Overall Ryzen is pretty successful and will likely be my next processor. I've been living on a i7 980X and my old LGA755 processor for too long.

>>60482822
Big deal, 1700 obliterates it on RPCS3 and can still play on the other two emulators.

The most popular server CPUs are actually 12 and 16 cores in 2U racks, these top end chips are mostly for universities and science/engineering institutes

>>60482822
>single thread performance meme

>every other year get excited for the next "nvidia killer"
>turns out to be another disappointment
k im done with this shit.

just curious for all you gaymurs out there, why exactly are you so eagerly awaiting a new gpu when the current mid range to high end cards run every game that is currently released on high to ultra settings just fine?

>>60471315
Why do people get hyped for this shit still?

Hyped for 580
Hyped for 480
Hyped for 380

All failures.

>>60488311
because technolgy dummy
Besides HBM2 is exicting because its NOt DDR system anymore just like HBM but with more memory.

>>60488330

>All failures

[Citation Needed]

>>60488344
HBM uses DDR memory.

>>60488330
the 380 did what it said it killed the 960 and it still does lol.

the others I agree with sadly.
But the 580 is worth the coin none the less.

File: 0312854.jpg (23KB, 600x484px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 600x484px

>>60488344
>because technolgy dummy

wow great explanation

That doesn't explain why people are getting so asspained about vega being delayed or on normal schedule as if there life depends on it.

It's 2017, PC games aren't even good anymore and hardware doesn't scale nearly as well as it used to because they are all optimized to shit.

>>60488357
but not in the trational means it what i meant plus less die area squared and smaller Gpus.

Stacked Dram was always going to be a thing infact it was predicted in the 80's to help overcome moors law.

>>60488385
If you want more Vram you going to have to stack Dram its the only plaseable route than packing into smaller and smaller nodes.

HBM's problem for the lowend and midrange is the interposer requirement, traditional memory can work off the chip package, so why not GDDR* memory stacked?

>>60488584
They went 2.5D with NAND, they'll go with DRAM sooner than later.

>>60488357

DDR isn't a physical characteristic, it's just a capability/feature.

HBM reads/writes in the same clock cycle as per the fundamental advancement of SDRAM memory from SDR to DDR.

Did you mean to say that HBM is just stacked SDRAM? So what lad?

>>60486769

> The original argument concerns that Ryzen has similar IPC to Skylake

Which is wrong anyway - ryzen (outside of AVX2) has higher IPC than skylake.

Source: Agner.

>>60488668
Yes, HBM is just stacked DRAM, got my acronyms mixed up.

>>60488689

No problemo. Despite my "So what lad?", I didn't actually know that until you said it and was just being a cockhead :^)

"You want a joke:)
Vega needs some extra Volta(ge) for overclocking:)"

Based Raja hinting that RX Vega is going to whip Pascal's ass and when Volta arrives you merely need to overclock RX Vega to get same or better performance.

>>60489147
>this is what amdrones actually believe

>>60488385
They are deeply invested in corporations that don't know or care that they exist. It's pretty sad, really.

>>60489147
They also said the Furyx was an over clockers dream.

You can't just overclock past a new generation of GPUs.
My old 780ti wasn't able to Oc past a 980ti.
The 980ti can't OC past a 1080ti

>>60490215
>You can't just overclock past a new generation of GPUs.
You can OC a 980 Ti past a 1070. Good enough.

>people talk about games and OCing on this platform
I'm glad I'm spending less time on this board

>>60490906
>You can OC a 980 Ti past a 1070. Good enough
The 1070 is a mid range card.

>>60488676
>Source: Agner
That's like sourcing AdoredTV
Agner is a moron who hides behind intelligent shit
>says five intelligent statements
>says a false statement
>"Well he's smart and he was right about the other things so he is correct here obviously"
The guy is an AMD shill, he knows you morons will believe anything he says

>>60492342
(You).

>>60492342(You)

>>60492122
>The 1070 is a mid range card.
lol.

>>60492450
>>60492773(ME)

>>60492899
guessed wrong

>>60478152
None of the gamer variants of volta are HBM2 its all GDDR5X and GDDR6

Its a good upgrade path more or less with a new 5000+shader top tier and just knock everything down a bracket. Even if Vega outperformance pascal and is a better bargain than volta it will still lose due to mindshare of nvidia. Theres no way vega can overcome that unless it were 30% faster than the 1080ti for the same price and that wont happen for gen one NCU arechitecture.

Navi is where shit gets crazy. AMD is building an new Graphics card design that willbe extremely efficient and infinitely scalable. Basically they will make a bunch of tiny 100-200mm2 GPUs that are designed for the utmost maximum performance per mm2 of die space and the most efficient performance per watt. Then they are going to place as many of these smaller GPU's with their own independent command processors on an interposer alongside HBM2 memory interconnecting everything together. The drivers will make the game engine treat this as a full singular GPU (no SLI or multiadapter bullshit)

Instead of building a huge die with high clockspeeds they just make the most efficient gpu and then put as many on a card as they need to fit in a certain performance category. The most expensive and diffiuclt part of this is the drivers. AMD needs to flood fucktons of cash into their Driver devlopment and testing team to pull this off but if they do then they can make GPU's that are faster AND cheaper than nvidia's offerings.

Oh you have a 5000-shader titanXV? well we have an 10000 shader Navi card for the same price and only slightly higher power draw.

>>60494356
Are you telling me to JUST WAIT™ for Navi instead of Vega?

File: __.jpg (130KB, 592x592px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 592x592px

>>60494562

I'm not that guy, but essentially we're just WAIT™ing for some graphs to jizz over, so what does it matter

In reality it's not like 99% of us are going to buy anything more than a used 970/290/whatever

>>60488311

They don't.

Pascal Nvidia cards barely tickle 60fps in 4k.

It's a shitty time to buy if you want that.

And sticking with 1080 resolution, anything greater than a 1060/580 is a waste of money.

They're only good for 1440 and that's such a shitty meme resolution it literally is a half step up from 1080.

>>60494562
Considering that Navi will drop sometime in 2018, probably late 2018, I personally don't see a reason to wait for it after they release Vega.

It's going to be more powerful, but so is every successive gen, and the guy in the post is making a lot of assumptions about how it's going to work and how good it will be. In reality AMD (and Nvidia) is constrained by budgets and time, and making the absolute best product they can is not feasible in the time frame that they are working with.

Personally, I am waiting for Vega since I don't have a super great reason to upgrade beyond "I want more power as well as 4K". My 970 could probably do perfectly fine for another year.

And if Vega turns out to be shit I'll just get a 1080ti instead.

>>60495045
>anything greater than a 1060/580 is a waste of money
Yeah, fuck that stupid AA which makes games so better looking! Who need it anyway, right?

>>60495071

Navi is going to be 7nm Vega with high speed interconnect between multiple chips. There will be no other architectures.

It will be

>Entry level Navi with one Vega and GDDR6
>Mid-range with 2 and 3 Navi dies on one interposer with 2 stacks
>High end with 4 Navi dies 4 HBM stacks single interposer

Professional Navi cards will potentially grow to exascale demands.

Vega is the future of RTG.

>>60495116

Don't you mean DSR/VSR? A ridiculously over rated feature?

waiting for midtier vega. want to replace my 390. At least its winter here

>>60495195
Midrange Vega can't be much faster than a 390 though. I've got a 390x housefire and I'm also looking to get a new card.

File: amd-radeon-vega-frontier-edition-card-front-20170517[1].jpg (169KB, 1244x699px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 1244x699px

For those of you that own reference cards from AMD (the 480/580x) are the thermals and noise levels on those good?

I've always gone with aftermarket cards (MSI, XFX) and they are fairly quiet, and usually run very cool, but have reference cards gotten to the point now where it is a good idea to buy them if you want a quiet and efficient computer?

The Frontier cards look super cool, and the Fury X and the 480 are also, aesthetically, very good looking, so I wouldn't mind buying one of those, as long as the noise levels and the thermals are in control.

>>60495448
Lol no. Reference still sucks massive ass.
Wait for aftermarket cards or if there really is a shortage just get Volta.
If AMD can't supply enough cards with competitive performance for a competitive price, fuck them.

File: microsoft_shilling_6.jpg (3MB, 6024x5624px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 6024x5624px

>>60476579
>No company pays anyone to shill on /g/

>>60475111
The 7600k is not a good purchase right now. Premium bucks for cpu extra cost for a z270 mobo and extra bucks for an aftermarket cooler to keep this thing under check. Definatly a waste of money.

>>60475009
>i9 meme shit
>doing fuck all
no they're just scrambling around trying to do something about ryzen but their management is a fucking joke

ryzen, epyc and threadripper have intel shitting themselves

>>60495942
The names are fucking awful

>>60495980
they are, i don't think anyone can deny that. i don't know why they even bothered giving a name to their datacenter skus.

>>60495980
I think someone in managment lost a bet with an engineer and the names turned out like that.

>>60495996
was talking about intel management

>>60471315
i just hope whatever compromises they had to make with vega don't tarnish raja's name.

steve jobs hired him for a reason

>>60495448
I have a reference RX 480. It either runs at 90C or sounds like a leafblower. I wouldn't get one again, it's really not that bad but there's just no reason to.

>>60496096
Reference heatsink on polaris is weak, blowers aren't bad unless you stick a weak heatsink on it

>>60496062
King Poojeet also designed R700/R800.

>>60496188
Yes but AMD had more resources to throw at it than AMD have now.

>>60496198
They took their time for Vega. Now we need to see the results.

>>60495980
Nice kick in the balls to Intel over Itanium, though (IA-64 is Explicitly Parallel Instruction Set Computer, ie EPIC).

>We’ll be showing Radeon RX Vega off at Computex, but it won’t be on store shelves that week.

POO IN THE LOO
O
O

>>60495980
About as awful as everything else on the market. You just got used to it.

>wait
>wait
>WAIT
>end up cancelling my 1600x order
>wait
>"consumer Vega delayed"
>realise i'll be stuck with my dying rig during my imminent 4 weeks vacation
>fucking SNAPPED yesterday and bought a I7 6700k + mobo for quite cheap, and a GTX 1080ti.

Good fucking job AMD

>>60496440
>end up cancelling my 1600x order
why

>>60496499
To shitpost.

>>60496160
>didn't wait
>got a 1080p/ 144hz / freesync panel
>got a gaming X 480 for $199 in October
>ocd to 1400mhz it does all my fps titles at 144+ fps and all my other games still well above 60.
absolutely no regrets. Maybe I'll hop on the generation after Vega.

>>60496506
>>60496499
Dead serious. I bought a 16gb 3200 mhz ram kit beforehand to go with ryzen (it was pretty cheap considering how high ram prices are). But i found out it wasn't one of those optimal ram kits AMD recommends (no Samsung B-die chips), so i would get stuck at 2933mhz at best, which is bullshit. Plus, AM4 mobos are junk atm (AMD said themselves that mobo manufacturers will need to make some efforts hardware-wise in order to get better ram support... great news to those who already took the plunge) , and ryzen OC's like shit.
It's a good start for them, and competition is always good, but i haven't got time for beta testing.

>>60496745
You'll be happy to know that the latest microcode updates are going out and allow up to 4000mhz ram now.

>>60496783
Yet not on all ram, it's gonna be the usual lottery. At least with Intel, it just werks.

>>60496861
no. My 2500k doesn't do DDR3-1600 even though the board says it can and the RAM is on the comopatibility list.
Overclocking RAM is not guaranteed by anyone.

File: 4500mhz.jpg (659KB, 2558x850px) Image search: [Google]

659KB, 2558x850px

>>60496783
Who's benching at this speed? I have only seen the 6700K and 7700K going beyond 4000+

When did they make this microcode?

>>60496745
Yeah, it sucks. New architecture launches are always like this, though. I remember having RAM issues with motherboards when I got a shiny new i7-920. It's been relatively smooth considering

>>60497351
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/more-on-ryzen-memory-supportgame-performance-and-ryzen-3-launch.html