Just keep waiting

>>61125691
I'm still buying RX Vega. It's time for an upgrade and I'm not buying a cuck card (Nvidia).

>>61125725
>literally barely competing with a year old card (gtx 1080) with a 60% higher power budget
but yeah nvidia cards are cucked. face it amdrone, raja fucked you.

>>61125725
are you serious?

1070 OC performance for likely 700$???

>>61125771
RX Vega is likely to perform at 1080 ti levels once it's released. Stop with the "it's 1070 lol" shit already.

>>61125755
>>61125771
RX Vega will probably perform at close to 1080ti levels in 1-2 years, give or take. Even if it's just slightly better than a 1080 now, I'd rather play the long game and make one graphics card purchase over the next few years as opposed to feeling like I need to upgrade every gen with Nvidia.

>>61125808
Everything points to 1070OC levels dude.
Keep being delusional.

Even if that were the case... 700-750 USD for 1080ti lvls? WTF

>>61125725
I was hoping they would do well because we need the competition to keep prices comfy.

>buying a shitty massively over priced card out of spite
Thats just desperation anon and its only going to hurt you, your pc and your wallet.

>>61125835
>Everything points to 1070OC levels dude
Uh, no? An overclocked 1070 still isn't in the same league as a 1080 just because you own one.

>>61125845
We don't know the prices on RX Vega yet. I'm not buying Vega FE nor should anyone who just plays games.

>>61125835
It's 1080 levels on the FE card, and it's not going to cost $700, that's fucking retarded. That's only $300 less than the workstation card. It'll be at most $500.

File: 1467841773286.jpg (190KB, 1230x1036px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 1230x1036px

>>61125691

>>61125824
Except with our 1080's we will have better performance long before as well as long after vega catches up to it. By that time the new thing will have come out and amdtards will be waiting for it to catch up to that level and so on. If amd survives that is.
Why not just jump on the current technology train now and stop waiting this year to achieve last years performance? Honestly, whats your problem?

>>61125957
NVidia GPUs age like milk. If you don't constantly buy the latest card, it goes to shit within a year or two. Fuck that.
>If amd survives that is.
Yeah, some idiots spastically flailing their aspie arms over half-assed benchmarks by some random guy is going to doom AMD for sure.

>>61125957
Because Nvidia leaves old architectures in the dust and since Nvidia cards require so much on the software side of things to achieve their numbers their performance plummets once the next gen hits. Are you seriously inspired by the 780 and the 980 performance numbers at this point in time? I know they are old but I just mean relative to where they should be based on what they cost vs. what an AMD equivalent would do for you.

>>61125995
>NVidia GPUs age like milk.
That's a old, disproved, outdated meme dude.

Not true after the 9XX series anymore.

In fact 970s and 980s are doing BETTER than at launch now

>>61125835
> 700-750$
Stop taking numbers out of your ass, even if you like it

amd shills on this board is too strong.
"amd will beat nvidia etc etc etc"
Same shills over the past few years and once amd gpu is released it always ending shit

>>61125725
>people say Nvidia is a mindshare jew
>Radeon fags will literally buy anything from AMD as long as it is not Nvidia

>>61126055
Yeah, all the idiots running around claiming "1050 performance for $10,000" or whatever are totally shilling for AMD.
>>61126144
>Thermi outsold Evergreen
Fuck off, thermonuclearcuck.

>>61126166
>>Thermi outsold Evergreen
>Fuck off, thermonuclearcuck.
Literally what are you spewing you retard

>>61126172
Underage b& detected.

File: 52-300x300.png (158KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 300x300px

>>61126188
Are you a moron?
Literally talking about mindshare and you run in yelling fermi

Fucking sperg

>>61126202
He says nvidia's mindshare is unpenetrable.

>>61126202
You are beyond retarded.

File: Crimson.jpg (231KB, 1113x921px) Image search: [Google]

231KB, 1113x921px

>>61126283
Yeah ok buddy

File: Yumg.jpg (90KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 720x960px

Repeat after me:

1070 level performance

>>61126293
Reminder to report shitposters. https://rbt.asia/g/search/text/%221070%20level%20performance%22/

File: 1480714389647.jpg (157KB, 1103x873px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 1103x873px

>>61126293

Miners pls don't buy vega

>>61126333

they won't hbm2 isn't good for minin, latency

>>61126319
Its not shit posting you whiney bitch

>>61126322
>it's Fury X all over again
So AMD really was only successful with Ryzen.

>>61125835
>Everything points to 1070OC levels dude.

The 1 tests released so far were run on a 550W power supply with scores stated to be all over the place. The card is obviously throttled. I'm not saying it'll be a Titan Smasher, but it'll be more on par with the 1080 in performance, by average.

Problem is that it costs $1000 and uses 300W, which is nonsensical.

There must be something missing, since if you just scale Polaris to 4k scores, it would come out with the same performance too.

>>61126444
>Problem is that it costs $1000 and uses 300W, which is nonsensical.
They're positioning it to be a prosumer/workstation card, I don't know how much sense it makes in that position.

>>61126166
>Yeah, all the idiots running around claiming "1050 performance for $10,000" or whatever are totally shilling for AMD.

Technically the people saying that it'll have Titan performance are the ones shilling, and for Nvidia. They are building up fake hype, so the card comes off as a bigger disappointment. Everyone kept saying that Polaris will beat a 1080 too, and use only 120W or so.

File: Screenshot_3.png (143KB, 323x367px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 323x367px

>>61126444
>300 watts

>>61126444
>>61126477
This is a workstation card, not a gaming card.

>>61126584
q u a d r o

>>61126661
>hurr durr I'm gonna compare a $1000 prosumer card to a $7000 workstation card because I'm a stupid dipshit

>>61125824
>buying a card that takes two generations to reach it's potential
>still 60% of the current generations performance

yeah keep getting cucked.

>>61126886
>60%
You must really love pulling numbers out of your ass.

>>61125691
Just wait for Navi. What's so hard to understand about it?

>>61126909
in two generations the card will probably be around 60% of the performance of the new cards. it's been a trend for decades

>pulling numbers out of my ass

at least it's not pajeet's brown dick.

i tried to wait for vega but in the end i got a 980ti for 280€, i'd say worth

>>61126981

Just Wait™

getting either Volta or Navi flgaship

I'm not a cuck buying first generation archs

>>61127034
>Volta
You mean Pascal Refresh? Because it's that.

>>61127053
atleast nvidia's refreshes are actually worth the performance jump. unlike amd 1-3% perf increase

>>61127079
4xx to 5xx was like 10%, stop with the bullshit plz. No, 4xx OC does not guarantee 5xx performance and 5xx can be slightly OCed.

>>61125691
I still use a 290x idgaf I'm not upgrading unless Vega gets double the performance.

>>61127100
yes they are the same card

>>61127079
There's no new node. Maybe it'll bring 10% bigger dies for 10% more performance. I guess it's a race now till someone finds a way so throw fuckton of silicon for cheap.

>>61127120
Fuck off.
>>61127123
If AMD can get Infinity Fabric working on GPUs, it's game over. They can just slap 4 high yield dies on a GPU and have an unstoppable monster.

>>61127143
Or something something 3d stacking. We'll see. The only way for GPUs to get faster is more silicon now.

>>61127143
>If AMD do X everyone is BTFO
>just wait
I wonder how many times I've herd this.

>>61127351
Wonder how many times Intel had to have their head buried in the sand to not see it coming.

>>61127351
Hahahaha

WAIT™

The trademark for all technology.

>>61127501
.....well Intel still owns a much bigger majority of the market. Even at AMD's current growth, they are only projected to level the playing fields by 2022. A lot can happen in half a decade, companies can change.

>>61127605
Unless Intel's new arch in 2020/2021 is any good, they're definitely in trouble.

>>61127669

imagine the pressure on those guys

>>61127792
They're making x86 Linus edition - Chopping parts of it off to make it fit in a smaller space.

I've been waiting 7 years to replace my 980x cpu so I'll wait a little longer for threadripper, the first cpu that achieves 2x performance < 1000$

intel, I'm leaving you

File: 990X.png (226KB, 410x393px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 410x393px

>>61127890
Hey bae
Also we have had 6 core 12 thread CPUs for 8~ years now with only minor(35%) performance gains across the board in that time.
Price has not even come down much

I wonder how my 990x @ these clocks performs compared to a 1600 @ 3.9ghz or even a 7800x

File: amd=dead.jpg (47KB, 1740x355px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 1740x355px

>>61127605
Source?
As far as I've seen Ryzen has helped minimally as far as market share goes.

It's looking like a dud desu.

what the fuck is a good AM4 mobo that can overclock well and do cool shit? I keep hearing they're all shit and have BIOS issues.

File: INTEL-AMD-CPU-Market-share.png (136KB, 1118x862px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 1118x862px

>>61128018
You already shit up another thread with these, fuck off. AMD is gaining back marketshare overall.

>>61128034
ASRock is pretty good.

>>61128051
I haven't ever denied that.
I said it's minimal.
And wait for Q2 figures.

Most of the sale volume was hype-related and AMDbro-related

My graphs showed that everything except the 1600 is dying off as far as sales go

Ps: don't shoot the messenger bro

>>61128083
Yes I can totally trust your non-biased opinion with filenames like "amd=dead", "amd=rip" and "amd=joke". Fuck off.

I really doubt the marketshare they gained back is just going to vanish because Zen is far better than Bulldozer was and is actually very competitive.

>>61128146
Hey I made a thread for this kinda discussion.
Let's continue there pls
>>>>>61128286

The names were jokes bub lighten up

>>61127977
hey
that's a damn nice overclock you got going on there, you obviously spared even less expences than me. You also didn't find a worthy upgrade path yet?

Most of my cpu cycles go to compiling C++ projects and I'm not a gamer. A Ryzen 1800X approaches 100% performance boost in the compile section. Finally I will be able to upgrade soon.

We bought our CPU's at the perfect moment, we paid a lot, but really there hasn't been any CPU's in the history of CPU's that remained competitive for so long

decidedly AMD cannot make a good CPU and GPU at the same time

>>61129175
They are a small company. They obviously put more resources into Zen, which was probably a better idea in the long run. Vega won't be a flop, but they really should have had it out several months ago. They just didn't have the resources to do it.

>>61126444
>There must be something missing
Primitive shaders and geometry discard engine are not enabled. Gaming drivers are not ready hence why RX Vega wasn't released yet.

>>61125907
The Fury X is still priced at $700
Keep dreaming you dumb fucking nigger

>>61130518
There's only two vendors still selling it, they obviously didn't get the fucking memo. That doesn't mean anything.