/w4v/ - Daily Wait for Vega Thread - 5 More Days

1080 +10% performance for $400

Can overclock close to a 1080ti if you don't mind pulling 420W


Screencap this

>>61551282
Yeah somebody screencap this so we can point and laugh when Vega is actualy released

File: aHR0cDovL21lZGlhLmJlc3RvZm1pY3JvLmNvbS9SLzgvNjkzMDQ0L29yaWdpbmFsLzAzLUNyZW8tU2NvcmUucG5n.png (37KB, 711x533px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 711x533px

>>61551282
Yeah, about that...
Defintely GP104 level.

>>61551347
AMD has spend most of their driver effort on pro applications, they don't have full featured gaming drivers ready yet.

>>61551374
>most
All.
Fuck they don't even have working power management.
It throws 1.2v for no reason.

>>61551374
You don't know how 'gaming drivers' work at all you fucking clown.

Lads i need to get a new GPU but this whole mining shit is giving me blueballs. Any chance we'll see normally priced RX480-ish cards soon with Vega coming out?

>>61551429
no

>>61551429
No, fuck off.
You won't die without a GPU for a few months, fucking children.

>>61551434
I won't, but ive been using Intel graphics for years now and even though the new mesa finally brought opengl4.2 support, 3d apps are still somewhat slow, especially in a VM

>>61551397
>Fuck they don't even have working power management.
AMD are famously bad at this why do you think undervolting is so popular on their GPUs? They overvolt the fuck out of every product they ship for 'stability'.

>>61551474
That's not power managment, that's binning.

The former doesn't work with Vega since it's set at 1.2V static clock automatically at any frequency, be it 1700MHz or 1050MHz

>>61551487
>That's not power managment, that's binning.
That's wrong.

>>61551495
That's right.
Cucksumers only have scraps.
Good bins go to embedded.

>>61551501
Funny how NVIDIA can manage to do it properly.

>>61551495
I don't think you understand the difference between automatic voltage control and AMD setting their GPUs voltage targets so high for yield reasons.

Even GCN1 lowers voltage when the GPU underclock itself, Vega does not.

>>61551508
Every power state has unreasonably high default voltages which is why most people are looking at -80-90mV just on the Afterburner slider, let alone flashing a proper BIOS.

>>61551507
Manage to do exactly what properly, leather jacket man?

>>61551524
Seems like we're getting nowhere.
Carry on

>>61551526
design a good gpu, since you asked

File: 234567489.jpg (8KB, 281x179px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 281x179px

1080 level for $450
1070 level for $350
1080 Ti level for $550 but next year cause >muh respin

>>61551549
>1080 Ti level a year later
Sounds about right considering its current perf, can we expect GV102 perf in 2019?

>>61551549
Yeah, it's TOTALLY going to compete with GP104. >>61551347

>>61551561
What's GV102 perf?

>>61551549
Why are you overhyping shit again? literally why?

Have you idiots learned nothing from fiji?

>>61551566
Probably 80% of the performance increase the 1080 Ti got over the 980 Ti, over the 1080 Ti

>>61551578
Yeah, I find that about as likely as Vega being 20% faster than a Titan XP

Pascal had the fortune of being a double node jump, Volta does not have anything close.

>>61551576
dude overclocked poolaris at 1070 levels lmao!

>>61551561
Wait for Navi™

>>61551578
Without a dieshrink?

>>61551586
Pascal has some of the Maxwell -> Volta architectural improvements but not all of them.

Also given the size of GV100 I imagine cut down GV102 will have more cores than the full GP102 as well

>>61551599
All improvenets Volta brings are related to compute.
Aka eat shit.

>>61551594
Considering what they achieved on 28nm I don't see why not

>>61551606
Settle down there you edgy, clueless child.

>>61551599
They're not gonna give you a GV104 with GP102 die size, anon.
Don't be stupid.

Volta will be another incremental jump like the previous years have been, so *102 silcon some 40% faster at best than the previous one.

>>61551608
What?
They introduced TBR in Maxwell.
That's all the "achievements".
Aka eat shit.

>>61551594
12nm jej

>>61551616
>0% density improvements
Bravo TSMC!

>>61551611
>GV104
?? I said GV102.

>>61551613
You mean that think you AMD shills keep latching on to as the reason why RX Vega won't be absolute shit? Yeah good luck assuming AMD are capable of implementing it properly, they aren't even capable of designing a GPU with higher performance at the same clocks as their previous gen.

>>61551626
Holy shit you retard, AMD had a GPU with tile based rasterization fucking 10 years ago.

>>61551626
thing*

>>61551626
ATi uses TBR years before nVidia even though about it. They used it in Imageon (that one got sold to Qualcomm and became Adreno) and Xeons.
Eat shit.

>>61551636
>Xenos*
Fixed.

>>61551631
>>61551636
And Intel did MCM 12 years ago, doesn't mean it wasn't absolute shit.

>>61551646
Xenos was absolute shit?
Rope yourself cuckboy, it won Microshits a generation.

>>61551660
Pentium D you retard

>>61551667
We're talking GPUs you fucking cumguzzling retard.
ATi/AMD did absolutely everything years before nVidia even though about it.
In fact the last true innovation from nVidia was in GeForce256.

>>61551679
It's about doing it right not doing it first, dumbass. Go back to r/AMD with your utter cluelessness and rabid fanboyism

>>61551690
Xenos was TBR and unified shaders done wrong?
Eat shit my friend.

>>61551690
You're moving goalposts at the point it was clearly obvious your knowledge of GPU history doesn't go back more than a few years.

In conclusion you're not qualified to argue about anything involving GPUs.

Nigger.

>>61551708
What are you trying to even argue? It's already evident that AMD can't design a good GPU anymore, Vega is more or less Bulldozer 2.0 but NVIDIA won't be complacent like Intel was.

>>61551742
No it's not you retarded fuck.
I already told you that you have no qualification to argue about GPUs, now fuck off back to some gamer forum.

>>61551742
Totally Bulldozer 2.0. >>61551347
Stop shitposting you fucking faggot.

>>61551749
Oh please bless us with your abundant knowledge on the subject and how Vega isn't a complete and utter disaster.

>>61551754
You keep latching on to that benchmark graph but it's not helping anything

>inb4 le FE isn't a gaming GPU!!!! bullshit argument

>>61551760
>>61551347
?
Why are you ignoring that, my dear little shitposter?

>>61551772
http://www.tomshardware.de/vega-benchmarks-workstation-leistungsaufnahme-gaming,testberichte-242375-6.html

You can try to pretend it doesn't obsolete nvidia's entire quadro lineup all you want? I'm sure Nvidia will be thrilled for you to do that.

File: VegaFE-Chart2-1[1].png (15KB, 675x381px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 675x381px

>>61551775
see >>61551772

Also your cherrypicked graph won't help you forever, thinking you won some internet argument won't make Vega any less of a disaster either.

when is this getting revealed?

>>61551791
Yeah enjoy your pretend workstation card, call me when it gets certified drivers and ECC.

A Titan Xp demolishes in those workloads too.

>>61551799
Please read the OP

>>61551802
Why not get a Titan XP instead of a P6000? Lel what a retard.

Certified drivers come with WX, and not everyone works at Pixar that needs application cerification.
HBM has ECC baked in, I don't know if it's disabled and it doesn't really matter for graphic workloads, just intense floating point crunching.

So who remembers the last time AMD pulled this "look at these two systems with undisclosed hardware and look how similar they look in gaming performance!!"

http://www.legitreviews.com/amd-reality-check-at-fx-gamexperience_1838#Hc71mld4EcZJvekS.99

Oh that's right, it was the last time they had a massive failure of a product.

>>61551812
Yeah it says 5 days, but why not just put a fucking date

>>61551819
>Why not get a Titan XP instead of a P6000? Lel what a retard.
Because I can get a 1080 Ti for just over half the price.

>>61551823
I don't think I have to tell you AMD is under completely different management and has been for the last 2 years, right?

>>61551840
So why are they pulling the same bullshit again?

Do you unironically think they'd be doing these kinds of events and not revealing any details until literally the last minute if they had an amazing product?

You're a clueless AMD fanboy who knows nothing about the hardware you're trying to argue about here, fuck off already.

>>61551834
"7/31" is a lot less exciting than a countdown.

>>61551836
And Geforce 1080ti performs like garbage in those, it gets nuked by a fucking P4000

>>61551823
>Made Pepsi test
>Resulted in Pepsi problems

This looks more and more like Pepsi test is cursed

>>61551857
thanks for the date

>>61551856
Because RTG marketing is retarded, breaking news.

Do I also have to remind you that even with Ryzen AMD kept benchmarks closed until launch day? Hmm, almost like it would be a bad idea to scream from the rooftops about your unreleased product, how fucking interesting.

>>61551859
Same problem with Titan X, so what's the difference? Oh right, money that I wont be spending.

>>61551875
>even with Ryzen AMD kept benchmarks closed until launch day?
That's blatantly wrong, they were showing Cinebench perf a month before the launch.

>>61551876
And who are you of importance?

>>61551891
Me.

>>61551891
He's the dumbass who's going to laugh at those 1080 Ti "retards" when he spends $500 on a GTX 1070 with 375W TDP.

>>61551887
No, they showed blender running at 3.0GHz clock to clock against Broadwell-E, basically telling you nothing besides the touted IPC improvement.

We know nothing of clocks at that point, and Intelshills were desperate enough to back to the old "Glofo is so shit it will barely clock over 3.2GHz!"

>>61551802
HBM supports ECC by default.
Read some specs then rope yourself.

>>61551905
I still remember "AMD is not going to sell an 8core for <$800" mantras.

>>61551905


>>61551907
Being supported isn't the same as being enabled. Half the AM4 motherboards out there don't support ECC RAM even though all Ryzen CPUs do.

>>61551916
Yeah, people seem really confused AMD can undercut so much, like people telling Vega will most definitely cost $500+ while the much more expensive Fiji that's bigger, using a custom process and has two extra stacks sold under that.

Really shows how people don't either know history or just conveniently forget.

File: 9700.jpg (2MB, 2000x1203px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2000x1203px

>>61551946
People also forgot what happened the last time ATi conceded a generation to nVidia.

>>61551946
You know the R9 Fury launched at $550 and the Fury X/Nano was $650 MSRP right?

No, of course you don't, because you're a fucking dumbass.

>>61551964
It's a fucking 596mm^2 die with a gigantic interposer and 4 HBM stacks.
Compare that to Vega you fuckretarded moron.

>>61551946
AMD margins = 32%
Nvidia/Intel margins = 60%

That's why, Intel spends a lot of money on R&D and not just CPU R&D, it needs those margins to survive.
Nvidias R&D goes straight into GPUs and software and pretty much nothing else, they can live with smaller margins but Nvidia is also greedy and a private company so shareholder run.

AMD gives not much shit about its shareholders, that's why threadripper is so cheap and you can see that the share price dropped after the TR price announcement, investors were expecting higher margin products.

Margins are good for investors, but bad for us, so who gives a flying fucking fuck what they want.
Apple has like 36% margins and it's the richest company on the planet, revenue + EPS >>> margins

>>61551967
>thinks newer GPUs are going to be cheaper than equivalent older ones
That's not how it works, child.

>>61551980
Oh yes it does.
AMD needs GPU market/mindshare, not GPU margins.
They have EPYC for absolutely stellar margins.

>>61551964
Launched and sold under $500 for most of its life, it got a fast price cut.

And has been selling until May this year for under $400 until the Fiji line was EOLd in May, meaning there were no problems with cost you fucking ape.

Vega compared to Fiji is cheaper to produce in every single way, and if performance isn't there it'll be even cheaper.
AMD has no reason to price their products like its competitors do even if it had the performance(see CPUs)

>>61551980
>thinks newer GPUs are going to be cheaper than equivalent older ones

That is how it works, the 1070 was roughly equal to the 1080ti at a much lower price point, and before that the same happened to the 970 and the 780ti

>>61551999
I don't think you understand what 'launched' means, go find me an example of a Fury card selling for under $500 on launch day.

>>61551980
Yes, that's how it works, nobody is using Glofo's 28SHP anymore so it's just a matter of supply and demand, it's now currently more expensive than 14nm LP which is a fucking mobile SoC process for Samsung, made to be the cheapest of cheap.

Hardware cost-wise, Vega is in all metrics less than Fiji, this is a fact.

So if it's using a cheaper process, with high yields, and costs less to manufacture, how is it gonna be priced high or higher unless it's performance is absolutely stellar?

>>61552019
Equal to the 980ti I meant

>>61552019
What the fuck did I just read

>>61552021
Launch day doesn't dictate the price, market conditions do, unless the market is barren.

Find me a 580 at MSRP, there, I can act retarded too.

>>61552038
You said it was launched at under $500, don't shift the goalposts now retard.

File: 1500711416654 (proof cereal).png (96KB, 382x491px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 382x491px

>>61552045

>>61552053
As expected of a brainwashed fanboy who blatantly lies to defend a corporation who doesn't know he exists.

>>61552045
Kek, clinging to launch day price like a few days of sales matter when it got immediately price cut after since AMD overestimated its mindshare.


So why don't you wanna comment on Fiji being sold under $400 latter on? Because it would ruin the pathetic thing you call an argument?

Go fucking home, kid.

>>61552073
>mindshare.
Every time you use this term you expose yourself as a mindless fanboy who religiously watches AdoredTV.

>So why don't you wanna comment on Fiji being sold under $400 latter on?
No shit it got price cuts when it was launched at the same price as the 980 Ti, a vastly superior product.

Still waiting for any evidence of any Fiji card launching under $500 because you fanboys seem to want to avoid backing up this claim now.

File: 1498510410026.png (393KB, 512x542px) Image search: [Google]

393KB, 512x542px

>>61552072

>>61552120
Are you preparing your damage control for when RX Vega paper launches at the end of the week?

Please get a trip so everyone can laugh at you and you can backpedal and say "I only wanted 1070 performance anyawy!!"

>>61552097
I'm sorry, but I'm not interested in your e-celeb religion.

The narrative was that Vega will be priced high because it costs a lot to make, this was proven false because AMD sold something more expensive to make for far less money.

Launch price as I said is irrelevant, it only matters until the market changes through internal or external factors.

Now go cry about your MSRP in your pillow, it holds about as much ground as a 512SP GF100

File: 1497414818010.jpg (23KB, 200x234px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 200x234px

>>61552139
Secure tripcodes are for jerks.

>>61552146
>he's still moving the goalposts and avoiding backing up his blatant lies
AMD pajeets everyone.

>>61552151
Don't worry, AMD will sell RX Vega for $600 at 1080 perf because "HBM costs a lot to make!" , don't worry.
Just don't wake up and the dream continues on

>>61552165
If you think a GPU with that die size and 8GB of HBM2 will sell for less than $400 you're sorely mistaken and if it sells for any more than that it's a flop because the 1080 can go as low as $450 and Vega performs like a 1070.

Kek, I can't believe Intelkikes are this fucking desperate having to fall back to AMD'S GPUs because their CPUs got obliterated.
Also conveniently forgetting Intel GPUs are about as useful as dead dog.

>>61552196
What even is this post, are you in the right thread?

>>61552183
This thread just told you it can go even lower, you dumb idiot.

AMD sold a more expensive product for less, now keep dreaming.

>>61552146
So how long more should I wait™ so that the prices are good?

>>61552217
I dunno, ask the miners.
I'm satisfied with my integrated and laptop graphics.

>>61552210
Yeah because your uninformed and uneducated speculation is more probable than what the evidence out there suggests.

>>61552224
The miners want Vega as well?

>>61552233
No Vega is terrible at mining too.

>>61552233
Unfortunately, it crushes everything in Montero.
It's lackluster in Eth

>>61552239
>>61552243
So do the miners want Vega or not?
How long more should I wait™?
I have been sitting here with my iGPU since last year when my GPU broke expecting a Q2 release. I would have bought Nvidia if I didn't already buy a Freesync monitor. Fuck my life.

>>61552239
All AMD GPUs are dog shit for Lyra2REv2, the only algorithm that matters.

>>61552261
>All AMD GPUs are dog shit
Correct

>>61552259
It's July 30th for launch event.

>>61552259
If it's under $500 miners will pick it up.

>>61552266
t. leather jacket man

>>61552275
No they won't the power draw is horrifying.

You would literally get better performance and less power consumption (and better value overall) with a $600 GTX 1070 for mining.

>>61552268
I know. But apparently it is will a high MSRP according to >>61552146?

I really fucking regret listening to all those faggots who told me to wait for Vega. I really really fucking do.

>>61551980
>they will NEVER sell eight core for 300 NEVER YOU HEAR ME NEVER EVER REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>61552291
What the fuck is that English?
Also we know nothing about both MSRP price and performance of RX Vega.
Wait™, it's the true ATi way, i swear.
t. waited for 9700pro

>>61552286
There's more than one coin, anon.
And nobody runs mining rigs with stock voltages and BIOS, this is common sense.

>>61552301
Not comparable at all, Vega is not MCM

>>61552302
It will have a high MSRP
I fucked up cause I am really sick and tired of my shitty IGPU and the market is absolutely fucking shot

>GPU breaks end of the year
>People tell me to wait
>When I finally realized waiting was shit, the GPU markets gets fucking shot by miners
>Got meme'd into buying a Freesync monitor got G-sync is the GOY TAX
>Can't get 1080/ti or the 1060 cause I already have a Freesync monitor

J U S T

>>61552322
What?
Are you fucking retarded?
AMD sells one 8core Zeppelin for $309 MSRP.

>>61552302
>and performance of RX Vega.
Yes you do, the silicon is identical in every way shape and form to the FE.

>>61552318
>And nobody runs mining rigs with stock voltages and BIOS, this is common sense.
Nobody said that wasn't the case, GTX 1070 28MH/s at 100W full board power draw is unbeatable, there is no chance in hell Vega could ever achieve this, Polaris can't.

>>61552335
>It will have a high MSRP
Why?
ATi/AMD historically sold bigger dies for less.
Volume > margins.
>>61552339
>silicon is everything meme
?

>>61552336
One 8core made up of two 4core CCXs

>>61552344
>gaming drivers meme
?

>>61552344
Cause the thread said it launched with a high MSRP and eventually dropped so that means I have to wait™ even more. How long must I wait™?

>>61552322
doesn't matter, AMD willing to stay in the red just to keep market share
look at what FE can do compared to quadro x3 expensive?
their motto next two years going to be "disruptive products", they say it already in every presentation

>>61552359
Oh it will definitely drop it price because it is another disaster like Fiji, it just won't launch at such a low price like the fanboys are trying to claim it will because they're delusional as fuck.

>>61552364
>AMD willing to stay in the red just to keep market share
Yeah no, AMD split off RTG because they're a burden to the company now that Ryzen is actually a successful product, meanwhile RTG continue to shit out more garbage.

File: zeppelim.jpg (375KB, 1432x646px) Image search: [Google]

375KB, 1432x646px

>>61552351
>One 8core made up of two 4core CCXs
It's a single die.
>?
Because enabling TBR alone in gayms means nothing...
...right, Jensen?

>>61552359
nothing is launched, anon

>>61552339
http://imgur.com/a/rp7Lk

Go be retarded somewhere else.
Vega is not good at etherium, but it's good at other coins.

>>61552374
Hello Jensen!
Why does Tesla V100 have only 80 out of 84 SMs working?
<1.7% yields?

>>61552374
>AMD split off RTG because they're a burden to the company now
except thanks to RTG they almost got out of red last year? not to mention GPU division is what kept them alive all these years
also, confusing timelines there, RTG is two years old already

>>61552387
What's that in context?

File: tesla-v100-cvpr-jensen-huang-researchers-group[1].jpg (329KB, 1080x578px) Image search: [Google]

329KB, 1080x578px

>>61552364
FE is not comparable to Quadro, wait for the WX Vega to come out before you draw those price comparisons.

Otherwise compare FE to the Titan Xp just like AMD themselves do.

>>61552375
>It's a single die.
It's not a monolithic die that's the entire point of the Zen architecture you utter, utter dipshit.
>Because enabling TBR alone in gayms means nothing...
>...right, Jensen?
It's unbelievable how fucking stupid you are and how desperately you cling to shit some redditors regurgitate.

>>61552392
Yields are so low yet I can still give them away for free because we have no competition in any of our markets.

>>61552400
>except thanks to RTG
You're joking right?

>>61552406
1080ti gets half, around 1200.
580 gets around 800.

Vega will sell to miners, you don't have to worry about AMD

>>61552412
>It's not a monolithic die that's the entire point of the Zen architecture you utter, utter dipshit.
One Zeppelin IS a monolitic die.
Holy shit Jensen now i know why nVidia is worse than chinks at making SoCs.
>Yields are so low yet I can still give them away for free because we have no competition in any of our markets.
But it still 80 out of 84 SMs?
Why, Jensen?

>>61552412
>compare FE to the Titan Xp
it makes it look even better though

>>61552376
At what price? If it is below 500,that will really piss me off

>>61552423
>One Zeppelin IS a monolitic die.
If it were a monolithic design they wouldn't need the IF interconnect to connect the two CCXs

>>61552335
Nvidia GPUs will still work with that monitor, you know. Get a 1060, upgrade to Navi for Freesync. Profit

>>61552439
Oh fucking god.

>>61552439
time to stop posting, anon

>>61552423
>But it still 80 out of 84 SMs?
>Why, Jensen?
Don't even need to release the best in the arsenal because of non-existent competition.

Which is why you'll never see a G_100 GPU in a consumer product ever again, we have no reason to release it, our second-best can hold the performance crown.

>>61552439
So is this the power of an Nvidiot?

>>61552456
No, i mean why top crop Tesla V100 only has 80 out of 84 SMMs enabled?
Exblain blease.

>>61552456
GP100 is slower than GP102 in fp32 you idiot, why don't you learn a thing about the GPUs you're shilling instead of looking at the sticker?

>>61552464
Because it's not the best of the best, remember Titan X(P) and Titan Xp?

AMD can't even match our midrange performance now.

>>61552473
No, i mean why your TOP CROP compute board has 80 out of 84 SMMs enabled?
We're not talking cucksumer trash.

>>61552483
Consider learning how to read

Charlie i need V100 yields i'd ever buy a good goy account.
>>61552485
No, Tesla V100 is best of best, why can't it have all 84 SMs enabled?

>>61552494
It's not the best of the best, it's the best of what's been made available

>>61552500
So, 1.7% yields.
Gotcha.

>>61552507
There's a reason why there aren't any incredibly successful corporations run by teenagers like yourself.

>>61552516
>nvidia denies sub-20% yields on V100
I can (almost) see it.

>>61552520
Imagine AMD trying to get a single working chip at that die size.

They can't even afford to try, they'd probably burn down the entire fab

>>61552534
So, you're not denying single digit percentage yields?
Gotcha.

>>61552542
I'm not sure where you're going with this, it's a $13k card you think low yields matter with our margins?

>>61552552
You need to have working chips to sell them first.
The volume for V100 parts would be atrociously low.

>>61552568
Wow it's like you're finally getting a grasp of basic economics, good job little redditor.

>>61552577
So it's another fucking thermi right Jensen?
Now with moar fixed function elements?
Bravo!

>>61552587
Vega is the new Fermi

>>61552603
No, since it's not an oversized die with 1.7% yields.
V100 is THE new GF100.

>>61552619
>dumb AMD shill tries to claim GV100 is the new Fermi when Vega draws more power with a significantly smaller die size and is still an oversized die given its performance
kek

>>61552630
>is still an oversized die given its performance
>>61551347
?
Stop denying that GV100 is anudda GF100.

>>61552642
can't hear you over those 375W housefires

>>61552644
>moving the goalposts
So yes, 1.7% yields: part deux.

>when you fuck up so bad you make something worse than Fiji

File: NVIDIA-Quadro-P6000-Power-Test.jpg (79KB, 480x408px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 480x408px

>>61552644

>>61551819
>HBM has ECC baked in
AMD already confirmed that Vega has no ECC memory or feature set.

>>61552664
Where?
HBM has ECC baked in.
You physically can't have no ECC in HBM.

>>61552664
Show me where.

>>61552664
stop destroying their delusions it will be much more satisfying watching their hearts get broken again when they reveal it in a week

File: 1499872943542.png (39KB, 801x745px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 801x745px

>>61551863

File: r300.jpg (2MB, 1788x1785px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1788x1785px

>>61552674
Jensen stop shitposting.
Here, have a spook.

>>61552688
please get a trip temporarily so i can laugh at you when rx vega comes out and is another pathetic card

>>61552664
You must have a source on this, right? AMD's own page for the WX 7100 says nothing about ECC, and it still has it.

>>61551754
You just tossed the textbook apples to oranges comparison. How does that make you feel?

>>61552691
You do not fear the R300 anymore?
Time sure flows.

>>61552699
put your pride on the line you clueless amd fanboy

>>61552697
Graphical workloads are different from...
...graphical workloads?

>>61552692
>>61552673
>>61552672

FE doesn't have ECC, stop being deluded.

>>61552716
Even if it doesn't it still makes the entire Quadro lineup a joke, secondly I still need a confirmation for that ECC claim.

>>61552716
Where did they even say that?
Anything HBM supports ECC.
It's baked into the memory.

>>61552730
Fury X didn't

>>61552715
Because Bulldozer was a GPU architecture. Good joke!

>>61552767
That was not me, but the other retard comparing Vega to Bulldozer.

>>61552755
I don't see anyone questioning, denying or asking about ECC in Fury*

But Fury is a gaming card, Radeon Pro Duo does have it and Vega FE being a pro card should naturally have it as well.

>>61552777
>thinking the comparison was literally cpu vs gpu as opposed to their relative performance to the competition
you're a fucking idiot

>>61552778
but you just said anything HBM supports it

also the pro duo didn't perform like utter shit in games even though it wasn't a 'gaming' gpu so who knows what else the FE is missing

>>61552781
>performance in extremely geometry bound graphical workload is not indication of uarch being good
?

>>61552793
Did someone test pro duo in gaming?
I do know someone tested a WX7100 in gaming and it was quite a bit slower than RX Polaris in gaming, but those are completely different architecture than Vega.

>>61552795
>performance being so bad they need to do pepsi-tier blind test marketing campaigns to convince the masses to buy the product is not an indication of a bad product
?

>>61552793
It's missing software banda- i mean gaymen drivers.

>>61552798
>I do know someone tested a WX7100 in gaming and it was quite a bit slower than RX Polaris in gaming
calling bullshit on that, historically every firepro gpu has performed just as well as its consumer counterpart in games, usually even better if it had more memory.

>Did someone test pro duo in gaming?
yes, they compared it to crossfired nanos which is what the card is

>>61552793
>even though it wasn't a 'gaming' gpu
Except it was literally marketed as one too.

>>61552800
>let's show the performance of our card so nvidia drops prices again resulting in no sales
?
Because it worked so nice for everything since what, GeForce 3 days?

>>61552811
just as much as the FE was, they both have the same stupid hybrid driver gimmick and they both have horrendous fp64 compute.

actually IIRC they even advertised certified drivers for the pro duo unlike FE

Gulp https://videocardz.com/71090/amd-radeon-rx-vega-3dmark-fire-strike-performance

>>61552815
name a single time AMD have ever sandbagged performance or not revealed it until the last second and the card performed so well it sold fantastically and caught nvidia off guard.

one single time please. just one. that's all i need. and a real one, not another one of your fantasies cooked up by your religious belief of amd marketing

>>61552834
R870.
Now hang yourself.

>>61552831
unsurprising

>>61552839
except that's wrong

>>61552672
>>61552673
>>61552692
Spent the last 25 minutes trying to find the AMD post where someone asked if it uses ECC memory, and it was confirmed by the AMD rep that it doesn't. I'm certain it was in a plebbit AMA, but fuck me, I'm struggling to find it again. If I can find it again I'll have to get a screenshot.

>>61552806
You mean that GTA5 test? That thing was basically unplayable at around 40FPS with stutters all over the place.

Here are way better results in 4k Fury CF, way over 50% more

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7k_f0yh2_c

>>61552831
What did I say? 1080 +10% for $400, at the start of the thread

>>61552892
https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/hwbattleradeon-pro-duo-vs-gtx-980ti-sli-vs-fury-x-cf.2471567/

Keep in mind that the Pro Duo is two Nanos not Fury X's

>>61552913
>the damage control begins
Also $400 lol keep dreaming

>>61552934
It's literally the first post in the thread, lmao.
And I've been saying it for a while.

And yes, $400

>>61552943
i hope you livestream your suicide when the msrp is $500

but then you'll just backpedal and say some bullshit about it selling for $400 day 1 because you amd fanboys are only good at spinning bullshit stories and not backing anything up

File: Vega 20 ECC.png (1MB, 1573x1409px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1573x1409px

>>61552672
>>61552673
>>61552692
>>61552730
ECC won't be a feature until Vega 20. HBM2 supports ECC, but it's not a working feature in Vega 10.

>>61552958
>A-AMD won't sell 8 Broadwell cores under $700!!

t. 3 months ago

You can start crying now, and I won't be buying Vega, but it's hilarious how you fanboy quacks have been so acclimated to NVDA/INTC prices that you think someone can't undercut them significantly.

>>61552977
Vega 20 is likely canceled since it's so close to Navi.

>>61552977
That's a fucking old slide from old roadmap.
Vega20 is no more.

>>61552978
stop moving the goalposts and comparing apples to oranges

>>61552977
>Vega 10 x2
>#00W
haha oh wow they fucked that one up big time

>>61552998
Silicon is silicon, AMD can sell one at 200% margin and some at 30% margin depending on the market and competition, you seem to not understand that.

They could sell full Vega at $300 and still make money.
They won't though.

>>61552986
>>61552988
Then I guess we won't be seeing ECC on a consumer card until Navi.

>>61553023
>Silicon is silicon
tlel me what the die size of zeppelin is again?

>>61553026
WX should release soon.

>>61553033
200mm^2 and that's high margin silicon for R7.

They're selling the same silicon for $110 with R3

Guess that's unprofitable too?

>>61553034
Also SSG.

>>61553045
you don't understand how binning works i see

>>61553058
It's still the same amount of silicon.
Also considering they gave 80%+ yields on Zeppelin...

>>61553034
That's not a consumer line of card.

>>61553058
You don't understand shit in general, you think there's enough defective dies to fill up the entire R5 and R3 lineup that outsells R7 by at least three to four times? AMD neuters perfectly fine R7 silicon to meet lowend demands.

File: autism.png (646B, 115x55px) Image search: [Google]

646B, 115x55px

>230+ posts
>14 Unique IDs
/g/ has gone to shit

>>61553069
it's incredible how little you know about the industry and how you appropriate apples and oranges and draw parallels between completely different things.

oh well since this is clearly your first AMD GPU launch i'll just sit and laugh while you have a mental breakdown

>>61553071
Why does ECC matter on gaymer cards? They'd probably scream and cry because memory is 1-2% slower with ECC

>>61553090
Jensen please.
Stop shitposting.

>>61553086
i see you don't understand why ryzen 5 and ryzen 3 have staggered launches.

how do you reddit children keep finding this board?

>>61553099
Ryzen 5 still sells several times more than Ryzen 7.
And the yields are not going to tank just because.

>>61553099
God you're so clueless, releasing several times per year instead of all at once encourages publicity and people keep talking about you, it also means they sell the higher margin products first before others, more cost effective solutions come in.

You're fucking clueless, even Intel and Nvidia launch the same way.

>>61553107
>Ryzen 5 still sells several times more than Ryzen 7.
please grant us access to amd sales figures so you can cite your claims here

surely you can cite it and aren't just pulling this out of your ass right, surely you wouldn't prove my point and yet again claim some shit without backing it up with actual evidence like a stereotypical amd shill, right?

>>61553089
It's GPU shitposting thread.
And GPUs are toys are autistic manchildren.
What did you expect?

>>61553119
will you fuck off already r/AMD

>>61553124
Jensen stop calling people shills.

>>61553089
Neat!

>>61553135
completely dodged the request and didn't even try to be subtle about it. bravo

>>61553133
>i can't say anything so i'll screech about lebbit
Ebin.

>>61553133
I'll remind you that you started the thread with a brainfart about TBR and how "AMD can't implement it properly", lack of knowledge on historical GPUs and other nonsense, 200 posts later you're still spewing diarrhea like a cute little shitsniffer, none the wiser.

>>61553152
see >>61552831 and cry your heart out you little child

>>61553175
So, Xenos has bad implementations of TBR and unified shaders?
>>61553152

>>61553175
I'll cry when you give me a reason to cry.
And I'm not seeing one there.

>>61553179
vega != xenos

>>61553188
But you said ATi can't into TBR.
Looks like they can!
Whoa!
Eat shit anyway.

>>61553201
i never said they can't into TBR i said they can't into proper implementation of it.

where are the huge perf/watt gains you morons are citing because maxwell gained it over kepler due to TBR and TBR alone, according to you uneducated shills?

Why is RX Vega still performing like shit?

>>61553222
Xenos was improper implementation of TBR?
Holy fuck eat shit my friend.

>>61553222
The fuck if I know, it performs like P6000 at similar power usage where it works, so clearly direct your attention to AMD because I don't know what they hell they did.

>>61553237
is "eat shit" half your vocabulary you stupid ESL

>>61553247
>it performs like P5000 in very specific workloads
ftfy

>>61553269
Eat shit.
Literally.

>>61553280
thanks for confirming, rajesh. i guess you can't help but have feces on your mind 24/7 when you fanboy amd this hard

>>61553269
Oh, getting ansty that a prosumer card makes the entire Quadro lineup obsolete? I thought you only cares for gaymen stuff.

JHH needs a new playtoy after INElite

>>61553288
>makes the entire Quadro lineup obsolete
even if you weren't wrong quadros would still signicantly outsell vega FE

no self-respecting professional would buy an amd gpu for professional work

>>61553288
Original Titan was also making Quadros fucking irrelevant, so leather jacket man fucking nuked them.
Fuck you JHH.
Eat shit.

>>61553302
No self-respecting professional would buy Quadro instead of SSG for video editing.
Eat shit.

>>61553302
You're basically admitting that only brand is important, how do you even function you cute little thing?

Like, did Intel's shitups screw you over so badly you have to go to AMD's GPUs to feel better? Don't worry, Vega will still sell regardless.

>>61553321
name 10 people who have actually bought the ssg

show me evidence that anyone even owns one

>>61553330
Vega SSG is not even out yet.
Supriiiiiiiiiiiiiiise!
Also eat shit please.

>>61553329
>that only brand is important
you clearly don't understand cuda's hold on the professional market

i'm not the one screwing myself buying inferior products because i feel pity for a corporation

>>61553339
>Vega SSG
nobody even asked about that, show me anyone who actually owns the original SSG
>Also eat shit please.
take the poo to the loo pajeet

>>61553352
Original SSG was a prototype.
Also eat shit.

>>61553342
CUDA sure doesn't help Quadros in Maya, Creo, 3ds, Solidworks, and AutoCAD, which make most of the professional graphic market, but hey muh cuda muh branding.

You can stop pretending to be cute now, you're too far into the retarded line to pass off as cute.

>>61553362
so you're saying, and i quote
>No self-respecting professional would buy Quadro instead of SSG for video editing.
so no self-respecting professional would buy a Quadro over a non-existant product.

can you confirm that's what your saying, please?

>>61553371
i'm getting second-hand embarassment from your utter stupidity and cluelessness when it comes to the professional market

>>61553389
Wow, so now those don't matter anymore? This is getting better and better.

What's your next spark of brilliance? Mining zcoins with Quadros?

It almost feels like INElite is back.

>>61553396
you can count the number of professionals using amd workstation gpus on your fingers

there's no need to be so butthurt, i can't believe somebody could take such offense to the truth, especially when it's in regard to a corporate that doesn't realize you exist at all. why do you endlessly embarass yourself with your uneducated opinions to defend a corporation?

It's real amazing how he doesn't want to admit a $1000 card with lolnodrivers makes a joke out of Nvidia's entire professional lineup.

>>61553421
>n-nobody!
>m-muh brand sticker

That's what your argument is at the moment, keep it coming doggy.

>>61553421
So your last argument is
>nobody ever got fired for buying nVidia
?

>>61553431
>nobody uses x brand because they make garbage products
>b-but muh single cherrypicked benchmark!!!!
kill yourself

>>61553422
That also happened with OG Titan, but since it was nVidia™, it doesn't matter.

This is THE definition of FUD.

>>61553442
>$1000 FE performs like a $5000 P6000 in professional tests people buy these GPUs because they're good at it
>NVIDIA IS BETTER BECAUSE IT'S NVIDIA

Woof woof?

>>61553468
>he keeps claiming it performs like a p6000
>keeps posting one cherrypicked benchmark that is unsubstantiated.
see >>61551794 you clueless amd shill

and stop comparing the FE to real workstation cards

>>61553468
Maybe he's not satisfied that they're like 5% avg slower, they should have tested the CLC version that's some 15% faster than the aircooled Vega

But then he'd probably scream about how the CLC would destroy all the work he's done if it goes to shit while buying 3x 200mm rads for his Skylake furnace. Kek

>>61553489
No, you can OC Air FE to 1600mhz at ~1.1v.
It's just voltage regulation is non-existant on FE, it pours 1.2v for no reason.
Aka is crushes GP102 on air.

File: quadro-spec1_0[1].png (72KB, 588x550px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 588x550px

>this kills the amd shill

>>61553489
>CLC
>workstation
see now we know you're retarded

>>61553502
>No, you can OC Air FE to 1600mhz at ~1.1v.
and now you're making shit up. show me a single air cooled FE holding 1600mhz boost consistently.

>>61553487
SpecView is a synthetic benchmark you idiot, Maya, 3ds Max, AutoCAD, Solidworks and Creo are all expensive programs used for modeling and creation, and it's a fact that the pathetic $1000 FE equals your $6000 full GP102 in them.

>>61553514
LOL the amd shill can't cope with the results, is he going to kill himself yet?

maybe you can ask for somebody to print your shitty cherrypicked graph to bury with you

>>61553502
Nobody doing pro work does OCing, that's why the higher clocked CLC version exists for that little extra performance, nothing is guaranteed with overclocking, not precision and much less stability.

>>61553512
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZkfYDWwo7s&t=540s
Eat shit.

File: VegaFE-Chart1[1].png (14KB, 572x381px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 572x381px

ouch, how can anyone even claim vega is comparable to the P6000 lol

>>61553529
http://www.tomshardware.de/vega-benchmarks-workstation-leistungsaufnahme-gaming,testberichte-242375-6.html


NVIDIA
NVIDIA
NVIDIA

>>61553530
It's supposed to boost itself to 1600mhz but it's not doing that because it's fucking overvolted OOTB and tried to maintain it's power target.

>>61553532
that's a current draw chart you stupid ESL fuck

>>61553542
see >>61553539

>>61553539
>>61553542
LONG LIVE LEATHER JACKET MAN!

>>61553542
Bad testing setup, CPU bottleneck most likely.

>>61553557
Hahahahahha.
Please stop.

>>61553557
toms aren't exactly known for having the greatest testing methodology

>>61553554
leave it to the nvidiot to actually prefer synthetic compiler (SPEC from 2006) tests instead of actual tested software.

By the way, SPEC2017 removed libquantum from the ranks, guess why?

>>61553593
see >>61553539

>>61553593
SPECapc is also synthetic, just uses newer software.

>>61553557
You know they actually have the testbed used.
I assure you there's no CPU bottleneck, seeing as they even bothered to OC the CPU

>>61553606
>OC CPU

Tests aren't valid then, nodody who does work OCs their CPU >>61553539 still stands

Why don't AMD just sell off the burden that is RTG?

Maybe Intel can buy them out and they can burn in flames together.

Also why the fuck g*rman Tom's are the only ones to test with SPECapc?
What the fuck has happened to reviewers.
Also why the fuck no one besides B3D forumites used B3D suite to bench.
>>61553624
This is some next level shitposting, pal.
Get a trip so i can filter you, INElite-junior.

>>61553635
>lest kill our iGPUs
You're a genius!

>>61553636
>why the fuck are these cherrypicked benchmarks the only ones of their kind?
i wonder

>>61553636
It's pretty amazing that nobody tested anything but gaming for 3 weeks.

AMD's fault if anything, should have actually released it to reviewers with some guidelines.

>>61553650
>calling them igpus
you're not a very good shill are you

>>61553656
>industry-standard benchmark suite is cherrypicking
Get a fucking trip, INElite-junior.

>>61553674
>industry standard
laughable, considering the fact that you know NOTHING about the industry.

also for somebody who doesn't actually do any professional work you sure love to shill what you think is a professional card..

>>61553685
>your benchmarks are not valid because i say so!
Get a motherfucking trip, INElite-junior.

>>61553692
see >>61553539

>>61553709
>ages old SPECviewperf is more valid than new SPECapc
Get a motherfucking trip, INElite-junior.

>>61553723
see >>61553709

>>61553685
God why are you still here? First you went full retard by displaying your non-knowledge of GPU history.
Then you went on a tangent about prices but knowing nothing about component of wafer costs.
Then you started some confusing talk how automatic voltage control in the firmware is the same thing as RTG overvolting their GPUs OOTB
Then something about the "pro industry" and how it works.

Needless to say, the only thing coming out of your comments is literal garbage, Zero(0) value, not even worth the bandwidth cost for posting on this site.


Like, why do you even pretend to know anything? You don't, you're an idiot.

>>61553731
>вaши тecты - нитecты
Get a fucking trip.

>>61553732
reddit called it's time to stop shitposting here and go back

>>61553723
You can see the Intel resemblance, 10+ year old numbers are more important than anything recent.
Because otherwise it can't fit their agenda.

I recommend ignoring him.

File: 1.jpg (57KB, 455x400px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 455x400px

>>61553748
>l-lebbit!
This is getting TOO silly even for me.

>>61553750
There's no resemblance, after Ryzen and especialyl EPYC Intelfags have went nuclear and started to target AMD's GPUs, it'll probably continue until Q3 ER when AMD takes some 20% revenue off their hands then they'll have to change strategies.

The pink elephant in the room is Intel's shitty GPU architecture of course.
It's like laughing at someone who stepped in shit while being up to your mouth in shit, abundantly hilarious

>>61553656
>>61553685
You're dumber than a sack of dogshit.

vega is a failure, stop lying.

>>61553788
Something along the lines of "If Nvidia fucks over AMD Intel will thrive!" since Intel can't do anything to AMD until 2020 or 2021.

But $AMD is tied to $NVDA, if $NVDA goes up so does $AMD

Just a sad state of affairs for Intelfags.

>>61553809
Do they account for the fact that RTG won't even be 30% of AMD's revenue in 2018? Even letting them do nothing AMD will have more than enough money off CPUs, it's a losing game for the shills.

>>61553828
You can't expect logic when they treat tech companies like fucking sports teams.

https://videocardz.com/71090/amd-radeon-rx-vega-3dmark-fire-strike-performance
>just a 1080
If those RX Vegas are not selling at between USD300-400 then I will just buy a GTX1080 instead.
AMD, please get your Navi out at Q2 2018, or just nuke your entire graphics division out of the Earth's surface so that I can have no disappointment about your out-of-date graphics technology in the future.

literally all nivdia has to do is to start supporting freesync and there would be no point in buying ANY current amd gpu.
prove me wrong

>>61553960
Thread is autosaging, there's no point to shitpost anymore.
>>61553983
Wow! A recipe for marketing disaster.

>>61553983
>literally all nivdia has to do is stop trying to shove proprietary tech at high prices in our faces


And the Earth is flat.

>>61553990
>>61553997
g-sync is technologically superior and doesn't have as many issues as freesync does, though it's still not worth spending 200$ more.

>>61551242
>329 posts 17 IPs
What the fuck.

>>61554011
>g-sync is technologically superior
Wut?
G-Sync wire protocol is a fucking overengineered mess.

>>61554012
That was all me.

1080 + 10% for $400

Screencap this for the end of the thread.

>>61554077
Eat shit.

>>61554077
At 300W

1080 + 15% for $700
Screencap this.

>>61554108
Yes boi.
Eat shit.

>>61554102
Why do you think it's so cheap? A lot of people don't care about power draw, those who care buy Nvidia.

If it was more efficient it would cost more obviously, but power efficiency takes a fourth place unless I'm looking at ITX builds

>>61554115
Pretty sure RX Vega will be 285 watts or lower.

>>61554115
>If it was more efficient it would cost more obviously
?
Ryzen is more efficient and costs less compared to Intel.
Margins are not everything.

>>61554134
Because Intel is in another dimension when it comes to greed.
6 years of lowering die sizes, decreasing cost, hunting margins with barely any performance.

Nvidia is less greedy($1800 10 fucking core lol) and bothers increasing everything.
Still jews though

>>61554156
>Nvidia is less greedy
Wat.
The margins on Pascal are fucking stellar.
The margins on Volta will be low though.

>>61552708
Why don't you get a trip so we can filter your obnoxious ass?
We could always unfilter you if magically AMD actually delivers a decent GPU for once.