Vega RX benchmarks

File: lol.gif (2MB, 200x150px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 200x150px

>>61574042
forgot
>$850

>>61574070
this
AMDead

>>61574042
just run it on my 1070:

Graphics Score 20 771

So explain to me why would anyone buy a GPU that is twice the price, uses twice the power and is a year late to the party?

>>61574186
Don't question AMD fanboys

>>61574295
That explains why they're poor.

>>61574186
Price is unknown, that "leaked" price is complete BS
Power consumption is unknown but likely 250-275 watts
You are comparing a partner GPU to a reference GPU

>>61574042
How many schmeckles are you being paid to shill? This is old news, no need to rehash

>>61574333
yeah yeah just wait™ for drivers/non-reference cards/navi/ and let the AMD wait->disappointment loop continue

>>61574042
>but m-m-muh gaymen drivers

Whilst this is a ridiculous argument to begin with, nothing in your post disproves it whatsoever. The claim is that drivers will be ready for launch that will boost its performance. How would pre-release leaks using pre-release drivers be in any way relevant to that theory?

>>61574042
>>61574070
>>61574075
>>61574295
>>61574332
>>61574357
Almost every post in this thread is anti-AMD circlejerk shitposts. This board is a fucking cesspool.

>>61574392
you can always go back to r/amd

>>61574070
since when price is announced?

>>61574361
Shh can't ask difficult questions, the answer isn't printed on OP's Shill Instructions

>>61574412
Rumor posted on Swedish site https://www.nordichardware.se/nyheter/radeon-rx-vega-prislapp-sverige.html

>>61574070
>More expensive than a 1080, whilst being barely-on-par performance-wise.
>Waiting all this time for fucking nothing

>>61574392
Does that offend you?

>>61574392
>/g/nu
>pro nvidia

Oh boy...

>>61574593
>what is occasional /v/ spillover that happens every GPU launch
?

>>61574619
But all the "thermi" and 3.5 GiB meme. /g/ is the amd board. They hate nvidia and intel with passion.

>>61574042
And don't forget, all this with 375TDP and a year later than the competition.

Wtf is AMD thinking

>>61574700
they aren't thinking

File: vega-fe-firestrike-normal_hi.png (85KB, 807x916px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 807x916px

>>61574042

I'm calling BS.

>>61574757
Considering the results were posted by RTG marketer, it's BS.

>>61574700
375 watt TDP was only on the watercooled Vega FE. I swear you idiots just show up and spout dumb shit all day.

Fire Raja

If RX Vega is a cheaper 1080, I'm still going to buy it, But that's the best case scenario for Vega at this point, and AMD is going to lose a shit ton of money trying to sell it cheap compared to Nvidia with HBM2 and a larger die.

>>61574836
>replying to obvious bait
?

>>61574836
are you frustrated

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

2MB, 2000x1203px

>>61574857
Really?

File: aHR0cDovL21lZGlhLmJlc3RvZm1pY3JvLmNvbS9SL0svNjkzMDU2L29yaWdpbmFsLzA4LTNkcy1NYXgtU2NvcmUucG5n.png (32KB, 711x533px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 711x533px

Here, I'll just copy/past from the other shitposting thread:

Threadly reminder that anyone who claims to "know" how RX Vega is going to perform is a clueless shitposter since all of Vega's new uarch features remain disabled in Vega FE's gaming drivers.

These include: Advanced Clock Gating and Adaptive Voltage and Frequency Scaling, it should also have Primitive Shaders, Tile Based Rasterization and a High Bandwidth Cache Controller

Proof:
http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2990-vega-frontier-edition-undervolt-benchmarks-improve-performance

GN's article proves that Vega's Advanced Clock Gating isn't working at all, and that Adaptive Voltage & Frequency Scaling are in a failsafe mode where 1.2v is being used regardless of clocks. This is why GN was able to increase the performance of Vega FE by undervolting it to 1.09v and ~280w.

http://digiworthy.com/2017/06/30/amd-vega-frontier-tile-based-rasterizer/

Here's proof that Tile Based Rasterization is not working on the current Vega gaming drivers.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1633406/so-what-went-wrong-with-vega/120

HBCC and Primitive Shader are also disabled currently in gaming drivers.

Just to maybe get to to at least TRY and educate yourself a little bit, here is a nice article about what the implementation of TBR meant for Nvidia in going from Kepler to Maxwell:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/10536/nvidia-maxwell-tile-rasterization-analysis

What does this mean? It means that until we see IF and how well RTG's driver team manage to implement these Vega uarch features by the launch at Siggraph it's actually impossible to know how RX Vega performs compared to Vega FE in gaming workloads.

Will RTG's driver team fail to implement ANY of these by Siggraph and it flops at launch? Who knows? How well will any of these actually be implemented by RTG? Who knows? There is way too large a gap between the floor and the ceiling here to make confident predictions.

>>61575170
They try so hard.

File: old man huang.jpg (25KB, 475x324px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 475x324px

>>61575170

>anyone who claims to "know" how RX Vega is going to perform is a clueless shitposter

I disagree.

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

2MB, 1788x1785px

>>61575212
Have a stroke, Jensen.

>>61575234

No matter how good the R300 was all it showed is that for one reason or another people buy Nvidia even when they have an inferior product. See also: 970.

>>61575295
No, R300 sold INCREDIBLY well.
It was Evergreen that sold like shit compared to how good it was.
A shame, but whatever.