Now even Amd Vega FE is DOA with pro aps

More like....
>Texture resolution decreased 53% to 654%

>>61697596
I told you vega is doa...I told you

We had a thread about this already. nvidia is ungimping their drivers to come out better than AMD

>>61697905
>nvidia is ungimping their drivers
meanwhile ayyymd literally have no drivers

>>61697596
>unshackled
Can I spread windows across multiple screens with Xrandr on my smol dual GT610 box?

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

32KB, 711x533px

>>61697596
SPECviewperf is not particularly representative of actual performance in professional applications:

>http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-vega-frontier-edition-16gb,5128-6.html

>Since we’re comparing graphics cards made by more than one manufacturer, their drivers make a significant difference in the results. Thus, we're shaking up the benchmark suite a bit by deliberately not using the SPECviewperf freeware suite. It just doesn’t reflect the current state of professional workstation and CAD applications. Its workloads are just too short and old. Also, some of its benchmarks don’t even start without the presence of professional graphics cards or their professional drivers.

>Understandably (but also unfortunately for reviewers), AMD and Nvidia optimize their drivers to target popular benchmarks. This practice diminishes the value of results we generate since performance differences become unrepresentative of other workloads or card behavior in general (we're talking about you, Maya). It all makes for great marketing, though.

In actual 3D rendering application performance Vega FE trades blows with a Quadro P6000.