All AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 sins

>>61937651
The (((launch price))) was a scam for the reviewers scores. If this is confirmed, my 390 will be my last AMD card.

>>61937651
>https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/6u1jvp/amd_supplies_vegachips_of_different_height_and/
>you need 2 different types of coolers
Explains the lack of AIB custom cards. Literal shitshow.

VEGA is a fucking joke and AMD dissapointed pretty much everyone

and i'm saying this as someone who bought a 480

>>61937651
>repost from plebbit
You have to go back.

Thanks to the miners i have been able to sell my 480 at a 200$ profit (bought for 250$ in the states and sold for 350€ in europe) and bought a 1080.

>>61937651
>>Vega drivers were not ready
AMD NEVER has launch ready drivers

>>61938027
Vega 56 is a really good card tho

>>61938106
>$499

Nah

>>61938106
not at the 'new' price
you can easily get a 1070 for way less or even haggle a 1080 for just a bit more

>>61938330
Jus buy it with a radeon pack :^)

File: Vega56_OC_vs_1070_OC.png (274KB, 1280x1440px) Image search: [Google]

274KB, 1280x1440px

>>61937651
Yeah, too bad a reference Vega 56 undervolted and overclocked on half-finished launch drivers beats an OC'd AIB 1070.

>>61938368
You get 2 """""FREE"""" games just for $100 extra goy. What's not to like.

>>61937651
No fixed function decoding of VP9

>>61938388
>a literal dedicated shill defends this abortion in every thread
pathetic

>>61938402
>not with a ryzen 7 cpu
lmaoing@urlife

File: 1502731026862.png (752KB, 900x1000px) Image search: [Google]

752KB, 900x1000px

>>61937651
And HOUSEFIRE

>>61938388
Agree but with a 300w tdp. I dont care t b h about the power draw.

Pooga can't even hardware decode VP9, if you buy Raven Ridge and use Chrome which Google sends VP9 videos to save on bandwidth, you're a moron and you deserve shitty battery life

>>61938421
>posting evidence is shilling, while evidence free shitposting is not shilling.
(You)

AMD need to fire their entire marketing department and overhaul RTG. After such a great Zen launch they have COMPLETELY fucked up with RTG. Raja is also not delivering and giving false promises. Lisa Su needs to pull him aside and give him a thorough dressing down.

This launch is a disaster. Miners or not.

>>61938757
>working around the clock trying to sell an inferior product
t. amd shill

>>61938924
Doesn't need any help with that. With all the wailing and gnashing of teeth, it's sold out almost everywhere, including the bundles, on day 3.

>>61938403
>>61938667
Is this the new "AMD is doomed" shill talking point? It has a hybrid mode. Zen is more efficient than Intel's arch, and better efficient at lower clockspeeds, that much is known already. Vega embedded is not going to be a power hog because it won't have nearly as much die space and we've already seen results from undervolting the GPUs.

>>61938978
>It has a hybrid mode
It's a joke compared to true HW decoder, retard.

>>61937651
>Countries where vega wasn't available at launch
lmao it's still not available here. (Netherlands)

>>61938978
>>61938978
>It has a hybrid mode
Wow, I can now decode my VP9 videos at 15fps instead of 10fps in software mode, great this was worth the wait.

>>61938106
it really isn't if you look at the bigger picture. one year late, no performance improvements brought to the table, higher power consumption compared to the competition, massively overpriced, independent source confirming no board partner coolers etc etc

i'd understand the appeal if the vega 56 was like $350 but offered 10% more performance than the 1070 on average but at $499 it's basically DOA. nobody will buy this aside from people who want to use it for compute tasks/mining or loyal fanboys.

>>61939110
>no performance improvements brought to the table
Ref. Vega 56 is faster than AIB 1070s at stock, and faster OC'd on half finished day one drivers. The gap between the 56 and the 1070 is only going to widen from here.

Also, as far as I am aware AMD have not confirmed that Vega 56 will only be available in bundle packs on launch. The MSRP of the stand alone card is $399, not $499. In any case, Aug 28 is not far from AIB cards being ready and those will definitely be available as stand alone cards.

>>61939175
even joker productions who hates nvidia is saying the vega 56 isn't even in the same pricing league as the 1070 at $499 as opposed to the $350 of the 1070 and he also said he's going to go back and test it against his 1080 as that's the proper comparison at that price point.

>The MSRP of the stand alone card is $399
which will only exist as a standalone for barely a month, as confirmed by retailers who have already spoken about the "introductory offer".

>Aug 28 is not far from AIB cards being ready
nope once again. hardware unboxed has already said that his industry sources have said that there aren't ANY board partner vega gpu's in sight. i.e. they're not even in the works from what he implied and he confirmed this by saying his source said amd were going in "solo", i guess just like they did with the fury gpu's.

lets not smooth over the edges here. vega was a flop. there isn't a single reviewer i've watched who is happy with vega, not even adored tv. i'm going to buy a gtx 1070. the waiting meme is real. never fall for the just wait meme

>>61939175
>Vega 55 will only be available through bundles
DOA

File: Screenshot_2017-07-30-22-09-42-1.png (322KB, 1062x1022px) Image search: [Google]

322KB, 1062x1022px

Isn't the price point of the 56 like $500?
I was told the $400 is the launch price only.
With 1080s being so close, I don't see the point

>>61939633
you get 2 games goy

>>61937651
Never trust a pajeet, with india you always lose.
When will you fucking learn it.

File: ATIRADEON2000.jpg (89KB, 804x804px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 804x804px

AMD WAS A MISTAKE

>Already have a Freesync monitor and Ryzen CPU
>would just be getting two games
Meh, I wanted Vega for my Freesync monitor, but when it looked like vega was being delayed I bought a 1080. Glad I did since my old 980 was struggling a little at 1440p in some games, definitely got usage out of it. I'm interested in Prey but I'd be buying a card that's about the same or lower than my 1080 with a higher power consumption. Not sure it's worth the hassle just for Freesync, I've never even used Freesync or Gsync before so I have no opinion on them.

File: 1405395486751.jpg (233KB, 640x637px) Image search: [Google]

233KB, 640x637px

>Like the number 64
>had a Jaguar, (ok that sucked) N64 and Athlon 64
>get excited for Vega 64
>reviewers are absolutely trashing it, say the 56 is the real value

>>61940162
>say the 56 is the real value
Reviewers were told it would be priced $400. In reality it would be $500 with 2 (((free))) games pack and belongs in the trash.

File: amd_furry.jpg (175KB, 801x601px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 801x601px

>>61937651
> just wait
> j-just wait and see
> w-wait more!
> w-wait for drivers!
> wait for Rx Vega! It will destroy the 1080ti!
> It will keep getting better with time! ( <- now )
> ?????
> ??????
> ???????
> Wait for Navi

File: dirt 4 rx vega.jpg (116KB, 1284x722px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 1284x722px

Just so you guys know. HU made a mistake on their Dirt 4 testing by using CMAA instead of MSAA.

>>61941686
add also whoever isn't sucking amd dick is branded shitposter by literal newfag shills from /r/amd

>>61941708
>Not using the AA method currently known to be bugged in Vega drivers is a mistake
*pondering*

>>61941986
Well changiing to favor one GPU over the other is not exactly fair but he did test Nvidia on the same setting so either way he's not being biased to either brand.

>>61942156
He didn't even realize there was a bug in Vega's drivers with MSAA until he saw other people's reviews. My point was that once you know MSAA is bugged in Vega's drivers at the moment, continuing to use it would introduce bias.

>>61938978
>hybrid mode
What's this?

Also VP9 is DOA because of NETVC

>>61939297
>fury gpu
There were AIB fury gpus
https://www.amazon.com/Sapphire-Radeon-PCI-Express-Graphics-11247-03-40G/dp/B0196LWL3W/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1502936715&sr=8-1&keywords=fury+gpu

I really don't understand how AMD keeps doing this
>RX480/580's are great cards for the price <$200 before crypto mining craze
>Fury and Vega are overpriced HBM meme housefires with a gpu core that cant even take advantage of the HBM

at this point they should just stop trying to make high end GPU's and stick with midrange where they actually have something to offer

>>61942765
>only gaymen GPUs exist, period
?

Vega seems to be a smaller improvement in performance over Fiji than Polaris.
Something is wrong with the architecture, and the smaller bandwidth than expected fuck with AA performance.
And according to Hynix AMD must be paying 2.5 times more for this shitty HBM2.
This generation is a complete disaster.

>>61942796
>according to Hynix
Well surprise-surprise, AMD uses Samsung HBM2.

>>61937967
This.

As a 390x owner I am not paying 800aud for a card that's slower out of the box than a 1080

>>61942777
>>only gaymen GPUs exist, period

>Consumer market for GPU's is 99.999999% gaymin
>why even release a gaymen vega if its not for games
>why force bundle it with fucking games
>thread is titled RX VEGA 64

your not making any sense just like AMD

>>61942777
RX Vega is the gaming version. RX Vega is literally sold in bundles with games and gaming monitors. This thread is about RX Vega. Go suck shit somewhere else.

>>61942765
Exactly I was expecting a bigger Polaris not a tweaked Fiji xt with the same issues
AMD needs to respin these cards with gddr6 but we know that won't happen.

I'd be very interested to see how the volta nv100 handles hbm2 but it's a long waaaaay off

>>61942765
Because they don't have the same budget as Nvidia, they had to make a GPU agriculture that would compete in workstation environments but also for gaymer shit.

>>61942883
>respin these cards with gddr6
They need to modify the chip to work with gddr6. Memory controllers are entirely different.

>>61942916
>don't have the budget
>throw what budget we do have into a fire twice in a row

They literally could have just canned the HBM line and spent the budget on pumping out more Polaris gpus to sell to miners for maximum profit to obtain a budget.

>>61937651
>a gpu chip bigger than the titan xp
>match with the tiny gtx 1080 chip

Vega is GCN aka Fury x 2.0, even at 2 GHz, Pascal is more efficient...Fuck Raja.

>>61942883
>I'd be very interested to see how the volta nv100 handles hbm2 but it's a long waaaaay off
I wouldn't even be so sure NVIDIA is going to bring HBM2 to GeForce gaming cards. GDDR5(X) has clearly been working well for Pascal, I wouldn't be surprised if we got GDDR5X/GDDR6 cards with Volta.

>>61942808
HBM2 prices in general (and other types of DRAM), not just Samsung's.

>>61942916
How much money is there in the workstation market though? Doesn't even NVIDIA make most of its money of off gaming nowadays?

>>61943155
>How much money is there in the workstation market though?
Barely, if any. $NVDA posts some $250million revenue from it.
>Doesn't even NVIDIA make most of its money of off gaming nowadays?
It does, they always did. Good marketing pays off.

>>61938433
Those repeating integers.

>>61942883
Yeah they'd be even better with around 30-40W more power draw and possibly less performance... HBM saves these cards.

File: 1322089095851.jpg (412KB, 1680x1050px) Image search: [Google]

412KB, 1680x1050px

>>61941686
But.... Muh magic drivers, muh primitive shaders, muh dynamic voltage control

>>61943178
>Barely, if any
Yeah, that's what I expected, even if the products are ridiculously expensive, the number of people who want to play games must be much, much greater than people who need professional workstation cards.

So if that's the case, why would AMD focus on making Vega a workstation card first and a gaming card second?

All I know is that 580s or 1060s arent any cheaper right now. This sucks.

>>61943328
>So if that's the case, why would AMD focus on making Vega a workstation card first and a gaming card second?
Gaymen Radeons never sold well, even while being superior to nVidia's products at every price points.
Making a better gaymen chip would be a total gamble.
At least they got video editing market covered right now.

>>61938388
Doesn't that fatass joker fuck up launch day benchmarks for AMD literally every time?
He always ends up coming out with a video a week or so later saying the AMD results were higher "on accident"
It's happened three times so far

>>61943359
Even if they had 15-20% of the gaming market, that must be way more people than those who do video editing so seriously that they need special graphics cards designed around editing, that doesn't make much sense to me. Who would even need these professional video editing cards, the actual TV/movie industry and who else? I'm pretty sure even highly popular people on YT or Twitch don't need or use these cards.

>>61943427
Speshul video editing cards have higher margins.
Anyway, Radeon never sold well among gaymers for the past 10 years.
Nothing would change that, RTG are doing the right thing of shifting the focus to something else.

>>61943441
But highly specialized workstation cards which probably don't even shift 1% the number gaming Radeons do are flying off the shelf or what? I was also under the impression that CUDA reigns supreme in the rendering segment too.

>>61943466
Absoluterly everything supports (or about to support) Radeon ProRender now.
Also gaymen Radeons have razor thin margins.
Graphics division was always a huge moneysink for AMD. It was never really profitable.

They are clearly trying to keep miners off these cards with the suicide class pricing. Stupid fucking move IMO. 100$ off from 1k$ monitor which you have to buy at the same time whupdiduu.

File: esworking.jpg (293KB, 1036x772px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 1036x772px

selling on steam store when!?

>>61943482
Could anyone ever provide sources for the "chinese ict parts are expensive" claim? I see, what, like 10-20$ PCB, 20-100$ core+memory and 2$ cooler. Yes the R&D and management costs a truckload but it's the same for Pro cards. The base materials and infrastructure are the same.

>>61939297
>$350 for a 1070

I have a fury x, guess I am going back to nvidia. Wait for volta or gtx 1080ti?

>>61943560
Volta is faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar away.
Get 1080ti.

File: y'shtola neat.jpg (273KB, 576x576px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 576x576px

>AMD spent so much time and energy making Ryzen awesome that their video cards are now the butt of jokes

>>61943589
They killed Quadro, more or less.
That's no joke.

>>61943589
Ryzen+NVIDIA suits me just fine anyhow

>>61943496
>They are clearly trying to keep miners off these cards with the suicide class pricing
How so? Miners have repeatedly shown they are willing to pay way above MSRP for any card which is good for mining, it's gamers who are price-conscious most of the time. It also makes sense, gaming is a hobby while mining is something which people actually make money from, they're willing to pay more since the cards will make the money back. AMD even released a mining-specific driver which seems to be pretty effective.

>>61943625
Have they fixed those horrid performance cases from a few months back, when NVIDIA would run like shit on Ryzen in a few benchmarks?

File: 1426571972254.jpg (108KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 640x640px

RTG needs a swift kick in the ass because it's just been one disgrace after another with those people. AMD's CPU division Un-JUST'ed themselves in a creative way with Ryzen but RTG just can't seem to make it work no matter how many tries. Gut that thing inside out, fire the incompetent retard engineers and retarded third world code monkeys that can't write proper driver software. Chop Raja up, make him into a Sopa de Koduri, find a nice talented white person or some hyper autistic asian engineer to run it instead. You're only further damaging your reputation at this point.

>>61943734
I'm pretty sure that's at least mostly been fixed via updates since the launch

>>61939297
>which will only exist as a standalone for barely a month, as confirmed by retailers who have already spoken about the "introductory offer".

Yeah, and the 1070 and 1080 were on sale for MSRP for how long exactly? Because I've never seen them at that price. They only had the FE for $100 markup for sale on the first month for example.

>>61943838
They've just delivered AMD's best shot at killing Quadro. There's nothing wrong with RTG besides lack of resources.

so consensus is that 56 for close to MSRP is good, but only within $430 price limit?

>>61943568
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20170814VL201.html

>>61944051
consensus is just buy a nvidia card you can actually get at a reasonable price right now

>>61944070
so, Volta by the end of Q1 2018?

>>61944078
q3-early q4 most likely, they need volume but most of it goes for tesla huge dies

>>61944071
nah, after 770 nightmare I had to live through half a year I don't want to risk it mid cycle
vega at least guaranteed to be consistently 1070 level for 2 -3 years at least

>>61943887
What about the shitty marketing?

>>61943706
The original MSRP is above usual and then the added games+monitor joke pack which miners have no use. Yes, I see it is not working. Good for AMD I guess.

They should've found a way to cut RX Pro qualities more and do a RX 480 with these. Just copy Nvidia.

>>61938004
This is ridiculous

>>61942539
Yes and I'm sure every other game is bugged with Vega too, that's why Dirt 4 with CMAA is the only case where the Vega 56 can somehow match or beat a 1080 Ti, right?

You shills are so fucking unbearable.

File: 1502535376987.webm (1MB, 268x480px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 268x480px

>>61938881
>Lisa Su strips Raja naked and canes him bloody before forcing him to roll around in salted honey and then covering him in fire ants

>>61945390
Kinky.

>>61939782
oh look a faggot that spends $500 for an increase of 2-3 fps
Spend your money wisely you jew shill, i still have a gtx 670 and am real happy with it.

I upgrade when i NOTICE the diff, not when i THINK i notice the difference. GG

>>61940162
Get the nano. top binned 64 cu. performance will be lower from the limited tdp though.

>>61943284
>yfw prim shaders are already working

>>61938633
undervolt is drawing less power... hell, remember polaris can undervolt to run at 2/3 its release power and with the lower heat, overclock higher.

>>61939093
able to play flawlessly on cpu alone, get better hardware.

>>61938402
If you were going to get those games anyway, its a decent way to curb miners buying all the cards.

>>61945272
who said anything about matching or beating?

>>61945970
HW decoder is meant to reduce power draw in laptops retard. It's orders of magnitude better compared to """"hybrid"""" shit.

>>61946018
get a laptop with non shit hardware, its not like amd currently makes a laptop cpu/gpu worth buying

>>61939782
Freesync is seriously a game changer. I sold my rx480 a couple of months ago for way more than I bought it for and bought a gtx 1080. I have a 144hz 1080 freesync monitor and I shit you not gaming felt smoother on the previous card as the framerate drops weren't noticeable. That said, I can fully max out everything now and of course the average framerate is much better. Don't underestimate adaptive sync though.

>>61942972
they made an accelerator monster
They made a card that will handle a huge data set with ease

they made a gpu that can scale down to consumer models, so they dont just chuck the shit dies.

some how amd was suppose to cater a billion+ dollars to sub 5% of the total gaming market

>>61943328
from gaming (gforce) workstation (quatro) and accelerator (tesla) nvidia makes the most off quadro and tesla, but it's kind of a 30% 32% 33% split there in revenue.

Every piece of that pie is about the same.

now amds game with gpus is apus, not so much gpus themselves, as they are useful in desktop, laptop, and mobile markets. right here is a market that nvidia has never really been a part of that amd uses as a strength. amd just about breaks even when it comes to gpu and what they get out of the gpu r&d.

>>61937967
It took 3 months before you could actually buy a GTX 1070 for the $379 MSRP Nvidia claimed.

But it's OK if Nvidia does it.

>>61943482
Its long game with the gpu division. its largely there to make their real market, cpus, more appealing as you got an all in one chip, and amds apus are better than intels.

>>61946005
>claiming MSAA is buggy when MSAA Vega results in Dirt 4 are representative of its performance in every other title out there while CMAA results are a massive outlier

>>61946092
Nvidia's prices were store and AIB controlled. AMD outight lied.

>>61946215
prices are controlled by supply and demand.
Nvidia knew supply was limited and thus jacked up price of the reference version to $449.
$379 MSRP was a meanginless price they made up for reviewers.

>>61946252
imbecile

Bu...but... Vega win on Linux.

>>61946291
1070 was $500 for about two months in the stores.
but it's okay when nvidia do it...

Friendly reminder you can overclock the 56 memory bandwidth back to 64 levels to get almost 1080 performance without using more power.
If you could get it before prices get fucked it's a great deal.

File: 1485725314208.png (38KB, 676x758px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 676x758px

>>61946518
Vega leads in everything except pubg and other UE4 games.
Problem with vega is not vega, it's that you can't get vega.

>>61946658
on second thought, since 580 back to 31MH
what will happen in next 10 days:
1. miners come to their sense and stop buying it because it's terrible value like 1080 or 1080ti for mining
2. retailers will make a deal to move "pack stock" to normal stock, we might even eventually see game keys going as free bonus

what will happen with 56: AIBs will OC memory making it 64 level without 64 TDP
hardware works in long selling cycles, first week is really nothing

>>61943284
also no HBCC

https://youtu.be/m2-xZvv5wd8?t=14m20s

haha, way to fuck up your own card AMD
so apparently HBM doesn't draw power at all, 20w peak and no temp issues
why did AMD keep memory clock so low? for retarded segmentation? way to shoot yourself in the leg

>>61946658
Its idiotically expensive in Europe. Could just get a 1080 instead.

>>61947012
can't get vega at reasonable price*

>>61937651

forgot to mention

> Extremely limited supplies due to HBM2 shortages

It becomes a bloody repeat of HD 5850/HD5870 shortage but the GPU itself has the opposite characters (Hot, underwhelming performance).

Vega is AMD RTG's GF100.

>>61946710

Again, it is not miners who buying Vegas. It is fucking scalpers (check out fleabay which happens to be flooded with RX Vega at massive mark-ups) who think that "miners" or deseprate hardcore AMD-tards are trying to get Vega no matter the cost.

If Vega architecture was so awesome at mining then Frontiers would also be unobtainable protip: they aren't.

The real reason why AMD cost so much is because it is unobtainum from HBM2 supply issues a.k.a repeat of HD 5870/5850 launch.

>>61947103
more so point stands, it will all calm down next couple week by the time for aib cards
I have hopes for 56 with OCed HBM to the limit and under 230w TDP, sapphire will do it, it's doable with reference already

No idea what AMD was thinking with 56-64 liquid, who will buy those? They might've had 1070 killer if they didn't skimp on memory clocks, now it barely leads on it

File: rly_pepe.jpg (196KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 900x900px

>tfw 290
>tfw Vega is hardly faster than my 5 year old card.

Guess I'll hope the next Nvidia line will be worth it. I ain't upgrading until I can confidently use 4k at a decent framerate.

>>61945272
MSAA being bugged on Vega launch drivers is a totally separate issue from Vega's outlier performance in Dirt 4 with MSAA off. MSAA will tank Vega's performance in any game right now, but CMAA doesn't make it outperform a 1080ti in every game right now.

Testing games with MSAA on while you know it's bugged is just deliberately introducing bias into results. That's a totally separate issue from trying to figure out why Vega utterly crushed Dirt 4.

>>61937651
>>No live stream for the launch event
underage b&

>>61946199
You are conflating two issues:

https://m.hardocp.com/article/2017/08/14/amd_radeon_rx_vega_64_video_card_review/17

"This is combined evidence enough that enabling forms of anti-aliasing like MSAA or SSAA are for some reason performance-impacting on AMD Radeon RX Vega 64. We need to do more testing on this for sure.

The conclusion so far is thus, when using shader based AA methods like SMAA, or FXAA or Temporal AA, or CMAA AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 performs much better and can compete with GTX 1080. However, if enabling any level of MSAA or SSAA then performance will decrease more on AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 and GTX 1080 will give more performance in that scenario."

>>61947411
That makes sense when the card is starved of memory bandwidth though. MSAA/SSAA is really just rendering to a higher resolution.

>>61946974
>overclocking core glitches primitive discard to discard things that shouldn't be discarded
kek you're not nvidia, amd

>>61947448
I'm aware of that, as I'm the one who has been going on about Vega being bandwidth bound for weeks.

Keep an eye out for some undervolted and overclocked Vega 64 reviews and for the drivers to get a little more than half finished and see if bandwidth can be improved.

>>61947486
I'm afraid it wont make a difference whether the Primitive Shader culls 50% of the triangles or not.
MSAA/SSAA should not make a difference here. In fact, one of the culling techniques described for Primitive Shaders, will be less effective with MSAA/SSAA turned on. This will further the divide in performance from MSAA/SSAA.

I just hope the magic driver improvements will come before the 56 is released.

what are the chances of partners having moddable bios?

>>61947537
What I've seen around suggests that MSAA/SSAA may be a specific bug not just bandwidth issues.

>>61938881
>dressing down
Oooow how long till we get RajaXLisa nude video

>>61939694
>2017
>paying for games
Im a wageslave, how am I sopose to afford games?

>>61947362
>while you know it's bugged
Performing poorly doesn't necessarily mean it's bugged though, we'll have to see if it's a driver bug or if it's inherent to the architecture later down the line.

In any case, deviating from the standard test batch in order to exclude MSAA results because Vega performs poorly would be much more biased than simply running everything as with every other graphics card out there. Why should Vega get special treatment just because it performs poorly with MSAA?

>>61939747
Raja was part of ATi longer than he's been part of Amd.

>>61947859
>can afford high end GPU
>pretends he cannot pay for games

>>61946044
Are you talking about their gaming card market share at 5% of the market? Or their processional cards having 5% of the market?

Memes aside, they stood in front of investors and said "We want our GPUs to enter the premium high end markets and professional markets". They have completely and utterly failed to do so.

Fire Raja, he is an abject failure.

>>61948139
>buying games
amd literally shitting shovelware down your throat to jew you $100 extra is inexcusable

>>61948139
I buy high end pc so i don't have to spend $3000-$8000 on games

>>61944358
They can always try and sell the game and monitor. Would be nice to get a cheap monitor off 'em

>>61942831
>>61937967
Not to mention the 390x itself being a bit shit

>>61937651
Whatever good AMD has to their name is right now getting dragged through the shitty as this launch is undoing what has been a good year for them so far. Not only that but AMD are currently preparing a statement according to the OCUK forums regarding the RRP price of the cards so they're in damage control right now.

>>61948267
They have to be fucking embarrassed by this launch after the fantastic roll out of Zen.

>>61948149
>out of stock on day 1
He'll be fine, don't worry.

>>61948149
>They have completely and utterly failed to do so.
Oh yeah, totally, except for:

Vega SSG literally has no competitoin
Vega WX performs at lest as well as a P6000 for 1/3 the price
Vega MI25 is being used in Project 47 so it has a guaranteed market
Vega FE offers P5000+ pro performance if you don't need certified drivers and with RX gaming drivers will also deliver Vega 64 gaming performance.

Hell, Vega 56 is clearly better than the 1070 so the only two segments in which Raja can be accused of failure is Vega 64 vs 1080 and not having anything to compete against the 1080ti at the moment.

And considering how much better the margins are in every segment outside of gaming, I think Raja is about as safe as you can get.

>>61948285
Selling to miners is easy. So it's not like it's an accomplishment.

He has no idea how to run a business, his capsaicin events are full of cringe, his best efforts at the high end are equaling entry level professional cards. It is even more power hungry than Hawaii, not the chip, the island state, and just as hot. His software stack is years behind CUDA. Fiji, now Vega, are absolute dog shit in everything but computation. He has failed to capture market share in gaming cards, and routinely misses the mark in firepro and now radeon pro cards. He has done nothing but drag Radeon down.

>>61948433
>Selling to miners is easy.
If bundles priced $100 higherw with stuff useless to miners isn't enough to deter miners from buying up all the stock then Raja deserves a fucking raise.

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

37KB, 711x533px

>>61948433
>Fiji, now Vega, are absolute dog shit in everything but computation.
Oh yeah, except for trading blows with a P6000 in geometry workloads like Creo, Solidworks and 3ds Max.

>>61948184
>new wolfenstein
>prey
>shovelware

anon, I know this is /g/ but fuck off
problem is anyone who wanted prey got it already

>>61948433
Su is the one running the business though and she seems content with the state of affairs. She would have trashed Vega and sacked Raja before the launch if she wasn't happy

>>61948267
>according to the OCUK forums
please, inflammatory faggot from there is not the source

>>61948476
Professional users don't buy ATI/AMD. CUDA has already won, AMD is left to pick up the scraps.

>>61948504
>glide already won

File: aHR0cDovL21lZGlhLmJlc3RvZm1pY3JvLmNvbS9SLzYvNjkzMDQyL29yaWdpbmFsLzAxLVNvbGlkd29ya3MtU2NvcmUucG5n.png (28KB, 711x533px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 711x533px

>>61948504
Would you like a jetpack to help you move those goalposts? Vega's geometry performance in pro applications is demonstrably very good.

Oh BTW, nice Source: My Ass assertion.

>>61948383
>Vega SSG
One trick pony with such a niche use case the fact that you are using this as a selling point is laughable.

>Quadro P6000
At 100w more power consumption, and still loses to it in every benchmark.

>Project 47
Fantastic. It takes the CPU division to fabricate markets for this abortion of a architecture.

>Vega FE
Another abject failure with a tacked on "game mode". That was being compared to Titan XP cards when AMD pitched it last. Just to show you how much of a joke Raja is.

>Vega 56
At 100 dollars more expensive than advertised launch prices and nearly as power hungry as Vega 64, why would you bother?

>Profit Margins
Fantastic. They shined up a dog turd and sold it to people outside of a 30 billion dollar a year business. Will it do better than past efforts at breaking CUDA market share? Because last I saw, ROCm and OpenGPU were still laughing stocks against CUDA. Has this changed since the investors meeting?

He has failed to deliver time and time again.

>>61948149
I am talking the high end 1080 1080ti titan market at being sub 5%, the vast majority of gpu sales are 400 or below $ but with amds limited budget and resources they were suppose to make a gpu that caters to dick all numbers that would never buy an amd gpu to begin with?

Look, amd plays the long game on gpus because they treat the gpu division as a research think tank and get patent portfolios from it, and they also try to not fall behind, they put out what they can, but they look at it as a thing to bolster their cpus more so than a thing that will be sufficient on its own, especially after the 4000-200 series where amd was clearly better then its competitors and were never rewarded for it.

>>61948599
It should be. Since that is the only thing it is good at. Thdn of course we don't want to bring Tesla in to this do we?

vega will have better resale value because of miners.. that alone is reason enough to buy 50 of them and turn a quick profit

>>61937651
Vega faceplanted at launch, but there is still a possibility I'd get one.

> triple fan custom cards, undervolted and run at the originally intended ~1.5 GHz
> drivers actually mature and enable everything on the card
> SR-IOV gets enabled on consumer cards, and windows drivers work within guest VM ****

>>61948621
Because the 4000-200 series brought us the "no drivers" meme. They were fucking horrible. They shouldn't have been rewarded for that.

>>61948673
yea, had a 4000 in my little brothers build and a 5000 in mine, have no fucking clue where the no drivers came from, never ran into a game that failed due to drivers.

>>61948663
I want to get a loan for that very reason.

>>61948686
>>61948673
oh, and he had a 200 that was golden silicon, able to clock it well over what most people were able to, getting well above its weight class in performance.

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

32KB, 711x533px

>>61948620
>One trick pony with such a niche use case
Literally being the only option for working with 8k raw footage in realtime or working with super large data sets in real time is pretty good niche at $7,000 a card.

>At 100w more power consumption, and still loses to it in every benchmark.
Considering that Vega FE without even certified drivers trades blows with the P6000 in geometry bound workloads, on what basis can you imagine that Vega WX won't beat the P6000 in most workloads?

>Another abject failure with a tacked on "game mode".
Trading blows with a P6000 in geometry for $1,000 is a failure now? It may be a bit of a niche product, but its the only option in its niche since TItans are toys now.

>At 100 dollars more expensive than advertised launch prices and nearly as power hungry as Vega 64, why would you bother?
Because with undervolting and overclocking it dumpsters an OC'd AIB 1070.

>>61948686
Your anecdotal evidence runs contrary to the mountain of evidence and user experiences.

>>61938388
how the fuck are these cards still struggling at 1440p

OCUK are selling an in stock Powercolor RX VEGA 64 for £629.99. Apparently it's to 'deter miners'

Gibbo you are such a lying cunt.

>>61948647
Are you retarded? That's testing viewport performance in solidworks. It's a standard, albeit different from games, graphical workload, not a compute workload. Tesla, which is optimized only for compute, would probably lose to the quadro since the quadro has drivers optimized specifically for the render pipelines of productivity apps.

>>61948715
contrary to a bunch of nvidia people saying amd has no drivers, people who never used amd or would ever use amd.

yea, they say that enough and got enough people who never used amd to not use amd, what a fucking shock. the last time amd was genuinely bad with its drivers was prior to the 4000 series, as in crashing and shit like that, but funny enough, back then nvidia hard crashed computers more then ati did, funny how that is.

>>61948715
Mountains out of molehills. Which are also anecdotal

>>61948720
>miners are going to give a shit about vega 64 when they can buy 2 rx580's and get more hashes out of them or even 1060's
>gamers are going to give a shit about vega 64 when they can get a 1080 way cheaper
with this price nvidia has no competition at all

Why do AMD fanboys always go on and on about undervolting? It's kind of weird, it was there during the Fury and Fury X as well. SO you're saying AMD's default power and voltage profile is so broken that you have to manually tinker with the settings just to get decent performance without catching your computer on fire or increasing your electric bill too much? Overclocking is cool but it shouldn't be mandatory. It reminds me of delidding, except obviously undervolting is a lot easier and safer than delidding, but still time consuming. You're still trying to compensate for the fact that the vanilla product isn't good enough and requires manual intervention. Bragging about undervolting is like the people who brag about their delidded 7700K hitting 5.1GHz.

>>61944091
Q4 for quadros, no geforce volta until Q2 2019, calling it now.

>>61948780
580s are more expensive than Vega 56's launch price

File: 1411254347472.jpg (16KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 400x300px

>was really hopeful for AMD with ryzen and vega
>ryzen turned out ok, all good
>vega is a catastrophy
Hopefully it will be ok once they make a refined updated version of it... But still, feels bad

I just want intel/nvidia to have some real competition so they can't keep jacking up prices. But it's hard.

>>61948796
In the meantime, we'll see a Pascal refresh to 14nm, a vega refresh to make it AIB friendly, and navi will get delayed due to manufacturing problems

>>61948812
in my country rx 580's cost around 440$ or £340 right now, that's a bit above half the price of an vega 64
and the price is still going down

>>61948741
I used their APU's before, those literally had no drivers. Also it's annoying how they dropped support for FM2 after like two years. It's understandable that they had to drop support for legacy GPU's when switching from Catalyst to Crimson but to completely drop support for a 2012/2013 product in 2015? I would be pissed if an APU was my primary gaming platform, they even add insult to injury by recommending you buy a discrete AMD GPU, despite the fact that those APU's would have been used in mobile devices or shitty OEM PC's with crappy power supplies.

>>61948782
>Why do AMD fanboys always go on and on about undervolting?
Because AMD GPUs can typically gain a lot of efficiency by undervolting.

Gamers Nexus got their Vega 56 to hit a Firestrike score of ~22k with a +50% power target, +180mhz memory OC, and -1.075v undervolt to 1.025v where Vega 56 was drawing 240 watts total while giving much better performance than stock.

>>61948861
having had to fall back to a 5770 for 3 months due to msi's fucking rma process, there is honestly no real issue with games, I mean lets be honest here, a 2012 or 2013 apu was not going to be playing the new games from 2016 at anything resembling playable. that and most drivers for gpus are really unnecessary, few games are completely fucked without 'game ready drivers' at least on amds side.

>>61948829
>Ryzen is budgeted as a brand new architecture from scratch
> Vega is budgeted as gcn with new alus, basically the same thing carrizo

Wow, I wonder what happened.

>>61947057
reminds me of my 6970 that was a bitchin little card

>>61948853
580s msrp is like $230

>>61947228
>mfw 390x
>vega barely faster in 1080p
yeah nah amd fucked up big time
>>61947591
slim

we also have to wait at least a month
https://rog.asus.com/articles/gaming-graphics-cards/amds-radeon-rx-vega-gets-the-rog-strix-treatment/

>>61948955
why would anyone care about the msrp if the real prices are different?

>>61948933
Well if they'd had enough driver devs to actually get all the bandwidth saving uarch features implemented before launch they probably would have gotten away with that approach.

The question is to what extent those bandwidth saving features can mitigate Vega's bandwidth issues in gaming if they actually get properly implemented by the driver devs. I'm still curious to see what impact FP16 will have in the upcoming games that use it too.

>>61948959
early september is in two weeks

>>61948999
Vega doesn't have a bandwidth issue on 99% of games, we've seen that bandwidth ocs performance gain tops off after like 7%

I have an R9 380X, is it worth buying a Vega 56 or should I wait for the next line of Nvidia cards?

>>61948971
Because the cards sold at msrp or below with promos just 2 months ago in june

>>61949048
that's 64 because too many ALUs for it's own good
56 gains something like 17% from memory OC=> bandwidth issue

>>61949076
No you dont. And you only have too many alus if you can't feed it. Vega 64 should see the most benefit from bandwidth according to you but it doesn't

>>61948000
I tested Dirt 4 on my RX 480 and guess what? MSAA is set to 4x by default. So he had to have had to go in and change it to CMAA (or forgot to change it back to defaults) when testing.

In testing you don't do shit but set the game to ultra and don't touch shit. The only thing that you might be allowed to change is Gimpworks.

>>61949048
Vega very much has bandwidth issues in games at the moment, that's why Vega FE basically ties a P6000 in Creo, Solidworks and 3ds Max but strugles against a 1080 in games.

Primitive shaders and primitive culling are both specifically designed to get past Fiji's front end bandwidth limitations, and without those two features fully implimented Vega can't stretch its legs in games.

This is shown by a power offset increase and memory overclock getting Vega 56 to tie stock Vega 64 in benchmarks.

>>61948999
Dsbr is already working and RX showed 0% improvement over Vega FE despite the addition of dsbr. Primitive shader only improves geometry throughput, any bandwidth saving feature is secondary at best

Didn't Nvidia even delay their next line because there's no competition? Won't they now slow down and not make faster cards because they have no reason? Fuck this.

>>61948869
It's just bizarre that people made fun of the i9 for throtling at stock settings, when Vega does the same thing. In GN's undervolting review of Vega FE he claims Vega FE's stock settings are broken and the GPU throttles. How is that acceptable? Yeah you can fix it by undervolting but this board seems to think it's always ok when AMD does it. I get why AMD cranks up the voltage on all their products, so they can have higher yields. But they're clearly pushing the limit with Vega.

>>61949142
Creo, solidworks, max, and Maya use opengl and direct3d11. The reason why they run well is because and actually optimized them to compensate for developers' code for once like Nvidia does

This shit show is why AMD probably want to get away from the gaming market. Miners are not buying VEGA FE etc so that does not fuck things up for them. Professionals look at performance based on a few high end software tools. Not 100 games that are either badly optimized or favor one brand over the other.

AMD probably hate gamers more than miners right now.

>>61949163
Yes, the 1080Ti is still king so they're still marketing Pascal and waiting until Q1/Q2 for consumer Volta. They MAY do a Pascal refresh but I don't think they'll bother.

>>61949184
Until the mining dies and the used market floods with heavily used devices that normies will buy and then try to rma because they think warranties are transferable and partners get pissed

>>61949152
>Improvements further down the rendering pipeline don't show benefits while the front end is still choking.
*thinking*

>>61949135
>In testing you don't do shit but set the game to ultra and don't touch shit
What? What world do you live in? Plenty of reviews use different settings beyond default presets, those along with the testing procedure are usually detailed when reading the actual review. What you're saying has never been true, especially when benchmarking "max settings" in games where the highest preset isn't actually the best the game can do, or when benchmarking 4K where extreme AA is often unneeded and its performance hit is unwarranted.

>>61949065
wait 4 nvidia

>>61949225
would be hilarious if volta turns out 10% performance bump, just like grandpa intel

>>61949222
Then those benchmarks are worthless. This is why we have synthetic benchmarks like Timespy etc. You have to have a baseline to test with otherwise it all becomes meaningless.

>>61949347
How exactly are they worthless? What makes a default preset more valid for benchmarking than custom settings which are clearly specified in the review? Anyone can replicate the benchmark on any test system they choose as long as the actual settings are specified, which they will be in any decent review.

Are default presets made with magic benchmark dust or what?

>>61949347
>Then those benchmarks are worthless.
within one reviewer framework they aren't because
he'd use same setting for all cards

>>61949174
>It's just bizarre that people made fun of the i9 for throtling at stock settings
It's pretty much standard for GPUs to do that for a while now, especially NVIDIA since their boost has been getting smarter and pushing higher when the GPU is cool. The thing is, most decent graphics cards come with settings which allow you to prevent that by either increasing power target or fan speed and reference coolers have never been amazing.

i9 however is a complete laughing stock since it runs hot as all fuck even with good 3rd-party cooling, almost exclusively as a result of Intel being cheap as fuck and making a bad quality CPU by not soldering a fucking $1000 die to its IHS, which would've solved thermal issues entirely.

>>61949449
>But he changed to CMAA to test all cards for some reason

>>61946092

Not the same, to be fair. This intro price shit seems to be top shelf jewery. If it hashes as well as rumoured, they're cashing in on the miners.

File: 1467015443876.jpg (66KB, 990x877px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 990x877px

>tfw tried to justify waiting for a Vega
>Vega gets released and it's a power-hogging shitfest with good performance but I think I can justify it regardless
>600 dollars on launch, which probably makes it like 700€
>Wait for prices
>899€ for the liquid cooled edition, 740€ for the reference air card
>Abandon all hope and bought a 1080ti about 2 hours ago

I really wanted to AMD, I really fucking wanted to, but fuck those prices. I cannot justify Vega at these prices. The aftermarket cards will be closer to 800€, which is already what I am paying for this shitty fucking 1080ti.

Fuck you Raja, "deterring miners", garbage plan, especially considering I already own a 1700x so I don't benefit in any way.

File: Girls.png (490KB, 449x401px) Image search: [Google]

490KB, 449x401px

>>61950087
Nice LARP bro

Wait AMD killed BIOS flashing? What the fuck, even Pascal is flashable now. They literally put a dual BIOS switch and you can't flash the BIOS, it's like they're taunting you.

File: 1491842447050.jpg (231KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

231KB, 1000x1000px

Basically the best setup for the ultimate space heater is running Intel CPU + AMD Vega GPU. It's the ultimate combo is house fire technology.

>>61950366
>Wait AMD killed BIOS flashing?
Probably beacause of apple iMac pro

>>61950804
So the faggot ceo made a AMD do a faggot move? Interesting.

>>61950366
So that people couldn't flash Vega 10 to Vega 20
|
|
|>
|3
|

File: fuckinhell.png (285KB, 1009x953px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 1009x953px

>>61950869
Yeah, they will totally be able to flash the two extra stacks of HBM2 onto the card!

>>61948476
>>61948599
>>61948711
>that samefag amd shill in every thread

http://www.gamersnexus.net/news-pc/3023-aib-partners-to-gn-yes-vega-price-will-change

File: 1495051026483.png (95KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 653x726px

>>61937651
DELET

File: amdloocry.jpg (111KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 653x726px

>>61951064
NO AMD ARE THE GOOD GUYS

>>61951050
>Posting evidence is shilling, however evidence free shitposting is not shilling.

>>61951064
They're still gonna sell out.

>>61951144
>same posting style
Nobody is going to buy your marketing trash pajeet. You're literally 24/7 on /g/ trying to salvage this abortion. kys

>>61951064
is AMD going to destruct their graphics department on purpose?

>>61951184
You say that, yet you cannot refute his arguments.

File: 1483023530651.jpg (834KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

834KB, 1920x1080px

calm down gais

>>61951246
>his
>pajeet pretendiong to be a different person
hilarious

>>61951064
>people actually thought Vega bringing competition would force Nvidia to lower prices
>Instead AMD raises prices on Vega due to mining
Top kek, the only mid to high end GPU that isn't a complete ripoff is the $500 1080.

>>61951184
I want you to go to Tomshardware right now and tell them how much of a bunch of AMD shills they are for posting results showing Vega FE is competitive with a $6000 Quadro in workstation tasks.

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/amd-radeon-vega-frontier-edition-16gb,review-33968-6.html

>>61951283
>Vega FE is competitive with a $6000 Quadro
Professioal market is always about software support and personal troubleshooting. Good luck with amd.

>>61951336
>Shill tries FUD!
>It's not very effective ..

>>61951385
>/v/tard uses pokeman meme
>shows he'd never had to deal with firepro

>>61951283
>Vega FE is competitive with a $6000 Quadro in workstation tasks.
Speaking of which, is V64 close to VFE in workstation tasks?

>>61947486
>>61947537
Prim shaders are already working

>>61951507
>>61951336
Where are the proofs? I want the proofs.

>>61950087
>deterring miners
>release driver with mining performance boost

>>61951636
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/amd-radeon-rx-vega-64-8-gb.235978/page-9#post-3711339

>>61951661
fuck that little faggot, germans said it's inactive. maybe DSBR is making these problems since AMD put it's first implementation in the drivers

>>61951661
Primitive discard is not the same thing as primitive shaders. Computerbase.de was told by AMD that primitive shaders were not yet enabled in drivers, and it is one of the key uarch features aimed at overcoming GCN's 4 triangles per clock limitation.

>>61951854
>s-surely when they fix whatever is broken Vega will beat the 1080 Ti at 50W power consumption!!

>>61951860
>Primitive discard
Except primitive disciard is the DSBR which is supposed to be the Kepler -> Maxwell improvement every fanboy/shill expected to be the case with Vega over Fiji too.

>>61951874
How would you see benefits from DSBR if the front of the pipeline is still choking on triangles? You'd have to get both primitive shaders and primitive discard working to overcome the 4 triangles per clock limitation to be able to see the benefits from DSBR later in the rendering pipeline.

>>61951925
How long are you going to be this delusional for? Are you going to keep waiting until Navi is released expecting Vega to not be a complete and utter disaster?

I feel so bad for you shills that can't just get your heads out of the brand wars bullshit and buy the superior product in the market.

>>61937651
>There are countries where Vega wasn’t even available at launch
>where it WASN'T available
Silly anon... that's a good thing.

>>61951945
This board has gone completely down the loo since polaris hype started and all the shitheads from /r/amd migrated here.

>>61951945
>Wanting to understand how a GPU arch works makes you a shill
*contemplates*

>>61952017
/r/amd mods are from AMD, I think it's the same shit for /g/ posters. Nvidia staffs dont give a shit of the social media control

>>61948699
How high, 1200?

all the combos have weird parts instead of nice combo like 1600x and good Asus or Asrock mobo.

>>61952017
>>61952915
r/amd is basically AMD employees and people that bought shares in 2015 speculating. The problem is that their board mentality is leaking to other places, including /g/

>>61951441
Not entirely from what I've seen. As far as I understand it, VFE has access to both workstation and gaming drivers (or will, once both update streams are slightly less fucked up), while VRX will only get gaming drivers.

I saw some testing in Creo/Solidworks/3ds Max that put V64 well below where VFE performs, which seems to indicate this is the case, but I will have to check and confirm that later.

NGG is not yet enabled.
Just wait for NGG.
FineWine.

>>61953462
>wait a year for vega
>wait another year for drivers
>by then miners will have burnt out all the used gpu's so no one can can even buy any

>>61953635
FineWine(tm) is real. Faith will be rewarded.

>Assign an arbitrary low MSRP/RRP, sell a small first batch at that reduced price and then sell the card in a "package" with something else at the originally intended price. Reviews come out judging the card at the MSRP levels and not their real levels. In the meantime produce a driver that increases mining perf to entice miners to buy the cards even at the higher levels.

AMD are the good guys, amdbros.

>>61953462
>>61953648
Hitting a hard launch with your driver's half finished isn't FineWine. RTG literally needs to double the size of their driver department.

>>61953685
Drivers are never fixed.
Getting the hardware out makes all sorts of sense. Drivers can always be written latter.

so is this thing worth getting or not? what are my options for a sub-$300 card?

>>61949065
I think if you're playing at 1440p, the 56 is a great investment. It's what I'm aiming for, if the euro prices don't end up too inflated.

But if you can stand to wait and play at lower settings, do wait a year. Second gen Vega should fix the glaring issues.

File: 1502200273945.jpg (78KB, 583x580px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 583x580px

>>61954363
>Sub-$300 card
Oh you poor soul.

>>61954492
I'm actually kind of annoyed because my mother bought herself an RX480 right before they exploded in price/became unavailable. But I can't just take my poor mother's video card, she needs it for Facebook.

>>61954492
1060 prices have actually somewhat stabilized. 1070 prices are still fucked.

>>61954521
buy her a rx 550 and change it without her knowing you idiot

>>61954551
I'm moving soon, won't have the opportunity.

>>61954661
well than wait™

File: 5895ffddcba9841eabab60ba.png (1MB, 2000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2000x2000px

DELED THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>>61953710
>fixed
You probably meant finished.

File: 1502161343059.jpg (15KB, 288x512px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 288x512px

is there any good news in here? not interested in the amd hate circle jerk since ya know, they're kinda the only hope for intel/nvidia not turning into the comcast of pc hardware.

>>61955887
There is probably only one piece of good news at the moment: IF you can get Vega 56 for its supposed MSRP of $399 when it launches on the 28th, it's clearly the superior choice to an AIB 1070, especially if you are comfortable undervolting and overclocking to get the most out of the card.

I would hold off on considering Vega 64 vs. a 1080 until there is an official statement from AMD on whether more cards will become available as stand alones at $499, and wait to see if drivers can unfuck Vega 64's performance a little in the near future.

>>61951945
>Loses an argument
>"m-m-muh shILLS!!!!!!!!!!"
Kill yourself you insufferable fanboy.

>>61956401
t. redteam+

>>61937651
Raja is the pajeet Todd Howard. Don't believe his lies.

>>61955988
is this the AIB vega launch or reference?

>>61956448
>AMD teamed up with Bethesda
really activated my almonds

>>61956467
Reference. Last I heard AIB cards should be in September.

File: NEW GAME!! 03 - 00.10.18.jpg (138KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1280x720px

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202300&cm_re=vega_64-_-14-202-300-_-Product

>$689.99
>$689.99
>$689.99

>>61948285
The OUYA sold out at launch too, it doesn't mean shit.

>>61956977
>Free Wolfenstein II: The New Colossus and Prey, limited offer
what a bargain

>>61952919
1300-1400 I forget where in that range it was stable for everything but he pushed 1375 and could get most things to run.

Like I said, he had golden silicon for this chip in every sense of the word.

>>61951050
yep it's always this same shill that pretends the SSG isn't a niche within a niche

>>61957912
>Posting evidence is shilling, however evidence free shitposts aren't shilling
*contemplates*

>>61948251
Only an absolute stillborn would say the 390x/290x were shit.

>>61937651
>implying msrp is worth jack shit
Literally supply and demand 101. Miners fuck up the prices.

File: 1503019246630_r.jpg (123KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 1080x1920px

>>61956448
>Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies

>>61958079
How many cards will it sell?

>>61958364
Nop, this is the AMD price, not the (((happy marchand)))

>>61958391
Fucking kek

>>61958391
>buy my gpus

>YFW you didn't fall for the Vega meme

>>61938667

If you watch videos in a browser, you're a moron by default. Your argument only works for idiots who don't know anything about computers, and their opinions don't count.

File: amdrone.png (524KB, 920x900px) Image search: [Google]

524KB, 920x900px

>>61962091
>you're using vega wrong

>>61962112

What I said has nothing to do with the GPU manufacturers. The argument presented stands even for APUs.
Not that that could fit your worldview, shill

>>61961488
I fell for the Fury X meme, there's no way I was going to let Vega take from my wallet before I could see the true performance.
Glad I waited to see the results.

>>61962130
Your average laptop user doesn't run arch and watch vidoes in memepv, retard. He wants things to just werk, but fat amdrone basement dweller won't understand it.

>>61943560
1080ti all the way a stock Vega is barely any better than ur fury x and has the same stupid issues

In my country a imported Newegg 1080ti is 1000 aud but a Vega 64 is 700-900 so it doesn't make sense just get a Nvidia card.

T. 390x owner

>>61961424
One of the advantages of having a fully dynamic GPU architecture is... all of this just works.

There are over 200 hand crafted ALUs!

>>61954492
in pain...in need

>>61937651

Regarding the pricing they did the same kind of trickery jew bullshit with Polaris with those ultra cheap RX480 4GB which were basically fake news for quite a bit of time.

File: 1478937624712.png (63KB, 691x815px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 691x815px

>>61962366
for fuck sake, at least stop lying about performance
problem is slow, convoluted launch, hardware is fine

>>61955988

Personally I'ld be happy to get a 1070 if the prices drop thank to Vega 56 competition. It is a bit slower but the 1070 is far less power hungry and that's something to consider when you pay bills especially if you plan on keeping the card for three to four years.

File: asdfasd.jpg (89KB, 1200x1143px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 1200x1143px

>>61937651
>the company responsible for threadraper also has its brand on this

I hope to god this first release is just a stepping stone to new version that's on par with nvidia's new cards for cheaper

Also AMD better WORSHIP THE GROUND THE MINERS STAND ON because without them there would be a healthy second hand market of very affordable geforce 10 series cards and vega would have flopped with the force of a thousand suns

>>61963198
so were 1070 for $400, you couldn't get one cheaper than $500 for several months

I don't know if it's summer or what, this happens every GPU launch and it's news for some reason
3xx series had a retarded launch as well

>>61963274
oh how will I live without those $7 per 5 years in power consumption difference, will go begging, no doubt

>>61963285

They still emphasized massively on the price point during their whole marketing campaign but when the release came the cards where nowhere to be found so much the few people who actually got a RX480 4GB were actually 8GB with a different bios and a new sticker on the box.

File: power_average.png (35KB, 500x850px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 500x850px

>>61963310

>7$ per 5 years

More like an extra 15USD a year compared to a GTX 1070 with 4.5h average gameplay a day not even accounting that my computer is on twice longer and more everyday. In my country at least with an average 0.15€ kwh ...

Not negligible especially if you consider the heat and noise level. The GTX1070 still has plenty for itself, if they drop the price a little.

>>61963476

Actually I messed up, I took the GTX1080 line...

So the actual difference is 84 watts.

Definitely not negligible, that's 20 extra bucks a year...

>>61963507
aib 1070 is 180w
only reference keep it around 150.

also nvidiabutterup sure keeps those numbers favorable, reference with tom's

>>61963739
So what's your point? Reference cards compared with reference cards.

>>61945970
Ok, I have a Ryzen 1700

>>61963789
my point is $20 per year is nothing
i'd be high arms as you about TDP if it was even per six months, but per year is nothing

>>61963310

If you think like this at every turn, you quickly lose hundreds, if not thousands of dollars a year. These small extra things accumulate rather quickly.
AMD really fucked us on this front, especially considering how efficient Polaris and Ryzen are.

>>61963804

I can play complete UHD Blurays that are HEVC encoded and use less than 2% on my 1700 without using GPU hw decoding (which I could do on my RX480).
If you're struggling to play a video, get a better video player (mpv, vlc or mpc-hc). Either way, the problem is most definitely sitting in front of the screen in your case.

>>61937651
bump

>>61964063
wat

>>61963804
I have a 1700 stock with a crappy bios, for 2 weeks I ran it on a 4770 512mb gpu with no drivers installed because I was waiting on my new gpu and didn't want to deal with removing drivers on a fresh install.

The cpu alone is able to play 8k 30fps, 60 was to much for our internet to handle and me to test as it throws up frame skips for lagging behind downloading the video

so either stop lying about your hardware, or fuck off

>>61964455
1600x here, plays 8k 60 fps
no hitches besides internet

>>61958199
but they were anon, I am sorry.
AMD's last good gen was the 7 or 6 series.