AYYMD IS FINISHED & BANKRUPT AYYMDPOORFAGS CONFIRMED

>>385808702
both charts imply that vega is almost as fast as titan x pascal?

>>385808702
>top chart: FuryX 41fps @4k
>bottom chart: FuryX 49fps @4k
So that would likely put Vega64 around 64-65fps on the bottom chart, yes? Yet with 470 outperforming 1060 6GB and FuryX outperforming 1070, this is clearly a best-case scenario for AMD, so... yeah. Vega arrives very late and has nothing to show for it. What a shame.

Vega 56 might be a decent buy though. Assuming it sucks at mining and ethfags leave it alone, at any rate.

>>385808702
Wrong board kiddo
>>>/g/

>>385810017
The irony is that Nvidia gpus get even faster in dx11 with no quality loss. Give every Nvidia gpu there a 5-10 fps boost

Vega will barely outperform a 1080 for the same money bottom line. Amd pulled through with Ryzen but vega is easily the biggest disappointment they've ever delivered

>>385809394
RX Vega only gets 55fps in 4k.
Thats roughly the same as one single 1080.

It doesnt own the 1080Ti or Titan X

real talk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osSMJRyxG0k

File: 1471616664342.png (91KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 653x726px

>>385808702
NO NO NO! STOP

AMD is secretly keeping performance hidden from the press. When the new drivers are released this will be 50% faster and 50% more power efficient.

Mark my words!

>>385810195
the math, can you do it?

>>385810195
it doesnt cost as much as a titan or a 1080ti

AMD cant even compete anymore.

Thats pretty sad

File: 1495072507571.png (49KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 653x726px

>Wait a year and a half for a 1080 with double the power draw for $20 discount

>>385810583
it does when you count the power consumption.

File: dirt_rally-amd_official-vs-mesa.png (31KB, 600x395px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 600x395px

>>385808702
>AMD Official Drivers

Everyone knows they're shit. We won't see what these cards are really capable of till the open source driver devs get them.

>>385810318
Get with the times, gramps. Amd should be represented by a pink, bleeding and screaming wojack

File: 248_090116.jpg (25KB, 298x243px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 298x243px

>>385808702

why should I care about 4k when my monitor is 1080p?

>>385810195
and the 1080 ti and titan x also cost way more. i'm pretty sure most people are at least happy because there's a 1080 equivalent for amd now.
can't wait to use it on my 1440p/144hz freesync monitor, also the AIB versions with higher OC potential are going to be sick.

>>385810738
>he has expensive electricity from coal
Just buy some LED bulbs to replace your incandescent and CFL lights.
You'll more than offset the cost.

>>385810843
quadruple the power then if you have 120 hz. 4k is nice if you can afford it, but right now its a luxury resolution.

File: kike.png (108KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 900x900px

Can't wait for amd to tank and they get cheap as fuck.

>>385810960
But I could do the same thing and buy a 1080, saves me even more!
Hmm.. really making me think here

>>385810843
If you're still stuck with a low res 1080p display then you aren't in the market for a high end video card.

>>385810843
>2017
>still playing in 1080p

this is like those people that still own tvs with the tube in the back LUL

>>385808702
thanks, I'll still keep using a 380

>>385808702
Say it with me:
>AMDfags were waiting 15 months for this

>>385811274
mind you, these are also ayymd numbers. no relatively unbiased reviewers have gotten their hands on it yet.

this is going to be such a shitshow, I wonder how the drones will defend this one. overhyped expectations probably.

File: radeonsi_improvements.jpg (143KB, 1416x804px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 1416x804px

>>385810992
They won't tank, their cards suck on Windows where you're stuck with their official drivers, but they're awesome on Linux where there are open drivers from third party developers (though AMD did hire some of them to just keep doing what they were doing).

Its put AMD in a weird place where they want to talk up the awesome performance on Linux, but they don't want to compare it to their own drivers.
So they're left comparing it to old versions.

>>385811362
They're already latching on FP16 to save them.
In the grand total of 2 games that will support it.

>>385811365
It's easy to post 122% gains when you previously ran like total shit.

>Hype Vega as the Volta killer
>Can't even beat Pascal
AMD: Another Massive Disappointment

File: 4maAVRQTt9Q_fpvyhL9Li_HiHGnLVdi2U31C7hAD-Jo[1].jpg (125KB, 1024x702px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 1024x702px

Remember this?

>>385811362
>>385811453
>>385811529
i'm willing to bet you're 1080 TI coattail riders who don't even own one. likely upset because you paid full price for a 1080/1070 and can't afford a gsync monitor.

File: amd nukes nvidia.jpg (885KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

885KB, 1920x1080px

ITS NOT FAIR VEGA WAS MEANT TO SAVE US FROM THE JEWS NOT LEAVE US IN DARKNESS

>>385811674
t. assblasted AMDfag

These number are pretty in line with all the info we have right now. They are aiming to compete directly with gtx 1080, which is slightly disappointing but it's far from them being FINISHED.
Also buttcoinfags are going to be buying the shit out of these

>AMD, yesteryears performance at twice the temperature!

>>385811717
everything's fine on our end you poorfag without an adaptive sync monitor, keep riding that coattail. :^)
>>385810916

>>385811742
why, when it's almost twice the power draw? this is also optimal performance, and it barely matches the 1080 blower edition. in reality it'll be much fucking worse.

File: rx580-deux_ex_md-opengl-amd_official-vs-mesa.png (51KB, 602x488px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 602x488px

>>385811507
That may be, but you're ignoring the fact that the open drivers went from not really supporting the game at all to being 50% faster than AMD's own efforts.
Its still pretty common for there to be a new patch with big new performance improvements.

>>385808702
>$400 gpu
>same performance as $600 gpu
I don't understand.

>Getting payed soon
>Thinking of getting an i7-7700k
I-Is it a good idea bro's?

File: boagjrnyxqvy.png (153KB, 1072x639px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 1072x639px

here is your best CPUs for the money this month ;)

cya next month lads - kikes hardware

File: 20527543_10154557818272172_1251795009_n.jpg (9KB, 188x268px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 188x268px

>>385811812
>>385811809
>>385811794
>>385811749
>>385811742
>>385811717
>>385811715
>>385811674
>>385811637
>>385811598
>>385811529
>>385811507
>>385811453
>>385811365
>>385811362
>>385811343
>>385811274
>>385811104
>>385811020
>>385811003
>>385810992
JUST GET A PLAYSTATION 4 GUYS !! WE CAN UPSCALE 4K!!!

4.... 4 THE PLAYERS!!!

>>385811507
>buy 400$ card to play old games
youre not too bright

>>385811865
Wait for i7-8700K 6 cores 12 threads

>>385811104

I'd rather get a 144hz monitor than a 2k/4k one.

>>385811875
>i3
>if you aren't poor as shit give us $200 alright

>>385811809
>180 watts vs 280 watts
>twice

File: mad_max-vulkan-mesa-radeonsi_vs_radv.png (45KB, 599x539px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 599x539px

>>385811809
AMD's Windows drivers are piss poor for gaming performance.
The Linux drivers on the other hand are awesome, so all the extra power that's wasted on Windows is put to good use for Linux centric compute tasks like mining.
Those drivers are quickly getting to the point where they're definitively better for gaming as well.

OpenGL and D3D9 are already faster than on Windows with the official driver.
The open source RadV Vulkan driver, originally started by a couple of guys outside of AMD in their spare time is rapidly catching up.

They're already frequently much faster than the OpenGL drivers as seen in this benchmark of the Linux exclusive Vulkan version of Mad Max.

File: based indian AMD man.jpg (96KB, 960x655px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 960x655px

buy AMD graphics and computer processors please

do not fall for the intel/nvidia jew

File: 1481367484091.jpg (18KB, 479x479px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 479x479px

>>385812030
>anything x99
F

>>385812130
ayymd numbers, yes. they've never fluffed up their numbers before, i'm sure there wont be a problem this time.

>>385808702
Which card should I get for 1440p/144Hz gayman?

>>385811865
Don't know why you'd buy this over a R5 1600 these days, unless you play CS at 1080p and really need 300fps

>>385812278
In low res / high framerate gameplay you're more likely to hit the single thread CPU bottleneck than the GPU bottleneck.

>>385812278

you won't be able to get much fps over 60 in that res with anything less than a 1080ti

>>385811104
I own a 2560x1440 monitor and still don't consider it necessary. 1080p is just fine for most people's needs/GPUs, stop being a huge faggot.

>>385812543
We're in a thread talking about high end GPUs though. If you're still playing in 1080p then you're not really looking at a GPU over $200 (at least when the prices are normal)

>>385812380
I'm looking to get the Ryzen 5 1600 since that seems to perform pretty fucking good in games. Not worth getting the 1700 since it performs identical to the 1600 in gaming.
>>385812464
Sheet. I think I might be better off going 1080p/144 Hz in that case.

File: 1393487947658.jpg (116KB, 640x466px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 640x466px

>>385811104
I have a 2560x1080 screen and I'm happy

File: 1497412663077.jpg (312KB, 648x615px) Image search: [Google]

312KB, 648x615px

>>385811876

SHUT UP U NIGGER


GET A SWITCH IS MUCH BETTER HAS BETTER GRAPHIC NINTENDO ALWAYS WIN BABY!

>>385812723
RIght, games have only really started to use over 4 threads, games that require 16 threads are a ways off.
The 6 core / 12 thread Ryzen parts are a good choice for the foreseeable future.
Much better than a chip limited to 4 threads.

>>385812464
>>385812723
>you won't be able to get much fps over 60 in that res with anything less than a 1080ti
This isn't true for most games. I run a 980ti with an R7 1700 at 3.6ghz and I get 90-100fps in BF1 1440p ultra. Same deal with R6 Siege. PUBG I can get 50-60 on ultra but I turn stuff down so I can get 100+ all the time.

>>385810272
>thread is about redvgreen
>anon posts about redvblue
What did he mean by this?

File: 21109345540_3a95d9d3c0_k.jpg (194KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 1600x900px

>>385808702
>Implying 120 fps is ever enough.

If you aren't rocking more than 250 fps in all occasions to be sure that, whatever happens, your framerate never falls beneath your monitors refresh rate of 144 hz (you fucking pleb), then you should kys.

File: 1497714833206.jpg (34KB, 643x599px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 643x599px

>tfw R7 1700 and a GTX 1080

Amazing for gaming and amazing for MAYA, literally the best of both worlds. 4 core Intel cucks will never know this feeling

>>385813089

not all AAA games have stellar optimization, even in Witcher 3 it's hard to get over 70 fps in 1440p with a GTX 1070. 1080p 144hz is a better upgrade right now as it offers the best result for high end cards.

>>385813089
So a 1070/1080 or Vega card will suffice?

>>385812190
Are you stupid or retarded?

8700K is LGA 1151

>>385813534
>not all AAA games have stellar optimization
Seriously though, what is up with NVIDIA sponsored games and shit optimization?

>>385813534
Witcher 3's big problem is they never delivered the promised Vulkan version.

>>385813650
>Man these graphics are too good for my graphics card, and the AMD cards perform terribly on this game because of the Nvidia graphics technology, so I guess I'll go out and get myself a new Nvida GPU.

>the most expensive card from the company i prefer is better than the most expensive card from the company you prefer
>none of us own any of the two cards but the company i prefer is obviously better than the company you prefer therefore making my mid range card better than your mid range card

>>385813650
>>385813795

The thing is, high end cards nowadays find themselves in a very weird niche, since buying them to max out 1080p gaming is a waste and the upgrade to 2k/4k games is still expensive.

>>385811637
>buying Bulldozer
>ever

>>385813927
>Unironically defending the horrible optimization in Dishonored 2, Deus Ex MK, Just Cause 3, Fallout 4, and even Frostbite game ME Andromeda, never mind the last few Asscreed games.
Most of these still aren't fixed.

>>385814225
I wasn't defending it, I was speaking with the mindset that they want from their consumers

>have Freesync monitor and GTX 1080
>didn't buy a Gsync one because too expensive
>Vega would be at best a sidegrade
Welp.

>>385814225
Deus Ex was mostly AMD, they still advertise it with FX CPU's even though FX CPU's can't run the game very well.

>>385814268
When I bought my current AMD card it was a sidegrade/slight downgrade from my Nvidia card.
Three months later it was about the same most of the time and slightly faster in a few games.
Six months later it was definitively faster in every game.
Two years later its still faster than Nvidia's current card in that same market.

>>385814262
Didn't quite catch that. Cheers for clearing that up.

>>385814367
It will be interesting to see how the rumored Vulkan upgrade performs when its released.

>>385814562
This.
My 290 is still rocking everything maxed out at 1080p and has only seen performance improvements over the years.

File: 1455132349557.jpg (90KB, 720x679px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 720x679px

>mfw 4gb RX480

so good for 1080p

>>385813534
I think 70fps is plenty for a game like Witcher 3 though. Also if you only have the one monitor, 1440p will have a far superior desktop experience.
>>385813540
Yes one of those would be fine, but keep in mind they probably won't be able to hit 144fps consistently in the latest titles where as a 1080 ti probably could most of the time. All comes down to what is more important to you really.

>>385808702
How the fuck is Titan X worse than 1080ti?

>>385815016
I wouldn't mind dropping some ultra settings down to high since the difference becomes negligible at that point.

>>385812038
>not having a 1440p 144hz ips monitor with gsync

>>385812543
desu 240p is fine for most peoples needs

Hmm.. is the 7xxx generation (the 7970 specifically) the last time AMD truly competed for the high-end gaming market? It doesn't seem all that long ago (5 years) yet everyone seems to be fine with AMDs current state.

>>385815020
Same reason AMD cards aren't faster.
Optimized for compute over gaming.

the 56 is gonna be worth it

>>385815376
That's because AMD have the best mid-range cards for the average PC-gamer. NVIDIA holds the enthusiast high-end market at the moment.
That might change if AMD manages to squeeze out more performance out of their cards with better drivers and when more info starts to leak from the Vega cards and we start seeing more benchmarks.
Their Ryzen series is also a success that they definitely needed after the terrible FX-series.

>>385815376
The Fury line was competitive against Nvidia's high end at the time.
It still performs at somewhere between the 1070 and the 1080.
Depending on the game its sometimes faster than the 1080.

AMD's benchmarks with their own driver undersell their hardware.

>>385815020
The Titan X is a workstation card, not a gayman card. It's optimized for tasks outside of gaming.

>>385808702
you dirty retard have fun with Intel's unfair prices when AMD has something more powerful for literally 100$ cheaper. but know you're a poorfag if you make smarter decisions

>>385815778
>>385813164

>>385808702
Most gamers are midend where AMD thrives.

Idiot.

>>385815895
oh shit my bad i thought he was an Intel retard

>>385815014
xfx480 here senpai. Its great to able to play anything l want in 1080 without worrying about fps drops or meme resolutions.

>>385815713
Why would you go on the internet and tell lies? This is a DX12 game so AMD has the advantage, and it's below the 1070. Prey is the same and that's an AMD sponsored game, the Fury X is slightly less powerful than the 1070 and 980Ti.
>The Fury line was competitive against Nvidia's high end at the time.
It underperformed at the time because of the same reason AMD's high end cards always fail, lack of drivers. Sure the Fury X can compete with the 980Ti now but it's launch was so underwhelming no one bought one.

>>385815778
>>385810272
>AMDfags are so zealous to defend AMD they can't even tell if the thread is about GPU's or CPU's

File: gow4.png (41KB, 682x909px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 682x909px

>>385816287
Whoops forgot pic.

>>385816484
>1080p
lul

>>385816396
well yeah when its something thats better and cheaper and some dudes like "HAHA XD CANT WAIT TO PAY MORE BYE BYE POOR FAGS" people want to tell him how stupid he is but ill take fault for saying its Intel cause i didn't read or google it. but any who, how do these two compare in the grand scheme? Aren't amd usually still the same as its competitors but cheaper?

>>385816484
Yeah the optimization in Gears 4 was orgasmic.

File: gow2160.png (40KB, 682x946px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 682x946px

>>385816527
Fury X gets a boost from 4k probably from HBMeme, but it's still no where near the 1080. I'm guessing that AMD's drivers still have more driver overhead than Nvidia's, so in a GPU-bound scenario like 4k AMD GPU's can reveal their full power level. In more CPU-bound scenarios like 720p or 1080p their GPU's underperform due to lack of driver optimization. This is why Nvidia GPU's went best with FX CPU's, Nvidia's drivers play nicer with weaker CPU's than AMD's do.

>>385810195
>It doesnt own the 1080Ti or Titan X
It's almost like paying more gets you a more powerful GPU. Funny that.

File: 1496098972845.png (316KB, 882x758px) Image search: [Google]

316KB, 882x758px

>>385815778

>>385816791
There aren't any GPU's with good price to performance because the market is fucked due to miners. AMD GPU's are unobtainable unless you seel a kidney and Nvidia GPU's are overinflated because they're the only ones you can buy. the only GPU's you can buy right now are the low end stuff like the GTX 1050 or Rx 550/560, or high end stuff like the GTX 1080/1080Ti. Everything in between is fucked.

>>385817204
thanks for avoiding the post right after you smelly man

see >>385816791

File: 2344234234224.jpg (15KB, 324x291px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 324x291px

>>385816994
>can't beat the 1070 at 4k

Feels good to be green team.

>>385816287
>It underperformed at the time because of the same reason AMD's high end cards always fail, lack of drivers.
This is absolutely true, on Windows.

The best thing AMD has going for them right now are the open source drivers available on other platforms that are actually capable of competing against Nvidia.

>>385817346
Yeah, in Dx12. Which is supposedly were AMD performs best, always.

I had hoped Vega would be amazing or something so that I didn't have to stay subservient to the green jew
Fucking gsync why are you so expensive

File: 1426251544369.png (220KB, 400x384px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 400x384px

>>385817287
ya one of my friends told me to chill on buying any cpu/gpu's unless its something i need really bad (i have a shit pc) and i wanna add new parts and he said "Just stick to amd its cheaper and the market is very inflated so high end stuff will kill you"

File: 1469920124088.jpg (57KB, 560x560px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 560x560px

>mfw still using an overclocked i5 2500k and 4GB Sapphire R9 290X

I've been very satisfied with the card over the years for sure

File: Depardieu Ruski.jpg (32KB, 460x276px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 460x276px

>>385817534
>tfw have 290
>play hitman in DX11
>30-45 fps on mediium settings
>meh.jpg

>Start it up in DX12
>130fps
>wut.jpg
>max out vidya settings
>70-90fps constantly
>tfw

>>385817538
Part of it an artificial markup for Gsync but most Gsync monitors also have a feature called ULMB, which uses backlight strobing to give CRT-like visuals. There are a few non-Gsync monitors that do this but they're also expensive.

File: 1420841105228.gif (3MB, 240x234px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 240x234px

>>385808702
>$300
>for 1080 performance
>that will improve as its common knowledge vega is shipping before its full feature drivers are finalized, as fucking always with delAyMD.

seems like a good deal to me
but i am smart and sold a launch 480 for $350

>>385819279
b-but it's 499 MSRP? where did the 200 dollarydoos go, pajeet?

>>385814562
Keep holding it, maybe in another year it'll be able to make you millions of dollars in bitcoins, and the year after that it will give you the ability to fly and cure cancer and finally find a woman willing to put her mouth on your cheese-encrusted acorn you call a dick

>>385819279
Sorry, can you leave? I don't like the smell of curry powder and you people bring it with you wherever you go.

>>385819279
It wont age as well as you think, also it is nearly double the power consumption. So it is cheaper for the performance, but that money goes somewhere in most cases. Still a good deal, that you'll pay for in electricity for the coming years.

>>385819690
both the 1080 and vega 64 are 499 MSRP. I really don't get this ''cheaper for performance'' meme. Let's not even begin mentioning low AMD availability outside of the US.