AMD Vega GPU plays DOOM at 4K Ultra at over 60FPS

[WYP]

An AMD Vega GPU has been shown running DOOM at 4K Ultra settings with framerates of over 60FPS. The GPU was also shown to have 8GB of VRAM.



Read more on AMD's Vega Demo.

 

[The_Governour]

Well amd is a bit like Ubisoft, over hype their products and then dont live up to their hype.

I wish that its a good card for all of us, and if its priced the same or less (better for AMD if its less...) than a 1070 then it might be winner......

Doom with Vulkan is one of the few games that AMD can dominate. So rest of the games then this card WONT be as good as a 1080.

My 2 cents...

 

[AngryGoldfish]

OK, so 1080 performance in DX12 and Vulkan means 1070 performance in DX11. Now we wait until we see the price.

 

[NeverBackDown]

Might not even be the top end card. Who knows

 

[AngryGoldfish]

Might not even be the top end card. Who knows

I really hope so.

I never understood the rumour that Vega would replace Polaris. Vega only has two known cores: 10 and 11. Say this new GPU is Vega 10, that makes 11 the replacement for Polaris, a midrange product. That means Vega's top card is only as powerful as a 1080 in DX12 (and thus 1070 in DX11). If that's the sum of Vega in the high-end section, that would be very disappointing considering how a 1080 is not quite enough for 1440p any more. While I was disappointed by the Fury X, at least it could match a 980ti in some DX11 benchmarks and DX12 games.

I still reckon Vega 11 is going to be more powerful than Vega 10 and Polaris is going to stay as AMD's midrange segment.

 

[NeverBackDown]

We don't know how the naming scheme will work.
If 10 is better, it replaces Fury. If 11 is better it replaces Fury.
Whatever is the less powerful is filling in the 490 gap assuming the dual GPU is called X2.
Polaris is probably getting a refresh in the form of a more mature process.

All I know, is that the top end Vega will have 16GB of HBM2. I was right about a lot of things with Pascal and Fury, so my hunch again I hope is right.

 

[AngryGoldfish]

We don't know how the naming scheme will work.
If 10 is better, it replaces Fury. If 11 is better it replaces Fury.
Whatever is the less powerful is filling in the 490 gap assuming the dual GPU is called X2.
Polaris is probably getting a refresh in the form of a more mature process.

All I know, is that the top end Vega will have 16GB of HBM2. I was right about a lot of things with Pascal and Fury, so my hunch again I hope is right.

I say Vega 10 for one thing and Vega 11 for another when really they can be interchangeable. The point is, Vega 11 (or 10) can't be a replacement for Polaris realistically if we want truly flagship GPU's. It doesn't make sense to do that. What you said makes far more sense.

 

[NeverBackDown]

It could replace it. But seeing as it would be less than a year since Polaris, financially it wouldn't make sense and AMD need to get as much money per investment as possible to stay afloat

 

[AlienALX]

Guys this card will be about as good as a 1070. TBH I think it's a pretty poor show for AMD to be using Doom in Vulkan to show off a card. IMO it is absolutely and utterly meaningless as there is currently one game in Vulkan that works better on AMD.

They pulled the same crap with the RX 480 too, showing it in Crossfire in Ashes. Not cool tbh.

I love AMD I really do but marketing just makes me sick to my stomach. It shows a dirty side of every company.

Rumour mill has been 1070, that's it. And some of the rumours are true, so go figure.

 

[looz]

Well, my only hope is that GTX 10-series' pricing gets sliced to a more reasonable level. Then 1080Ti which AMD can't touch can take the crown and a 800€+ price tag.

 

[Dicehunter]

AMD always do better in DX12 and Vulkan for their price points, they should have showed a DX11 title, Watch Dogs 2 for example or the new Dishonored.

I reckon it will be just about 1080 performance.

For reference this is a 1080 running DOOM at 4K Ultra settings with max AA, Perf stats in the upper right -

 

[Greenback]

Well if it's 1070 or 1080 performance then expect close to those prices for it, unless they get in a price war with nvidia I can't see AMD making them dirt cheap maybe £30-£50 cheaper

 

[The_Governour]

They better make a price war if its in normal games (not vulkan or AMD titles) like a 1070. Then they should place it in a price point that is less OR as the least expensive 1070.

Look what happened to the fury x.... it was priced as a 980ti - came out WAY too late and did NOT live up to the 980ti Standards.

Go AMD for price war!!

 

[AlienALX]

Well if it's 1070 or 1080 performance then expect close to those prices for it, unless they get in a price war with nvidia I can't see AMD making them dirt cheap maybe £30-£50 cheaper

Yup. They're not in the game of giving things away.. That said it will need to be cheaper than Nvidia if they don't want another Fury flop on their hands. Also if this does have HBM then you may find it actually costs the same as the Nvidia card it gets closest to.

As for DX 12 Dice? tbh the only game that has impressed me on AMD in DX12 is Hitman, and that's because they were so close to the dev. The rest? meh, couple of frames in it.

What would impress me more is them showing me that the card can pee on Nvidia's patch.

 

[AngryGoldfish]

I read this on a YouTube channel's report on the new Doom benchmark run:

"Not only is the card 10 percent faster than the GTX 1080, but Vega is running without its proper graphics drivers, instead relying on the fury drivers to power it, and with a debugger layer slowing things doom even further."

With drivers, further clock speed increases, and without this debugging layer (I don't know what this is or its point), Vega could be more powerful than a 1080 in the same way the Fury was slightly more powerful than the 980.

 

[AlienALX]

I read this on a YouTube channel's report on the new Doom benchmark run:

"Not only is the card 10 percent faster than the GTX 1080, but Vega is running without its proper graphics drivers, instead relying on the fury drivers to power it, and with a debugger layer slowing things doom even further."

With drivers, further clock speed increases, and without this debugging layer (I don't know what this is or its point), Vega could be more powerful than a 1080 in the same way the Fury was slightly more powerful than the 980.

Only one problem, 980ti.

 

[AngryGoldfish]

Only one problem, 980ti.

And you mean the 1080ti? Well, yeah, but I still think there is going to be a bigger GPU with 16GB of HBM that competes at the top-end.

 

[The_Governour]

All comes down to price. If its equal to the 1080 in this case. Or equal to the 1070. Price, and AMD better be very good there in order to compete.

I have had Nvidia so long now but I would throw my money on AMD if the 490 is at a good price.

 

[AlienALX]

And you mean the 1080ti? Well, yeah, but I still think there is going to be a bigger GPU with 16GB of HBM that competes at the top-end.

No, I meant 980ti. You said "In the same way the Fury was slightly more powerful than the 980" and I said "Only one problem, the 980ti".

Which cost the same as a Fury, had more vram etc etc.

And if this card is as fast as a 1070 or 1080 Nvidia will simply launch a 1080ti, which they are probably doing as we type this.

So AMD end up behind. Again.

 

[AngryGoldfish]

No, I meant 980ti. You said "In the same way the Fury was slightly more powerful than the 980" and I said "Only one problem, the 980ti".

Which cost the same as a Fury, had more vram etc etc.

And if this card is as fast as a 1070 or 1080 Nvidia will simply launch a 1080ti, which they are probably doing as we type this.

So AMD end up behind. Again.

No, I'm talking about the Fury non-X. The Fury Strix was around €600 when I bought mine. The 980ti Strix was around €750. The Fury X launched with a price of $650, the same as the 980ti reference. That was the problem. But the non-reference designs were more like $700-750 while the Fury X theoretically remained $650. Of course, the 980ti reference was already faster than a Fury X. A Gigabyte G1 Gaming at 1450/8000Mhz was miles ahead of even a Fury X overclocked.

I don't mind AMD being behind as long as they release a GPU I like at a price point I like. I don't expect biggest Vega to topple the 1080ti, which is probably going to be close to Titan XP. But if it's the same price as a 1080ti, then we have a problem and a repeat of the Fury X. As people have already said, it's all about pricing. Which I'm concerned about because I highly doubt Vega was cheap to manufacturer, HBM2 is not going to be cheap, and they developed Zen and Polaris at the same time.