AMD Vega presentation leaks

WYP

News Guru
Slides for AMD's Vega presentation have been leaked online, promising some huge architectural improvements including enhanced clock speeds and more performance per clock than previous GPUs.



Read more on AMD's Vega GPU architecture.
 
Improved clock speeds.. Over what? Fury X? that's not hard. I dunno man, too much of it seems to rattle on about HBM2 and I'm still not convinced we need it.
 
Improved clock speeds.. Over what? Fury X? that's not hard. I dunno man, too much of it seems to rattle on about HBM2 and I'm still not convinced we need it.

Higher clock speeds than Polaris, which itself is significantly higher than the Fury X.
 
Improved clock speeds.. Over what? Fury X? that's not hard. I dunno man, too much of it seems to rattle on about HBM2 and I'm still not convinced we need it.

Not sure why you ask if we need HBM2 or not??? Surely there is no downside to extra bandwidth?
 
Not sure why you ask if we need HBM2 or not??? Surely there is no downside to extra bandwidth?

There is at resolutions where you don't need it. See also the Fury X with HBM. At 1080p and 1440p it was rubbish, some 20% slower than the 980ti. HBM did absolutely nothing for it.

The only resolutions you need it for are 4k and beyond. Resolutions which are so demanding that by the time you need the memory bandwidth it's too late. Showing Star Wars at 60 FPS doesn't count. What is going to happen when you load up Deus Ex? or Mafia III?

I just think it's AMD again looking too far into the future for what the market does not need now. See also - 8 core CPUs years ago, HBM but only 4gb etc etc. They constantly seem to keep taking gambles on predicting what the market will want and being wrong.

They need to do what Nvidia did. Stop chucking the kitchen sink at the problem because that is hot and pricey, and worst of all will gain you crap clock speeds. Cut the cores back, clock them to all hell and worry about 4k later.

Ever since Fermi Nvidia have been kicking AMD all over the place. From Kepler on they reduced the crap, upped the clocks and the rest has been history.
 
There is at resolutions where you don't need it. See also the Fury X with HBM. At 1080p and 1440p it was rubbish, some 20% slower than the 980ti. HBM did absolutely nothing for it.

The only resolutions you need it for are 4k and beyond. Resolutions which are so demanding that by the time you need the memory bandwidth it's too late. Showing Star Wars at 60 FPS doesn't count. What is going to happen when you load up Deus Ex? or Mafia III?

I just think it's AMD again looking too far into the future for what the market does not need now. See also - 8 core CPUs years ago, HBM but only 4gb etc etc. They constantly seem to keep taking gambles on predicting what the market will want and being wrong.

They need to do what Nvidia did. Stop chucking the kitchen sink at the problem because that is hot and pricey, and worst of all will gain you crap clock speeds. Cut the cores back, clock them to all hell and worry about 4k later.

Ever since Fermi Nvidia have been kicking AMD all over the place. From Kepler on they reduced the crap, upped the clocks and the rest has been history.

Well just because you don't NEED it, doesn't mean it's nice to have it, if you get it anyway right? :)
 
Well just because you don't NEED it, doesn't mean it's nice to have it, if you get it anyway right? :)

Oh? so when was the last time you bought a AMD GPU then?

Do you want to buy some snake oil? you don't need it but you'd buy it any way, right?

You're paying for it, dude. And if it's of no importance why would you want to pay for something you are not going to use? and yes, that makes all of the difference. HBM makes GPUs stupidly expensive and the gain has not been worth the price. Fury X launched at £549 the same price as the 980ti and got laughed at at every res except 4k when it managed 30 FPS due to the hobbled core.

Unless this GPU is as fast as the Titan XP in everything then that HBM will go wasted.
 
Oh? so when was the last time you bought a AMD GPU then?

Do you want to buy some snake oil? you don't need it but you'd buy it any way, right?

You're paying for it, dude. And if it's of no importance why would you want to pay for something you are not going to use? and yes, that makes all of the difference. HBM makes GPUs stupidly expensive and the gain has not been worth the price. Fury X launched at £549 the same price as the 980ti and got laughed at at every res except 4k when it managed 30 FPS due to the hobbled core.

Unless this GPU is as fast as the Titan XP in everything then that HBM will go wasted.

Not even sure if Chrazey ever has brought one :p

TBH not even sure if Chrazey knows what an AMD GPU even looks like ;)
 
=AlienALX;931614]Oh? so when was the last time you bought a AMD GPU then?

Do you want to buy some snake oil? you don't need it but you'd buy it any way, right?

You're paying for it, dude. And if it's of no importance why would you want to pay for something you are not going to use? and yes, that makes all of the difference. HBM makes GPUs stupidly expensive and the gain has not been worth the price. Fury X launched at £549 the same price as the 980ti and got laughed at at every res except 4k when it managed 30 FPS due to the hobbled core.

Unless this GPU is as fast as the Titan XP in everything then that HBM will go wasted.

From what I remember HBM2 is meant to be cheaper to produce, and I doubt AMD would make the same mistake again with the limited supply.

And yeah you pay for it but blaming the memory for the poor core performance seems a bit odd.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh? so when was the last time you bought a AMD GPU then?

Do you want to buy some snake oil? you don't need it but you'd buy it any way, right?


You're paying for it, dude. And if it's of no importance why would you want to pay for something you are not going to use? and yes, that makes all of the difference. HBM makes GPUs stupidly expensive and the gain has not been worth the price. Fury X launched at £549 the same price as the 980ti and got laughed at at every res except 4k when it managed 30 FPS due to the hobbled core.

Unless this GPU is as fast as the Titan XP in everything then that HBM will go wasted.

In 2012 actually. And why even bring up snake oil? What on earth does that have to do with anything even the slightest relation to the subject here?.

Keep it related dude.

Not even sure if Chrazey ever has brought one :p

TBH not even sure if Chrazey knows what an AMD GPU even looks like ;)

Sure I do, I even have one. It's an Sapphire Radeon HD6950 2GB... I even took a beautiful photo of it for you, as getting a bit tired of your sarcasm:

thumbnail_IMG_7983_zps0nggk8ry.jpg
 
Please AMD, make it good. PLEASE.

Crush the green team again

Ok dude answer me this when was the last time that AMD crush Nvidia with any GPU in terns of sales you would have to go back a long time ago.....Hasn't happen in the last 5 years at least.

I'm talking about in terms of sales & benchmarks from third parties not in house AMD benchmarks.
 
Last edited:
In my opinion, AMD has improved their GPU design everywhere that needs it most.

Faster cores with more performance per clock, more memory capacity with HBM2 and core logic that is highly suited to the professional market and not just gaming.

For the past few years (Pre-polaris) AMD has just been placing more cores on their GPUs and not bringing in any big architectural changes. Moving from the HD7970 too the R9 290X to the Fury X was just larger memory buses and more GCN cores, resulting in bigger, hotter dies.

With Vega, AMD are working to get more out of their GPUs without adding more silicon, which should make Vegas easier to produce and still have increased performance. It is certainly the right way for AMD to move.
 
From what I remember HBM2 is meant to be cheaper to produce, and I doubt AMD would make the same mistake again with the limited supply.

And yeah you pay for it but blaming the memory for the poor core performance seems a bit odd.

HBM2 may be cheaper to produce in itself but it still needs to be cut "connected" to the core. So if there's a problem with either you lose both. That was why they could not undercut the 980ti and had to sell the FX at the same price. I bet they wanted higher too, but Nvidia had already beaten them to market (AGAIN).

All of this cost is passed onto us. People who don't need HBM and would be perfectly happy with a fast GPU with GDDR5X on it.

Even if this card is for 4k only? the marketshare for 4k is tiny. And most of those who do use 4k don't use it for gaming.

Until AMD get themselves out of dreamland and start making products we can actually use that are worth the money? they've had it. They've had it because of companies like Nvidia, who are already beating them. People don't go "Awww, look at AMD losing I think I will fit an AMD GPU to all of my PCs !" they go "More crap" and go out and buy Nvidia.

The only GPU capable of 4k alone right now is the TXP. So as I said, unless Vega is as fast or faster? you don't need that HBM. Because the Titan X doesn't have it, and you don't need it.

I've already fallen for the HBM routine. Won't be falling for it again. I now have a card with 4gb VRAM. Games don't go "uhoh lookout here comes HBM !" they go "4gb? lulz".
 
Back
Top