Quick News

[AngryGoldfish]

Could you explain how 1080 performance at the same price will be good?
The 1080 is a year old. There are TONS of different 1080's for sale, lets se how many cards AMD can produce. And the 1080 does not use HBM2, so if they offer it at the same price, it will probably hit AMD on the profit margin.

It is ONLY for people who ONLY want AMD. (But as i mentioned earlier, mining will probably save AMD)

I don't remember saying 1080 performance at the same price is good, but if I did that's not exactly what I mean. I said, "The biggest market is the 1070 and 1080 sector. If they can sneak their way into that market, good." That means that if a Vega GPU comes in it at $450-500 and handily beats a non-reference 1080 in DX12 and matches it in DX11, that's good. That's more performance for the same price. That would be better than the Fury was against the 980. The Fury at launch was more expensive than the 980 and was only beating it in a few titles because DX12 was not as integrated as it is now. If AMD can get the card out for $500 at the performance I just suggested, that would be an improvement. That's good, at least to me. Is it great? No. It's six months too late for that, amongst other things.

You appear awfully confident about only AMD fans buying Vega. It might be true, but it might not be.

 

[AlienALX]

Well right now it doesn't perform anywhere near the 1080. It's a bit of a 50/50 catfight with the 1070. Even with the fan at 3000 RPM the card maxed out at 1524, and mostly floated in the 1300-1400mhz range. I still do not see how AMD are going to get an air cooled card to boost higher than that, given the limitations of the cooling. It also chews down more power than a 1080Ti. Over 100W more than a 1080.

I am a huge AMD fan. I have been since 2000, when they started making Slot Athlons. However as I have said, their GPU department leaves a lot to be desired. Fact is the last truly epic range topping GPU they made was the 5870 and that wasn't even them it was ATI. The 6000 series left a lot to be desired, the 7000 series were good at launch but soon caught and matched by Kepler and anything since has been hot and guzzled down power.

So that means if I was loyal enough to buy a Vega (which I'm not) then I would need to put it under water, adding at least £100 to the price. Fury X blocks were £120, due to the HBM needing a much bigger die area of copper.

If every game became a well optimised DX12 game as of tomorrow (ain't gonna happen) then AMD might sort of be onto something. It's obviously never going to be a 4k card unless all of a sudden everything tomorrow was coded in Vulkan, so the HBM2 is another big fat expensive waste of time.

I saw Polaris as a complete success. Maybe AMD just need to stick to stuff like that.

 

[Korreborg]

You appear awfully confident about only AMD fans buying Vega. It might be true, but it might not be.

I base that on it being late. Same performance 1 year later is by my account really not good. If they could do a Ryzen move, same/more performance but 100$ less, that would be truly awesome, but the HBM2 makes me confident that's not possible.

AMD GPUs is lost to me for the next many years. I have gone down the G-sync road, and i think more and more people are.

 

[AngryGoldfish]

Well right now it doesn't perform anywhere near the 1080. It's a bit of a 50/50 catfight with the 1070. Even with the fan at 3000 RPM the card maxed out at 1524, and mostly floated in the 1300-1400mhz range. I still do not see how AMD are going to get an air cooled card to boost higher than that, given the limitations of the cooling. It also chews down more power than a 1080Ti. Over 100W more than a 1080.

I am a huge AMD fan. I have been since 2000, when they started making Slot Athlons. However as I have said, their GPU department leaves a lot to be desired. Fact is the last truly epic range topping GPU they made was the 5870 and that wasn't even them it was ATI. The 6000 series left a lot to be desired, the 7000 series were good at launch but soon caught and matched by Kepler and anything since has been hot and guzzled down power.

So that means if I was loyal enough to buy a Vega (which I'm not) then I would need to put it under water, adding at least £100 to the price. Fury X blocks were £120, due to the HBM needing a much bigger die area of copper.

If every game became a well optimised DX12 game as of tomorrow (ain't gonna happen) then AMD might sort of be onto something. It's obviously never going to be a 4k card unless all of a sudden everything tomorrow was coded in Vulkan, so the HBM2 is another big fat expensive waste of time.

I saw Polaris as a complete success. Maybe AMD just need to stick to stuff like that.

We'll have to see. I really don't know what's going to happen. I'm speculating and hoping, but Vega could be an even bigger disappointment than Fiji. We'll have to see.

I also think that maybe AMD should stick to low-midrange GPU's and CPU's. It's clear that they are really struggling in the high-end. Even if Vega does come in at what I hope and think it will, it'll be six months late. That's a long time to pass with a lot of sales going to the competitor. That's the biggest issue; not that Vega will underperform but that it will be too late and possibly too expensive.

I base that on it being late. Same performance 1 year later is by my account really not good. If they could do a Ryzen move, same/more performance but 100$ less, that would be truly awesome, but the HBM2 makes me confident that's not possible.

AMD GPUs is lost to me for the next many years. I have gone down the G-sync road, and i think more and more people are.

You can't expect AMD to pull a Ryzen in the GPU sector when Nvidia haven't been pulling an Intel. Do you not see how impossible that would be? HBM2 or GDDR5X, it doesn't matter, that's virtually impossible.

 

[NeverBackDown]

I base that on it being late. Same performance 1 year later is by my account really not good. If they could do a Ryzen move, same/more performance but 100$ less, that would be truly awesome, but the HBM2 makes me confident that's not possible.

AMD GPUs is lost to me for the next many years. I have gone down the G-sync road, and i think more and more people are.

HBM Technology has nothing to do with it's performance being a hindrance. It's more than fast enough.

I think you should base your opinion off RX Vega instead of being a downer about the FE. Ya'know, the actual gaming card?

 

[AlienALX]

My biggest concern with Vega (well, concerns) are heat and power use. If we cast our minds back to this...

Then we can now see that those pics were absolutely genuine, as the FE is identical. Let's look past the power use for now and stick with heat/clocks. If that silver card there with the red lights and letters is the stock card then it is exactly the same as the FE. Which means that basically it will not get anywhere even resembling close to 1600mhz or more. Not without the fan on 100%, and even then you only get about 1500mhz.

So that means that in order to get the limits out of the card you *must* put it under water. The thing is, water guys (don't count me as one, mine is all old s**t cobbled together) do not want to put a mid range card in their PC and spend all of that money to get it going. They want the top end card, which Vega isn't.

So we're back to air, but the air cooler stinks (we already know this).

Unless that silver card in that pic there was an early "non-anodised" sample of the FE then AMD are set to use the same cooling on the retail card. In fact, I really can't see how they can really change it *that much* between the FE and retail. Meaning we have a huge problem.

NBD - we have what we can all but imagine is a full fat Vega core with 16GB HBM2. I don't know what more you were expecting?

As for drivers, BTW, why would AMD want the FE to stink and save it for the desktop arena when they are asking a cool grand for this card? yeah, can't see it.

 

[NeverBackDown]

If you cannot see the point about drivers then there is no point in trying to discuss it.

If you also believe they won't have anything more than a reference cooler then there is even less of a point.

 

[Korreborg]

HBM Technology has nothing to do with it's performance being a hindrance. It's more than fast enough.

I think you should base your opinion off RX Vega instead of being a downer about the FE. Ya'know, the actual gaming card?

The HBM2 hinders the price and availability of the card. Not performance.

And I have written it multiple times. I just don't see the possibility of the gaming card being A LOT better than the FE. Maybe 1080 level. But IMO you are dreaming if you still expect the gaming card to be awesome.
If a Vega with a awesome cooler can hit 1600-1700mhz, it also stops competing with the 1080 FE. And then it is up against 1080 card that can maintain 2000+ mhz because of an awesome cooler.

 

[Korreborg]

If you cannot see the point about drivers then there is no point in trying to discuss it.

If you also believe they won't have anything more than a reference cooler then there is even less of a point.

Drivers can't give the card more power. It can optimize the use of the power. I don't see this raising the performance by 20%

 

[AlienALX]

The HBM2 hinders the price and availability of the card. Not performance.

And I have written it multiple times. I just don't see the possibility of the gaming card being A LOT better than the FE. Maybe 1080 level. But IMO you are dreaming if you still expect the gaming card to be awesome.
If a Vega with a awesome cooler can hit 1600-1700mhz, it also stops competing with the 1080 FE. And then it is up against 1080 card that can maintain 2000+ mhz because of an awesome cooler.

It's not just the awesome cooler on the 1080 that allows it to clock that high. It's mainly because it is a tiny little die that cost little to make, but due to it not being overloaded with stuff can clock to hell. Big cards like Vega will never clock that high.

Drivers can't give the card more power. It can optimize the use of the power. I don't see this raising the performance by 20%

I think the drivers (like all AMD cards) will improve the performance over time, but yeah, not 20%. I don't think the drivers are the problem any way in all honesty, more the clock speeds and thermal throttling. If AMD can't get past that and clock it higher then it will be what we already see with the FE.

Funny how every one expects the Vega gaming card to perform better really. If this card is not for gaming on then why does it have a gaming mode? :headscratch:

THE most critical part of Vega is allowing vendors to add their own cooling/PCB design. Then, and only then, can this Fermi turn into a GTX 480 Lightning (IMO of course). That is the only way I can see that they could prove me wrong. And if they get all precious like they did with Fury X it will be an absolute disaster.

That, IMO, is the only remaining question I have. How much wood would a... Wait, no no, how high could it clock with proper cooling?

 

[Korreborg]

My point with 2000+ MHz was that if the Vega FE is behind by 15%, then gets a better cooler and a overclock. The the comparison is not towards the 1080 FE, it also needs to be against a 1080 with a better cooler and an overclock.

 

[AlienALX]

My point with 2000+ MHz was that if the Vega FE is behind by 15%, then gets a better cooler and a overclock. The the comparison is not towards the 1080 FE, it also needs to be against a 1080 with a better cooler and an overclock.

The differences with the 1080 will be smaller. Reason being, they already boost like crazy. The boost on the Vega we have seen is far smaller. In fact, for the most part it can only boost 100mhz or so due to the poor cooler.

That is where AMD could gain back ground.

 

[Korreborg]

The differences with the 1080 will be smaller. Reason being, they already boost like crazy. The boost on the Vega we have seen is far smaller. In fact, for the most part it can only boost 100mhz or so due to the poor cooler.

That is where AMD could gain back ground.

Arr you are right. I'm thinking of 1080ti. My FE quickly drops to around 1750-1800mhz, and they can do 2000+ with a good cooler so the gain can be 10%+

 

[NeverBackDown]

Drivers can't give the card more power. It can optimize the use of the power. I don't see this raising the performance by 20%

You must not have been around computers long then. You'd know how wrong you are otherwise. I'll point you to AMDs driver from October 2011 for your research reference.

Either way I am out of this Vega talk, it's not going to change anyone's opinion and besides this is a quick news thread.

 

[Warchild]

Guys this is quick news. Make a thread if you want to discuss it.

 

[AlienALX]

Ram prices going up again.


http://hexus.net/business/news/comp...factory-mishap-taiwan-results-fab-suspension/

 

[WYP]

Ram prices going up again.


http://hexus.net/business/news/comp...factory-mishap-taiwan-results-fab-suspension/

Reports from Micron themselves refute this story.

https://www.overclock3d.net/news/me...2_has_closed_down_after_a_major_malfunction/1

The sad thing is that Microns statement was released before the Hexus article was.

 

[AlienALX]

Reports from Micron themselves refute this story.

https://www.overclock3d.net/news/me...2_has_closed_down_after_a_major_malfunction/1

The sad thing is that Microns statement was released before this article was.

Shame no one told OCUK who have stuffed up all of their ram prices today

 

[WYP]

Shame no one told OCUK who have stuffed up all of their ram prices today

That is the sad thing about commodities, rumours can cause the same pricing changes even if they are false. The market will react regardless, even if temporarily.

 

[TheF34RChannel]

That is the sad thing about commodities, rumours can cause the same pricing changes even if they are false. The market will react regardless, even if temporarily.

And for what, a few clicks on Hexus

Additionally, we need RAM prices to come down again, not up.