290x

>290x
Hype!...
...Disappointment
>FuryX
Hype!...
...Disappointment
>Vega
Hype!...
...Disappointment

When did you grow out of AMD Sup Forums?

Other urls found in this thread:

anandtech.com/show/9421/the-amd-radeon-r9-fury-review-feat-sapphire-asus
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Hi Jensen! How's V100 yields?

290x was pretty good user, albeit a housfire

raja and the hbm meme has literally killed radeon

nvidia have been on top and stayed on top since the end of tahiti.
7970=680
290x

>290x

breddy gud
we habe bositive IBC gains

Now show the SPEC.
Also who the fuck uses term IPC for bibeocardz?

like 10 years ago

not sure if bait or just stupid AMD user

at launch it was. It might not be in 2017 but that's irrelevant. I'm not waiting 2 years for the card i spent $550 on to become good.

I hope AMD drops out of making gaming GPUs, they clearly don't give a fuck

it makes sense when both chips have the same 4096 processors. vega is just fiji with OC and 50-100W higher tdp

I've never owned ati/amd card for the last 15 years.

So moar ALUs makes a new uarch?
Dude you're genius.

people used to say that about the cpus before zen. Where is the radeon version of zen? we need some gpu competition.

Hi jen hsun

780ti was $700 and only marginally ahead of the 290x because Nvidia payed half the developers back then to use gameworks.
290x was a far superior card and would have been the standard for high end gaming PCs if it wasn't for Bitcoin.

Maybe you should wait for them to release a gaming GPU before saying that?

>Where is the radeon version of zen?
Probably in 2016 when they haven't diverted all R&D money to Zen and told RTG to make something from pennies.

Good decision might I say, Zen is far more important than any GPU

yes good sir buy amd and good drivers coming wait for it

no but if the only paper difference between 2 cards is the clockspeed and then when at the same clockspeeds they perform the same it suggests that there have been no architectural improvements. the least they could've done is chuck some more stream processors on it. although then it would've had an even higher tdp.

Does anyone find the situation of gamers foaming that they're not being focused on delicious? They literally cannot comprehend that GPUs are used for something else and it's driving them mad.

You need to go back.
You can mention cryptos and feel the rage.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

I'm glad AMD finally have a competitor for the 980ti

>You can mention cryptos and feel the rage.
Kek, people are literally triggered they can't buy a GPU because someone else is buying them and making money doing it, there's a hint of both obsession and jealousy in the whole situation.

Tbh it's dumb AMD fanboys own fault.

AMD has released 2 gaming benchmarks of Vega so far (Sniper elite and Doom) and both showed it at around 1080 level of performance, which is what you would get if you take the FE edition and add 10% for higher clocks and better drivers.

Ofcourse fanboys wanted to insist it would beat the 1080ti at a lower pricepoint even though there was no evidence at all to believe that.

It still is a massive disapointment though, performance at the level of a non oc'd 1080 with more power consumption than a 1080ti.

The blow is even harder because fanboys hyped up the product like they do each year

>They literally cannot comprehend that GPUs are used for something else
they're being used for calculating ur mum's weight
no end in sight

x
>Hype!...
>...Disappointment

What are you talking about the 290X was great, bought in near launch and it only died a few weeks ago and it performed really well.
I replaced it with a 1070 so I guess the housefire thing is a meme since the 1070 runs hotter.

The 290X had overtaken the 780 Ti within six months of launch, having been barely behind in the first place. These days they're not even in the same ballpark.

tbqh the last time they went full enterprise we got faildozer.

Your point? Zen is clearly not Bulldozer.

Zen is full enterprise and we go, well, Zen.
EPYC totally shits on Intel.

not sure about fury x but all previous ones are now faster than the nvidia counterparts

zen was "desktop first"

my point is they haven't got a good track record of predicting markets.

Zen is desktop first? The fuck are you smoking?

Zen is clearly and evidently a server design, what the fuck are you smoking?

Zen wasn't dekstop first? Wtf are you smoking?

I still have 290X 8GB, it's still better than most shit on the market.
1070+ is better.
Nothing from AMD is better period.

Zen is clearly a server design, fuck, every Ryzen currently available uses leaky Zeppelins not suitable for EPYC.

where was the disappointment? those where cheap as fuck cards and performed great

That's not what he said you daft cunt.

He said it's dekstop first, meaning it was released for the desktop first

>Smart Home
What did they mean by this?

Because you needed to test and iron out bugs before launching Zen for servers you moron.

No shit you stupid cunt, that wasn't the point though

I'll grow out of AMD as soon as Nvidia supports freesync, stops encrypting their BIOS, and lets people disable GPU boost.
Until then, looking forward to vega.
I've actually owned a 560ti, a 760, a 1060, and a 980ti but since going high refresh last year and realizing how much I like it the value I place on adaptive sync has gone through the roof.
If you don't care about it though the 1080ti is actually good performance for the money.

...

>I'll grow out of AMD as soon as Nvidia supports freesync
This. The moment nvidia support freesync I'm jumping ship.

The HD7970/R9 280X got faster than the 780 in recent games.

>Pay top dollar for an AMD card that needs 5 years reach maximum performance

It's not reaching maximum performance. It's just aged better.

>It's just aged better
This is the worst thing to ever come out of r/AMD. There is no FineWine™, there is no aging. AMD releases cards that simply can't compete with their equivalent until a number of years later, and by then, it's pointless as newer cards that are cheaper perform better. So, it's not better aging, it's AMD incompetence.

Stop giving them a free pass to be shit.

>denying that kekler aged like fucking milk compared to GCN
Oh no you don't.

Kepler didn't age like milk, it was poorly designed to begin with, and Nvidia acknowledged that and changed it. Meanwhile AMD has been dragging its feet with GCN, praying that developers will do what AMD won't.

Kekler is poorly designed now?
Now that's a new excuse for it aging like shit.

With Vega the hype has been pretty much all negative

>1 year late
>will never beat 1080ti
>event if it beats 1080ti it will be crushed by volta within months
>will only match a 1080
>wont even match a 1080

So judging from history Vega should be a great success. It's also not at all impossible that this is AMDs plan this time around: to avoid showing a strong hand until it's absolutely necessary. Nvidia has beat AMD too many times with a prepared response (980ti to Fury).

>So judging from history Vega should be a great success.
Yeah, in 2021, when drivers are finally optimized.

>When did you grow out of AMD Sup Forums?
Pretty sure most people grow out of Nvidia.

Kepler was great for its time. But by current standards it's not enough. The AMD equivalent was crap by comparison, and has only now caught up to kepler - an architecture that has been superceded by better architecture. This is AMD being way behind the 8-ball.

Eh, not really. It's not even about FPS, Nvidia simply has more features. AMD has made great strides to catch up of course but given Nvidia's marketshare advantage it makes sense that they have broader feature and 3rd party support. There are programs like Moonlight which is probably the best free mobile streaming app out there, and even has VR support now. Gsync is way more expensive and mostly a ripoff, however Nvidia has Lightboost on older 3d monitors and ULMB for more modern monitors, which is useful for those who hate sample and hold. There's Nvidia Inspector, nothing on ATI/AMD's side even comes close, Radeon Pro has been abandoned. And even the official Nvidia drivers have better features, I recently sold a GTX 980 used to some guy. He was switching from a 390 to a 980. You know why? Because AMD's aspect ratio scaler in their drivers wasn't working properly, he was a CS:GO player and needed 4:3 support. Nvidia's aspect ratio scaling is fantastic, that's just something I had always taken for granted.

The point is for niche use cases, Nvidia makes more sense than AMD.

Are you referring to the GCN architecture or the 7900 series in particular? Because the GCN architecture has received very few CU changes until Vega and still successfully combats everything prior to Pascal. GCN is much more scalable and has the potential to utilize more ILP than both Kepler and Maxwell and well before they were around. Pascal had to add more silicon and aggressive software optimizations e.g. pixel level preemption to par AMD's level of shader parallelism. Meanwhile on the geometry and RBE... Different story. Vega is just catching up to Pascal with Conservative Rasterization, ordered views, DSBA, primitive discard (from polaris) and TBDR.

It is reaching max performance not aging. AMD cards "should" be faster than nvidia at launch but they aren't and they take years to perform as they should. The fury x was an 8 teraflop beast while the 980ti was only 5.8teraflops. Even today the drivers still aren't good enough to show the furyx outperforming the 980ti as it should with that level of compute discrepancy between them. The 1080 is also only 8 teraflops so in theory the furyx will eventually perform the same as the 1080 (if vram wasn't a factor) but since amd have essentialy dropped support for the furyx since they sold so few that will never happen. "finewine" is good if you're in the market for a used card but if you're literally buying a worse card based on the speculation that it might perform better in two years time you're an idiot. "Finewine" aging has no guarantee and tends to not even occur if the card is not rebadged. The 7970 and 290x aged well because they were both rebadged to the 280x and 390x respectively. As vega yields are looking to be very low and the silicon is looking to be very expensive the likelihood of a rebadge is extremely low and vega is doomed to age just a averagely/poorly as the fury x did.

>It is reaching max performance not aging. AMD cards "should" be faster than nvidia at launch but they aren't and they take years to perform as they should.
>"finewine" is good if you're in the market for a used card but if you're literally buying a worse card based on the speculation that it might perform better in two years time you're an idiot.
It's refreshing to see common sense on this depraved shithole. Just a shame the fanboys won't see the reason in it.

The 780ti is quite a bit weaker than even the R9 290
The 290x outperforms the 980 in many games

For the record the R9 290 was an amazing value card at launch. Whooped the more expensive GTX 780. Can confirm it is a housefire though since own a reference cooler one.

Not sure where this myth is coming in that Fury support has been dropped any more so than any other AMD chip. Last I checked Fiji was still holding its own.

I agree that FineWine(tm) is overblown and not a real reason to buy an AMD card. It's not intentional on AMD's part. They've just been making chips with strong as fuck compute capabilities that brute force their way through shit for longer than Nvidia's chips can. Nvidia has always been heavily tied to software and driver optimization and to their credit it works extremely well for them.

290X and the Fury (non-x) weren't disappointments

Vega looks fucking awful though

My R9 290 works fine though, not a disappointment although it seems to be the GTX 480 from AMD when it comes to noise, power use and temps

>3.91ghz
Intel is absolutely fucked.

Woah there faggot the 290x was a beast and still is. That card can play any game on ultra today in 2017 as long as its 1080p.

Fury X was a pretty big disappointment IMO.

7870 and its 270x refresh was gud
7970 and its 280x refresh was gud
290x and its 390x refresh was an insane beast monster
fury and fury X was a big fat fucking flop though no reason to own that piece of shit card it wasn't a big enough upgrade over the 290/390

>290x
>Hype!...
>...Disappointment
>FuryX
>Hype!...
>...Disappointment
>Vega
>Hype!...
>...Disappointment

Yet the people that did buy those cards.. 95% of them didnt regret their decision because a R9 290X is still competitive.

Life of AMD cards is long...

A owner of a gtx 1080 here, i had a gtx 970 before that. wish i had gotten a Fury X instead of these two....

This, waitfags fucking rekt

>4:3

Non-x fury was decent, though

performance between 980 and 980ti for 980 (sometimes less) prices, with 4GB HBM instead of GDDR5, it was decent value and competitive

god knows what they were thinking with the Fury-X though

still no reason to upgrade from a 290x at 1080p so I don't care what happens with vega

290X was a good card, it got a shit rep because the reference models had jet engine, shit coolers which couldn't even stop it from throttling. Aftermarket cards were much, much quieter and performed better too since they were no longer kneecapped by the abysmal cooling. Even so the 290X was slightly faster than a Titan at high res when it released, so it was a fine card.

What does having HBM versus GDDR5 add though if it doesn't translate into higher performance?

In theory lower power consumption maybe but Maxwell was much better in that regard, even with GDDR5

Non-X Fury was a better performing card than the 980, though...
>Pay GTX 980 money
>get a card that was better than the 980
how was this a failure?

I'm pretty sure it was similarly priced to the 980, and I'm also not so sure if it outcompeted it in every situation

In terms of price/performance the regular fury was definately better than the x though, I agree

t.nvidia shill
- From a GTX 1080 owner

it was ~$450

I feel like nvidia was holding back since the 580 and the 1000 series is the first time they've made cards that actually push the envelope

the 680/780/980 cards were so fucking weak and shit tier

The Fury is better in like 9/10 benchmarks than the 980

anandtech.com/show/9421/the-amd-radeon-r9-fury-review-feat-sapphire-asus

The reason I know so much is that I was a 980 owner that got burned by the release of the R9 Fury so it is all still fairly fresh in my memory, it was simply a better card, mind you, the 980 was a trash card to begin with and barely justifiable over the GTX 970, so it was low hanging fruit for AMD

>When did you grow out of AMD Sup Forums?

> Bought a Phenom X2
> it was a piece of shit
> But, let's give it another chance
> Buy a 7870
> it's a piece of shit

Fuck me, never again.

Allright, I didn't know too much about the 980.

Only Maxwell card I owned was the 980ti, and have a 1080 right now

why did you upgrade?

x

I have a 290x and don't have any problem with it...

>and the 1000 series is the first time they've made cards that actually push the envelope
you mean rehashed maxwell? sure they managed to add clocks due 14nm move, but pascal is the most boring release from nvidia in recent decade

volta looks the same, maxwell was glorious though

I honestly credit Hawaii for some of the really nice aftermarket coolers that we have today. AIB partners had to step up their game and for the most part they did.

The problem with the Air Fury was that it was never in abundant enough supply to actually compete with the 980 and it came much later. If you could find one at the right price it was a no-brainer but they were hard to come by. By the time those Sapphire Nitro Fury variants were on a firesale at Newegg (for like $289 or so late last year) it was already getting tough to justify spending that much money on a 4 GB card, even if the GPU itself was powerful as hell.

Also, Fury non-X was competing with the unjustifiably (at the time) priced 390X at $400 which really never should have existed at that price point as the 390 was a much better buy at $330 or so.

In the end there probably just weren't enough Fiji chips to go around. It was 600 fucking square mm.

the 1080 and 1080 ti are very strong cards
meanwhile the 980 could barely beat 290x which was a generation behind

Was having lag in some games at 1440p at ultra settings, so I sold it, invested another 120$ on top of it and got a used 1080 with almost 2 years of warranty left on it.

Very happy with the purchase, lag is gone, power consumption is fantastic, and the cards runs very cool

Actually, no, not a shill. I've had GTX470, R9 280, R9 380, GTX970 and now currently RX 480. Had to RMA the 280 3 times, and on the third time they sent back a 380. The 380 also had to be RMA'd 3 times, and on the third time they sent back the GTX970. Still have the GTX470 and use it as a back up for when/if a card needs to be RMA'd, gave the 970 to my brother and bought a 144Hz freesync monitor and RX 480.

>Happy with the GTX470 - still works fine
>Unhappy with 280
>Unhappy with the 380
>Happy with 970 - still works fine
>Happy with the 480 - works fine, but can only use driver 16.11.2 because every newer driver introduces a problem

Forgot the screenshot

just because AMD had to redesign whole gpu line nvidia looks strong right now
nvidia will have too do the same soon if they want in MCM game that amd started

remember when they had to scrap whole GPU line? something similar happened to amd now

I hear that once they get 64GB of HBM2 on a GPU they will finally have enough available memory with a high enough bandwidth that they will able to calculate a thousandth part of his mom's weight and then be able to extrapolate the rest.

Except for the last 5 years Nvidia Always managed to release high-end cards that could compete with AMD. Sadly it seems that this time around AMD looks a generation behind on performance and performance/watt.

And Volta will only make the gap bigger

MCM is so far off though, it's even farther off than volta

>vega

B-but what about muh CPU? FX-4300 is so gorgeous.