Wait for Vega

>Wait for Vega

Other urls found in this thread:

pcgameshardware.de/Radeon-RX-Vega-64-Grafikkarte-266623/Tests/Benchmark-Preis-Release-1235445/3/
geizhals.de/?cat=gra16_512&xf=9809_14 10215 - Radeon RX Vega 64
tweaktown.com/news/55875/amd-launch-monster-navi-10-2019-next-gen-ram/index.html
files.shareholder.com/downloads/AMDA-1XAJD4/5023073131x0x953561/F850D328-4AEF-479F-B0B6-88703C81A28A/Rev_by_Mkt_Qtrly_Trend_Q218.pdf
tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-vega-frontier-edition-16gb,5128-6.html
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>wait for drivers
>wait for navi
>wait for drivers
>wait fo x

>.4% worse
>"HOLY SHIT GUYS DOA"
I'm not saying its actually good (Performance per watt is terrible and its competing with an older card) but please make your shilling a little less obvious

> No price:performance ratios

>fake msrp's

nice try, jensen

still gonna buy vega 56

I'm going to try and get in on a Vega56 + Ryzen bundle. I want to upgrade both parts and buying Ryzen + a separate 1070 is too expensive to be worthwhile.

>400+W

it costs more than a 1080 you mong

No it doesn't you fucking nvidiot its MSRP is literally the same as 1080

>overpriced memecoin mining cards irrelevant for gaming
Jesus fuck, if you pay over $100 for a fucking video card, you're an idiot.

vega 64 is $600 while 1080's can be found for $515

>SLOWER THAN THE GTX1080 ONE YEAR LATER WHILE CONSUMING ALMOST AS DOUBLE.
Literal DOA

>$500 MSRP
Yeah no.

>gaming at 1080p/60
What is this 2007?

>Vega 64 is $600
It's actually going for $700.

The MSRP for the standalone card is $500 and AMD just confirmed that yesterday what's so difficult to understand?

More like $400 for the standalone card.

>The MSRP for the standalone card is $500 and AMD just confirmed that yesterday
good luck buying one while you can get a 1080 for as much anywhere

and i'm saying this as someone who bought a 480 and R5 1600

Not AMD's fault retailers are a bunch of greedy anti-consumer pieces of shit and that miners are driving the demand up. AMD is literally doing their best to restock Vega, just be patient and wait until prices stabilize.

they better gonna release the vega 56 aib on 26th august

>He doesn't know
It's actually $499 for Vega 56 and $599 for Vega 64 MSRP, btw Vega 64 is going for more than $700 right now.

>Low stock is the retailer's fault.
For (You).

>just be patient and wait until prices stabilize
fucking Volta will be out by then

>Literal engineering sample on alpha BIOS with no factory overclock, just increased power target, virtually ties factory overclocked AIB 1080 with mature drivers.
Looks pretty promissing t.b.h f.a.m.

>caring about graphics in videogames
You are now required to play only games released before 1995 for two years.

I hope that you will come out of this a better person and have a better appreciation for actual gaming, vs. today's style-over-substance barely interactive movie bullshit.

You want pretty graphics and a fucking neverending story? GO WATCH A FUCKING MOVIE, CHILD.

what the fuck is wrong with you
there is nothing wrong with wanting better graphics, that's literally what everyone has been doing since the beginning of this industry
my favourite game of all time is still heroes of might and fucking magic 3 but that doesn't stop me from admiring how pretty games are nowadays

>Vega is dead

Autism

For everything other than gaming it's good.

Been amd admit it's more of a workstation card which is why t y launched it as one months prior.

Actually it is marginally faster than 1080 but consume quite a bit more power (higher than 1080Ti at peak)

It has potential to go faster but it is entirely depended on drivers and software taking advantage of its new architecture. It is AMD's GF100.

>It is AMD's GF100.
No, since it has no yield problems or anything.
Just consumer drivers are both late and currently unfinished.
It's also no HPC chip, no 1/2 FP64.

It's a mining card that has mediocre but acceptable gaming performance. It will still sell out because of the crpytocurrency crowd.

AMD have a fraction of the budget of Nvidia or Intel. It's a miracle Ryzen arrived in relatively good shape.

AMD graphics driver devs are woefully behind schedule. Performance can only go up from here.

Right now the only sure bet is the 56 though, it's the one most in line with what Vega can do on reasonable wattage, and it does very well against the 1070 already. If current Vega cards never get any faster because of drivers, I would still not regret buying a 56, but I would with a 64

Current gaymen drivers are alpha-tier in quality.
NGG path is not even implemented yet.
pcgameshardware.de/Radeon-RX-Vega-64-Grafikkarte-266623/Tests/Benchmark-Preis-Release-1235445/3/
DSBR is supposedly enabled.

Sigh I wonder when amd will actually get off their asses with gou drivers...

Navi better not be this bad but considering it's mcm it I'll be even worse.

More money = more code monkeys for drivers.
Anyway the Pro stuff works pretty nice already.

What's the point when all I want is a Vega 56 oc aftermarket for $500aud

Sure beats paying $1000+ for a 64

>faster than a 1080FE in some games, while behind in others
>if it's anything like rx480/580, it'll have virtually zero room to overclock, meanwhile 1080 can OC a good amount
>all of this while consuming much more power
im an amd fanboy, but this is embarrassing

There's no aftermarket 56's yet, besides ASUS one.
Looks like AMD is staggering the launch.

Isnt GTX1080 like 1.5 years old?

It is GF100. The architecture is focused primarily on general compute and geometry throughput a.k.a workstation graphics. Gaming performance is secondary just like GF100 back in its heyday. Vega is hot and eats more power then compention just like GF100 back in the day. There's supply issues as well but Vega is from HBM2 memory not from the silicon itself.

And gaymen graphics needs no geometry throughout?
user this is getting silly.
Vega20 will be GPGPU thing. Vega10 is simply a nice all-arounder, just like GP102 is (that one can't into FP16, but is very stronk in int8).

RX Vega obviously has 1/2 FP64 disabled, it's a consumer version. Radeon instinct has 1/2 FP64 and 2x FP16.

Instinct is still 1/16. Read the spec sheets first before shitposting.
Hypothetical Vega20 will be FP64 chip.

1080 can barely OC over its boost speed because the voltage control is locked and power boost already pushes the chip near its overclocking ceiling. It isn't really a good OC'er.

1080Ti has more overclocking ceiling because it hasn't been pushed to its limits.

Nvidia already used up all of their clockspeed juice with 16nm process on Pascal. Don't expect any miracles with Volta. I do suppose that Nvidia could unlock voltage control as a marketing gimmick. If anything Volta is going to be more of a compute monster.

Isn't your entire life like worthless?

Are you saying the MI25 doesn't exist? It says clearly 25 tflops fp16 / 12.5 fp32.

Only GV100 is a compute monster, and it's really-really big (with really-really low yields). The rest of the Volta lineup will be bigger dies.
Think of GV104 being as big as GP102.

ITS STILL 1/16 FP64 YOU RETARD.

I wonder if they'll go taller (moar ALUs per SMM) or wider (moar GPCs) for GV102.

The MSRP sure helps when in the real world the cheapest ones cost €649 (= $764).

geizhals.de/?cat=gra16_512&xf=9809_14 10215 - Radeon RX Vega 64

Nah, Volta is going to be a minor evolution of Pascal with more focus on general compute because that's where the real money is going to be in the near-future.

>GPGPU meme, again
About to be killed even in meme learning by dedicated meme processors.

On paper and professional-stuff Vega is able to match the Quadro version of GP102. Gayming has a stronger bias towards shaders depending on the title or you are using AA/AF or not. That's part of the reason why Vega falls behind in gaming. There isn't enough bandwidth to keep all of those 4096 shaders happy.

There's MORE than enough bandwith to feed 4k ALUs, given that DSBR is enabled.
Stop memeing that BW is the problem.

It isn't a meme you idiot. It is the future of high-end GPGPUs.

Gayming tards don't want to face the music that they are becoming more and more irreverent.

There isn't enough capital in the high-end PC gaming market to justify massive R&D costs for large GPU designs.

The masses are more then content with 1060 and iGPU on modern CPUs for their gaming needs. The low-end discrete market is already dead and mid-range is about to face the same threat once Intel designs a decent iGPU that can do 2Megapixel gaming and AMD will have one with Ryzen Mobile (Vega => Navi).

Nvidia already has seen the writing on the wall and have been slowly moving away from high-end PC gaming as their bread and butter.

GPGPU is L I T E R A L L Y a meme. There's barely any workloads that actually benefit from GPGPU in any meaningful way.

fuck off retard

I'm just sad. I really wanted to grab Vega 56, but at $500, that is a no go. That is, unless someone figures out how to enable SR-IOV, that's a whole different story. I guess I'll stick with the cuck 970 for another year and wait for two die Navi.

Jensen please. You and your company are. IBM's cumdumps at best.
Your better invest in visualisation.

>Navi better not be this bad
Vega is far from being bad, and Navi will be a juggernaut of a architecture.
tweaktown.com/news/55875/amd-launch-monster-navi-10-2019-next-gen-ram/index.html

Both Navi, and whatever NVIDIA will name their MCM GPU uarch will be monsters.

>mfw cute small efficient die scaled up to behemoth destroyer of compute

Some HPC and enterprise markets would completely disagree with you. It is the sole reason why Intel has been trying to cram AVX down its entire CPU market when only their HPC and enterprise customers benefit from it.

Kiddo there's much more to high-end computing then silly gayming.

Nvidia isn't stupid and are having bank. They aren't going to fall for SGI's mistakes. (Protip: most of Nvidia founders are ex-SGI guys)

>some
The key word is SOME. Only and only SOME workloads benefit from GPGPU acceleration.
The entire datacenter market is much much bigger than the part that actually considers GPGPU for anything.

It is still larger, more profitable and [bold]stable[/bold] market then "high-end" gaming GPUs.

Nvidia wants a slice of that pie, also they are get on the whole crypto-currency craze with Volta and beat AMD at its own game.

>Gayming tards don't want to face the music that they are becoming more and more irreverent.
files.shareholder.com/downloads/AMDA-1XAJD4/5023073131x0x953561/F850D328-4AEF-479F-B0B6-88703C81A28A/Rev_by_Mkt_Qtrly_Trend_Q218.pdf
Q3 FY16
>58%
Q4 FY16
>58%
Q1 FY17
>53%
Q2 FY17
>55%
Q3 FY17
>62%
Q4 FY17
>62%
Q1 FY18
>53%
Q2 FY18
>53%

Q1 FY17 53% > Q1 FY18 53%

For the low low price of $700 usd.

Nvidia's datacenter revenue is only 2/5 of their gaymen revenue, and that's considering they are riding the ML boom.
It'll drop to silly amounts once dedicated meme processors arrive.

The wait is not over. Drivers will enable FineWine.
Gotta wait. For Vega.

inb4
>mining

The lion's share of that is from mid-range GPUs a.k.a 1070, 1060 and 970 not high-end solutions.

That market is about to get besieged by next generation of iGPU + CPU combos. They just need to be "good enough" for the normies and nu-gaymers.

Miniaturization is a bitch. High-end gaming GPUs are going to become as niche as high-end discrete audio solutions.

Air cooled 1080ti reaches its heat ceiling very quickly around 2k, mine can't even maintain it stable.

Duh, it's 3.5k ALUs.
Nah, since the resolutions are getting higher.

>they are becoming more and more irreverent.
Holy shit. If this keeps up they're going to be a shitty adult swim comedy by 2020!

4K is meme and it is at limits of human visual acuity with 30-40" screens.

Besides, framerate is what majority of high-end PC gamers want not higher resolutions if given a choice between the two.

>4k is a meme
It's not.
But since nothing can achieve 4k@144fps, there's still a LOT of room for growth.

So it overclocks slightly worse than 1080, why say its better.

>poorfags

1080 boosts very high compared to 1080ti.
You are *actually* overclocking 1080ti. To a degree.

I use a 42" screen on my desktop for 4k, I don't get why thats so uncommon.

The normies and nu-gaymers don't care about them.

Only a tiny, but vocal minority does. That market is not large enough to justify dedicated high-end GPU designs.

Yes, midrange GPU market is still the king.
But no, iGPUs won't kill it.

oh yeah i can totally see how the card flops
tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-vega-frontier-edition-16gb,5128-6.html

oh wait

fucking abbreviating bandwidth to BW
technology was a mistake

The other Germans even did B3D suite benching. Primshader culling is disabled for everything but selected few workstation tasks it seems.

Its running dow3 at 1860 just off boost atm, manual oc adds very little to the frame rate at 4k really.

>implying it's in stock

vega 56 isnt much of an upgrade over a r9 Fury it seems though i cant find any direct comparisons. And I'd only buy it under $400. Should I just do the Fiji core activation on my fury? It looks like i have 4 cores that could be activated

>technology was a mistake
Fight me fgt.
It is.

>4 cores
You mean 4 CUs?
And no, 56 won't be an upgrade, for now that is.

AMD push Vega to the limit, this card is a turd

He probably bought an Nvidia card that's faster, and cheaper. So he has thst over you wait fags.

well its not good. but for a guy like me who has a good freesync montir, vega liquid running on powersave mode works fine.

its like 5% slower than a 1080

Jesus christ, this level of delusion...

The high end space is a failure for AMD since they can't compete in a timely fashion. Despite them desperately wanting to enter the high end card space for those sweet premium profits. There's a reason the mid range stuff is barely profitable, because whether it's a big die or a little one the cost to manufacture the two is largely the same. The ONLY difference when it comes to manufacturing is how much silicon is used and how many wafers you can maximize. The bigger the die, the more expensive it is.

And catering to miners like AMD does means they are no longer worried abiut enthusiast cards. Just pushing product out the door to salvage this shit architecture.

PC gaming is now a 30 billion dollar a year marketplace. And AMD can't compete.

It was obvious the 1080 Ti would be the better card all along.

11GB > 8GB

I don't give a shit that these cards don't compete with high end nvidia cards.
What I find disgusting about them is the price and power consumption.

AMD wanted to build a hotter FERMI.

Just wait ®

Far from reality. Until the resolution keep increasing gpus will have plenty of market to increase. Today top solutions are breaking even 60 fps on 4k and it's not even considering hdr which will need additional power.
GPUs will stay relevant for at least next 4 years.