Tuesday, May 2nd 2017

AMD Says Vega is "On Track" for Q2 2017 Release

During its Q1 reports for fiscal year 2017 (which saw AMD's stock tumbling about, even if this Q1 only considers a single Ryzen sales-month on its accounts), AMD CEO Lisa Su referred that AMD's high-performance Vega architecture is still on track for a Q2 2017 release. The words, specifically, are these: "AMD's "Vega" GPU architecture is on track to launch in Q2, and has been designed from scratch to address the most data- and visually-intensive next-generation workloads with key architecture advancements including: a differentiated memory subsystem, next-generation geometry pipeline, new compute engine, and a new pixel engine."

So yes, AMD confirms what we suspected. This leaves a launch time-frame for Vega products until, at most, the end of June. Confirmation after confirmation, it's still a long time to wait, if you'll ask me, with little to no information in the last few months. But it's better than nothing, and I'd much prefer a real launch with retail availability than a glorified paper launch. Here's hoping Vega answers our questions and our needs. It's been a long time coming already.
Add your own comment

34 Comments on AMD Says Vega is "On Track" for Q2 2017 Release

#26
the54thvoid
Super Intoxicated Moderator
HoodYou forgot to put Ryzen on the list, a botched launch if I ever saw one.
Botched launch but a very competent and competitive CPU. Fits perfectly in my system with M2 drive and 1080ti. Blows my old Sandy-E and 980ti combo out of the water.
Posted on Reply
#27
Boosnie
Botched?
For a completely new platform been born in a world of hardware and software optimized solely for intel and nvidia product lines is a bit a harsh word IMHO.

Regarding price/performance issues, I'd suggest 2 things:
  1. The platform is not even been decentely rumored about right now, I find it difficult someone has a decent overview of the actual performance when paired with different HW configs.
  2. Nvidia monopoly of the last years has brought an insane increase in prices for their higher end cards. The margins are extremely high, expecially if you consider the Titan. AMD has room for an aggressive pricing strategy for the first iteration of the cards. Nvidia BTW, mostly thanks to an outrageous number of fanboys and over leaning press coverages, potentially has amassed the cash to sell at a loss to drown Vega launch and its first few months of life until Volta launch.
The situation is a bit on the uncertain side of the hill to start a flame right now, IMO.
Posted on Reply
#28
the54thvoid
Super Intoxicated Moderator
BoosnieBotched?
For a completely new platform been born in a world of hardware and software optimized solely for intel and nvidia product lines is a bit a harsh word IMHO.

Regarding price/performance issues, I'd suggest 2 things:
  1. The platform is not even been decentely rumored about right now, I find it difficult someone has a decent overview of the actual performance when paired with different HW configs.
  2. Nvidia monopoly of the last years has brought an insane increase in prices for their higher end cards. The margins are extremely high, expecially if you consider the Titan. AMD has room for an aggressive pricing strategy for the first iteration of the cards. Nvidia BTW, mostly thanks to an outrageous number of fanboys and over leaning press coverages, potentially has amassed the cash to sell at a loss to drown Vega launch and its first few months of life until Volta launch.
The situation is a bit on the uncertain side of the hill to start a flame right now, IMO.
So.... don't blame the current situation on Nvidia fan boys and PR conspiracy if you dont want to start a flame.
Posted on Reply
#29
Boosnie
the54thvoidSo.... don't blame the current situation on Nvidia fan boys and PR conspiracy if you dont want to start a flame.
There is scientific evidence out there for this claims.
It lays in past price/performance points back when ATI was a company on it's own.
Posted on Reply
#30
rruff
sergionographySo to summarize i think at the worst case scenario the highest end vega would perform between 1080 and 1080ti, or basically around 50% faster than furyx. And at the best case scenario if we assume the architecture is a solid improvement in per core/shader performance then we could end up with a card twice as fast as furyx
Agree. Most likely the "worst case".

But it won't be the cool fuel sipper that Pascal is. And before long Nvidia will be on to the next generation.
Posted on Reply
#31
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Actually, most of the features in Vega over Polaris are designed to curb power consumption. Like Pascal, Vega is designed to work smarter, not harder.
Posted on Reply
#32
Th3pwn3r
HoodYou forgot to put Ryzen on the list, a botched launch if I ever saw one.
How so?
Posted on Reply
#33
sergionography
rruffAgree. Most likely the "worst case".

But it won't be the cool fuel sipper that Pascal is. And before long Nvidia will be on to the next generation.
Well yes but then pascal is a stripped out architecture that will be rendered useless once the next nvidia architecture comes out. AMD on the other hand support their cards for much longer and often build architectures with much untapped potential that keeps them relevant and consistent for atleast 3+ years. If anything there is a reason vega has the same number of cores as fury x yet is rumored to be similar in die size even with being on 14nm. If i was amd and wanted to aim that low i wouldve simple did a die shrink on fury x probably with polaris cores and a conservative 350mm2 die size, clocked it around 1300mhz to perform similar to a 1080 or a bit less. And go from there. But to wait a couple years and release a 500mm2+ chip, there just better be something big up their sleeves
Posted on Reply
#34
medi01
So less than 2 months away, sigh.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Mar 15th, 2025 21:04 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts