Monday, May 8th 2017
AMD Vega 10 3DMark Fire Strike Results Surface
Another day, another set of Vega results see the light of it. It would seem like this saga has been going on for ages, ever since we've seen AMD showcase its prototype Vega cards running Star Wars Battlefront (4K, Ultra settings at over 60 FPS) and Doom (4K, Vulcan render path at over 60 FPS on pre-production hardware). But with the lack of official information coming from AMD (let's hope this changes on May 16th), it would seem the company is content to see us hardware news sites jumping at every detail and offering free publicity.
This is known to be Vega because the device ID, 687F:C1, was spotted on AMD's own hands while running that Doom demo in 4K. The device clocks seem to be in line with previous leaks: a 1200 MHz core clock and 8GB of video memory running at 700 MHz memory clocks. With these clocks (which are expected to be extremely conservative when we take into account what we know of Vega), the Vega video card manages to deliver a 17,801 points graphics score, approximately 1,400 points more than your average Fury X, but some hundreds less than your average, current-generation GTX 1070. Remember: AMD's MI25 is expected to come in at 1,500 MHz core clocks, and this is a professional, passively-cooled graphics card. This means that unless AMD greatly overestimated the clock capability of its Vega cards, the consumer version of Vega will have necessarily higher clocks. But we'll stay here, waiting for some more details to pour our way, as always.
Source:
WCCFTech
This is known to be Vega because the device ID, 687F:C1, was spotted on AMD's own hands while running that Doom demo in 4K. The device clocks seem to be in line with previous leaks: a 1200 MHz core clock and 8GB of video memory running at 700 MHz memory clocks. With these clocks (which are expected to be extremely conservative when we take into account what we know of Vega), the Vega video card manages to deliver a 17,801 points graphics score, approximately 1,400 points more than your average Fury X, but some hundreds less than your average, current-generation GTX 1070. Remember: AMD's MI25 is expected to come in at 1,500 MHz core clocks, and this is a professional, passively-cooled graphics card. This means that unless AMD greatly overestimated the clock capability of its Vega cards, the consumer version of Vega will have necessarily higher clocks. But we'll stay here, waiting for some more details to pour our way, as always.
60 Comments on AMD Vega 10 3DMark Fire Strike Results Surface
I'd guess there is going to be three Vega SKUs and this is the bottom one. That would fill out their lineup perfectly with the RX 480 right on the 1060, this bottom vega at or above the 1070 when fully clocked, middle vega around the 1080, and big vega around the Titan Xp.
Well, next month the dust will settle and we'll be able to see this mythical beast.
As @PowerPC said, if this is supposed to be the "low" end vega, this is actually pretty good.
There could be some merit to this leak though, albeit a controlled leak if you asked me. AMD is testing the waters and getting feedback and tinkering little by little, i just hope this launch is not anything like Ryzen. Please send the cards out on time and give reviewers the necessary time needed to properly test these gpus.
My .02
Maybe this picture appeared on 1st April ,2017 around many website is real slide?
Maybe 1.6GHz+ as slide the top one.
1.6GHz Clock could archive amazing performance.
Maximum pixel rate = 1.6GHz x 64 = 102.4 Gpixel/sec
Maximum texel rate = 1.6GHz x 256 = 409.6 Gtexel/sec
OMG!
www.3dmark.com/fs/11978393
www.3dmark.com/fs/11924657
www.3dmark.com/fs/12027989
Also overclock should be taken into account.
Also I don't think "Vega 10" is the uarch name. Vega 10 is a code name for GPU (like Hawaii, Tonga, Fiji, Polaris 10/11 etc.).
Unless AMD comes up with the new name for the massively refined GCN that Vega will be based upon I guess name will be GCN5 (Polaris cards being based upon GCN4).