Wednesday, July 19th 2017
AMD's RX Vega Low Key Budapest Event: Vega Pitted Against GTX 1080
On the first stop in AMD's two-continent spanning RX Vega tour (which really only counts with three locations), the company pitted their upcoming RX Vega graphics card (we expect this to be their flagship offering) against NVIDIA's GTX 1080 graphics card. The event itself was pretty subdued, and there was not much to see when it comes to the RX Vega graphics card - literally. Both it and the GTX 1080 were enclosed inside PC towers, with the event-goers not being allowed to even catch a glimpse of the piece of AMD hardware that has most approximated a unicorn in recent times.
The Vega-powered system also made use of a Ryzen 7 processor, and the cards were running Battlefield 1 (or Sniper Elite 4; there's lots of discussion going on about that, but the first image below does show a first-person view) with non-descript monitors, one supporting FreeSync, the other G-Sync. The monitor's models were covered by cloth so that users weren't able to tell which system was running which graphics card, though due to ASUS' partnership in the event, both were (probably) of ASUS make. The resolution used was 3440 x 1440, which should mean over 60 FPS on the GTX 1080 on Ultra. It has been reported by users that attended the event that one of the systems lagged slightly in one portion of the demo, though we can't confirm which one (and I'd say that was AMD's intention.)
All in all, I have to say, this tour doesn't inspire me confidence. This isn't the kind of "in your face" comparison we're used to seeing from companies who know they have a winning product; should the comparison be largely in favor of AMD, I posit the company would be taking every advantage of that by showcasing their performance leadership. There did seem to be an inordinate amount of smoke and mirrors here, though, with AMD going out of its way to prevent attendees from being able to discern between their and their competitors' offering.
AMD reportedly told attendees that the AMD and NVIDIA systems had a $300 difference in AMD's favor. All other hardware being equal, and accounting for AMD's stance that a FreeSync monitor tends to cost around $200 less than a comparable NVIDIA G-Sync enabled one, that leaves around $100 savings solely towards the RX Vega part of the equation. This means the RX Vega could sell around the $459-$500 bracket, if current pricing of the GTX 1080 is what AMD considered.
Sources:
Reddit User @ Szunyogg, RX Vega Budapest Google Photos, WCCFTech
The Vega-powered system also made use of a Ryzen 7 processor, and the cards were running Battlefield 1 (or Sniper Elite 4; there's lots of discussion going on about that, but the first image below does show a first-person view) with non-descript monitors, one supporting FreeSync, the other G-Sync. The monitor's models were covered by cloth so that users weren't able to tell which system was running which graphics card, though due to ASUS' partnership in the event, both were (probably) of ASUS make. The resolution used was 3440 x 1440, which should mean over 60 FPS on the GTX 1080 on Ultra. It has been reported by users that attended the event that one of the systems lagged slightly in one portion of the demo, though we can't confirm which one (and I'd say that was AMD's intention.)
175 Comments on AMD's RX Vega Low Key Budapest Event: Vega Pitted Against GTX 1080
I find it funny how "naked eye FPS comparisons" are even making tech news, like cmon hahah, whats next? footage of a pc running YouTube while using an RX ?
The only difference is that Vega takes so long from an initial announcement to the actual release, that even pseudo-tech-enthusiast sites completely lost interest in making bogus benchmark screenshots and fake photos for the sake of ad revenue :banghead:
Everyone is tired... Radeon Group, OEMs, fans, potential buyers... even boobs don't help in this depressing situation. :cry:
ONE GAME DOES NOT DESCRIBE A VIDEO CARD. I don't know what way that needs to be phrased for people, but it is a thing. Overall the only same generation AMD card that is competitive is the 5970 and yes captain obvious it beats it. It also consumes 30 watts less power, which I already said.
The reference 480 was hot correct, it also consumed quite a bit of power (quite a bit less than vega), but that design was not bad, the fermi 2.0 cards were absolutely beautiful.
2003 was the release period for the 9000 series AMD saw a 13% market share increase. They saw a 21% market share increase with the X800 series. The market follows when someone releases a good product just fine. They saw a slight market share bump with the Radeon 4000/5000 series as well. After that the next "good" AMD product was the tahiti based 79x0 cards which they yet again saw a bump from. Looks like the market works fine.
Poor viewing angles are a built-in property of TN. This really IS an issue.
This is a 24" LCD, which helps a lot. If you go for a larger TN LCD (30"+) and use it at a typical desktop viewing distance (50-70cm), you'll already notice the difference near the edges.
From a different point of view: imagine a situation when 2 people at the office are looking at the same TN LCD while discussing e.g. a PowerPoint presentation. They will see different colours on the screen. Good luck. :D
Any price speculations for big and aib Vega? Hbm2 is pricey and Vega chip is bigger than gp102, what can AMD do at all?
nVidia could announce a product the day after, and have it in a market in a month.
Waiting for Vega. It'll definetly be an improvement over the Nano, thats for sure, and it will help with the 144hz freq of the Monitor.
By the way, this Monitor, while beeing VA, is a bit of HDR as well (600 nits) and it is as fast as a TN supposedly with a 1ms Response Time.
I believe THIS would be the best Monitor for Gaming.
If Vega has Performance at or above 1080 while costing less, ist fine by me. I naturally wished it was more, but hey, you cant have it all. Beside, probably with the maturing of Drivers more Performance will be squezed out of it.
Im allready gaming decently with the R9 Nano, which is basically a stand by Card (Had 2 1080 before, and sold them), so it cant be that bad with VEGA.
Besides, what i'm really hoping for is a DUAL GPU Card. Something with like 4 8 PIN PCI power. I would get me two of those just to Benchmark.
Their old R9 390 is pretty much the same in performance to the RX 580...
Like is VEGA just a terrible architecture or what? cant they like just fit an RX 580 with a lot more of.. well everything and have that be the more high end card?
I mean unless you tell me it would not offer any more performance,
why not get an RX580 and put on that card 16gb of ram, 64 ROP's and 4608 shaders or something and sell it as an RX590?
It does seem a little stupid, doesn't it?
Air cooled card wouldn't draw so much power anyway, air cooler won't allow that...
If you want max 24/7 performance, you want water cooling on any card (or a very good custom fan design).
I also posted that people did buy and those times with a ncie neat graph that had a breakdown showing market share increase for amd during those times. You have chosen to ignore it however because it doesnt fit your plight against the green.