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
Amd released a 1080 competitor two years ago. It was called dual rx480's. You know what it did? Consumed roughly half the power of a Vega fe, cost similar to a 1070 and if the game supported xfire it worked just like a 1080. 2 years later where are we? Oh we are trying to push the fx8150 of graphics cards.
As for the second part, if AMD already released dual RX480 (which it didn't on single PCB) to counter GTX 1080, then why all this whining ever since R9 Fury X how AMD doesn't have anything to go against GTX 1080? Make up your god damn minds, will ya? AMD fanboy... F**k me.
well let's hope that's the bottom that they can get, wake them up and come up with something truly innovative like Rayzen
You have been swinging off of the vaporware that is vega for 6-8 months now. You have zero facts to back up any argument repeat the same line of b.s. and every time someone throws sand up to show how wrong that line is you stone wall and ignore it. AGAIN NVIDIA LOST MARKET SHARE AND ATI GAINED IT IN ALL OF THE TIMES YPU HAVE MENTIONED.
www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/amd-rx-vega-reportedly-beats-gtx-1080-5-performance-improvement-per-month.234924/page-4#post-3689493Look at this bashing of NVIDIA! God I'm so nasty by stating that NVIDIA has excellent drivers and holds supreme performance crown in a SINGLE SENTENCE. OH MAH GOD.
As for drivers and "terrible". I've had generations of Radeon cards and never had issues. I've also had several generations of GeForce cards. Also never had any serious issues. There were issues with both, mostly minor glitches that got fixed in driver or two.
People are reacting to your invalid point, quoted above. People DID call Nvidia out for the hot chip. People actually did switch to Radeon as Cdawall's sales graphs show.
If you simply say you understand this, it's all good. You're currently being gang banged because you've not accepted what you wrote (in quotes) is wrong. The history doesn't support you, nor does the sales figures.
Also, of real merit, after Fermi, Nvidia made efforts to streamline and make the design more efficient. We've seen it as they've reduced the compute component over time. This flipped the tables on former ATI who had made some nice efficient designs, especially by offering the 5870/5850 cards at the time.
Nvidia were laughed at and ATI got better sales. Nvidia managed though to get a full core 580 chip to succeed the 480 and this caught folk off guard (notably Charlie at Semi Accurate who said 'trust me, Nvidia cannot make a full core Fermi chip, it's not possible).
Since then, dropping compute has worked for gaming in the most part. Except now, GP100 and GV100 are not the same chip for gaming cards. Nvidia, unlike AMD is bifurcating their stack for HPC and general consumer.
Anyway. Most folk know your not a fan boy but failing to address your own erroneous statements doesnt help.
And if you mean minor glitches like, the overclock section shitting itself every single time you restart the computer normally then sure "Minor" or black screen crashes in multiple games or xfire just not working in games. The list goes on.
Everyone can see you're very supportive for AMD - yet, whenever someone points this out, you use the same story about not having AMD gear. It's been going on for months!
So here's the question: if you value recent AMD products so much, why don't you buy anything?
About the argument of dual R9 Fuxy x , not a lot of time ago i was wondering if would be good to add another Fury x or buy a 1080ti and the thing is that if we have to talk about performance we have to use the latest drivers too and not refer to old tests with old drivers or all this don't make any sense.
I wanna see how it goes with RX Vega but i was wandering what graphic card was pushing the first time was announced Doom at 4 k at 60 fps .
Was the FT or this RX Vega in ealry stages?
We don't know and i hope that was not only a dev concept that didn't work out .
AT 4k 2 How is the difference with 2 Fury x vs 1 1080ti with the latest drivers?
Because we have to push it to the limit to testing it out not using 1080p that don't push anything high end .
We have to wait and see how it goes .
4K 60 is good so i don't see the point in going over the refresh rate .