• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

AMD's Vega-based Cards to Reportedly Launch in May 2017 - Leak

If AMD can release a dual-Vega card with HBM and a closed loop cooler around $600 or so it would blow nVidia's gaming market out of the water until 2018.

It's not likely though

(I'm assuming Vega 10 will beat Pascal in Perf/watt but not in throughput)
 
Blueberries said:
(I'm assuming Vega 10 will beat Pascal in Perf/watt but not in throughput)
Click to expand...
Vega will not beat Pascal in efficiency. Pascal is currently 80% more efficient than Polaris, there is no way AMD can improve like that over night.
And if Vega were more efficient, it would scale past Pascal.
 
Blueberries said:
If AMD can release a dual-Vega card with HBM and a closed loop cooler around $600 or so it would blow nVidia's gaming market out of the water until 2018.

It's not likely though

(I'm assuming Vega 10 will beat Pascal in Perf/watt but not in throughput)
Click to expand...

...dual gpu cards have been quite cringe worthy (295X2 & TitianZ) and haven't benefited either team in quite a while..... unless you bought them for under $400.......even then you'd still be that odd fellow (kidding both gpus have a cult like following and a serious fan club)
 
Last edited:
efikkan said:
Vega will not beat Pascal in efficiency. Pascal is currently 80% more efficient than Polaris, there is no way AMD can improve like that over night.
And if Vega were more efficient, it would scale past Pascal.
Click to expand...

The new silicon alone is going to match/beat Pascal. It just gets worse with dx12/vulkan.

And 80%? Wut?
 
TheGuruStud said:
The new silicon alone is going to match/beat Pascal. It just gets worse with dx12/vulkan.
Click to expand...
How? Please explain yourself. If true it would be the greatest achievement ever, and a much larger progress than anything in over a decade, in fact it would require about the same improvement as ~HD 4000 vs Polaris in a single jump without any node shrinks, dream on…
 
TheGuruStud said:
The new silicon alone is going to match/beat Pascal. It just gets worse with dx12/vulkan.

And 80%? Wut?
Click to expand...

Admittedly this. I was kinda reading everyone saying 1080 if lucky probably not even 1080ti or titan certainly and I'm kind of thinking to myself yeah, we don't know for sure but seems awfully cynical for a GPU that AMD seems pretty confident is worth leaking info about and has promising physical specs plus the die shrink alone if all put together properly could be super efficient and fast.
 
efikkan said:
I've not seen the details of Vega 11 yet, but I assume it will be GDDR 5(X).

HBM has so far been a bad move for AMD, and it's not going to help Vega 10 for gaming either. GP102 doesn't need it, and it's still going to beat Vega 10. HBM or better will be needed eventually, but let's see if even Volta needs it for gaming. AMD should have spent their resources on the GPU rather than memory bandwidth they don't need.
Click to expand...

Nope it's HBM2. RX 470 - RX Fury will ALL be HBM2. HBM isn't expensive anymore, Nvidia is just milking their customers.


All you need to do is remember back to the HD 4870 that cost HALF as much as the 280. It had that "Expensive and new" GDDR5.
 
efikkan said:
How? Please explain yourself. If true it would be the greatest achievement ever, and a much larger progress than anything in over a decade, in fact it would require about the same improvement as ~HD 4000 vs Polaris in a single jump without any node shrinks, dream on…
Click to expand...

Take the 480 down to the reports of 95w with the refresh. Even if a little generous that matches its competition. Vega will have IPC gains (potentially good gains) and using same silicon.
 
dalekdukesboy said:
Admittedly this. I was kinda reading everyone saying 1080 if lucky probably not even 1080ti or titan certainly and I'm kind of thinking to myself yeah, we don't know for sure but seems awfully cynical for a GPU that AMD seems pretty confident is worth leaking info about and has promising physical specs plus the die shrink alone if all put together properly could be super efficient and fast.
Click to expand...

Have you looked at the leaked specs? It's easily 2-3x stronger than the 480, and that puts it firmly in Titan XP territory.


Now I don't have a crystal ball, but that's how strong the Vega 10 card SHOULD be. If it isn't, it will be a complete failure unless it uses like 100w.
 
Captain_Tom said:
Have you looked at the leaked specs? It's easily 2-3x stronger than the 480, and that puts it firmly in Titan XP territory.


Now I don't have a crystal ball, but that's how strong the Vega 10 card SHOULD be. If it isn't, it will be a complete failure unless it uses like 100w.
Click to expand...

Um...yes I looked at the specs, and I think you misread me entirely. I was saying I'm not sure why people are putting the card down and seems to me like it should be treated with great optimism and looking at those specs and die shrink gains in efficiency YEAH I'm saying I think it could be quite the card. Again I don't know for sure no crystal ball here either but I agree with you I think this will be serious competition for whatever Nvidia has out there right now if it is done right.
 
efikkan said:
How? Please explain yourself. If true it would be the greatest achievement ever, and a much larger progress than anything in over a decade, in fact it would require about the same improvement as ~HD 4000 vs Polaris in a single jump without any node shrinks, dream on…
Click to expand...

lmao are you high?!


The 1080 for reference is only 15% stronger than the Fury X. So you think AMD will have trouble making a card more than 15% stronger than their 1.5 year old flagship?


Dude stop drinking Nvidia's marketing koolaid...
 
dalekdukesboy said:
Um...yes I looked at the specs, and I think you misread me entirely. I was saying I'm not sure why people are putting the card down and seems to me like it should be treated with great optimism and looking at those specs and die shrink gains in efficiency YEAH I'm saying I think it could be quite the card. Again I don't know for sure no crystal ball here either but I agree with you I think this will be serious competition for whatever Nvidia has out there right now if it is done right.
Click to expand...

Buddy I was backing you up lol. I am on your side, sorry if it sounded like I was attacking you.

As for why people are so skeptical? I really am not sure, but my guess is Nvidia fanboys have just completely bought into Nvidia's marketing.


I mean at best Nvidia has a 33% efficiency advantage over AMD (Titan X vs 480). Just switching to HBM alone would make them equally efficient, and we already know that 14nm has become incredibly more efficient with recent maturity.

To compete with the Titan X AMD would have just had to scale up the 480 to a twice as big die. However they have done that, and then they overhauled the entire architecture. The RX Fury (Or 590?) should be a monster.
 
Captain_Tom said:
Nope it's HBM2. RX 470 - RX Fury will ALL be HBM2. HBM isn't expensive anymore, Nvidia is just milking their customers.
Click to expand...
So why will Vega 10 (the consumer version) only have 8 GB?
We all know the supply of HBM2 is low.

TheGuruStud said:
Take the 480 down to the reports of 95w with the refresh. Even if a little generous that matches its competition. Vega will have IPC gains (potentially good gains) and using same silicon.
Click to expand...
There are mythical reports of super binnings of Polaris, but that's not a fair comparison.
This is a real world comparison:
polaris_vs_pascal.png

(Note: Picture is cut)
 
efikkan said:
So why will Vega 10 (the consumer version) only have 8 GB?
We all know the supply of HBM2 is low.


There are mythical reports of super binnings of Polaris, but that's not a fair comparison.
This is a real world comparison:
View attachment 83094
(Note: Picture is cut)
Click to expand...

Now, you're just blatantly trolling and need banned.
 
Captain_Tom said:
Buddy I was backing you up lol. I am on your side, sorry if it sounded like I was attacking you.

As for why people are so skeptical? I really am not sure, but my guess is Nvidia fanboys have just completely bought into Nvidia's marketing.


I mean at best Nvidia has a 33% efficiency advantage over AMD (Titan X vs 480). Just switching to HBM alone would make them equally efficient, and we already know that 14nm has become incredibly more efficient with recent maturity.

To compete with the Titan X AMD would have just had to scale up the 480 to a twice as big die. However they have done that, and then they overhauled the entire architecture. The RX Fury (Or 590?) should be a monster.
Click to expand...

HA, that's funny, I almost said Hey buddy etc in response to you and said I'm on your side etc:). I ended up rephrasing it but I saw your post and I thought it was mine because I was thinking it still and forgot which way I had typed it. Anyway I don't care about being "attacked" but thanks, I just misread your tone and admittedly was confused it sounded like you agreed but yet didn't, so yeah no worries. I like arguing my point anyway so no worries on my feelings lol. Yeah anyway I agree, I saw specs and the doom test and various other leaks and fact they are confident enough to leak it months in advance is a good sign by itself, and all the evidence points to a very strong high end GPU that finally will compete with Nvidia's high end offerings.

Also that last slide showing efficiency or lack thereof is well known about the rx480 I admit it's a disappointment but this is NOT rx480 no? If it were, we wouldn't even have this discussion of even the hint of potential AMD could compete, no one would argue for it and no one would bother arguing against it for it would be obvious to all it was like an AMD CPU nowadays and just ok for price point only not performance.
 
TheGuruStud said:
Now, you're just blatantly trolling and need banned.
Click to expand...
I'm getting tired of this old lie.
I've checked >60 RX 480 reviews, both the initial and the more recent ones, and they all show power usage of ~150W +/-10%, in fact Techpowerup's measurements is slightly below average. There are no significant difference between the first batches and the more recent ones, and there are no significant difference between reference and non-reference boards, just the usual variance you'll get with every card. What matters is what you'll get when you buy a card, not what one out of every thousand cards claims to perform. It's disingenuous to claim that buyers will get a "95W" card, when we all know they'll get a ~150W card.
 
efikkan said:
I'm getting tired of this old lie.
I've checked >60 RX 480 reviews, both the initial and the more recent ones, and they all show power usage of ~150W +/-10%, in fact Techpowerup's measurements is slightly below average. There are no significant difference between the first batches and the more recent ones, and there are no significant difference between reference and non-reference boards, just the usual variance you'll get with every card. What matters is what you'll get when you buy a card, not what one out of every thousand cards claims to perform. It's disingenuous to claim that buyers will get a "95W" card, when we all know they'll get a ~150W card.
Click to expand...

No, now you're BSing and changing the subject after being called out. A 480 does not use 80% more power than a 1060 (trying to slip in 1070/1080 as a replacement). You're not being disingenuous or ignorant. You're lying intentionally. STFU.
 
efikkan said:
So why will Vega 10 (the consumer version) only have 8 GB?
We all know the supply of HBM2 is low.
Click to expand...

Why is anyone complaining about 8GB? That is definitely enough.

Furthermore let's see if AMD's new memory tech indeed cuts usage in half. If 8GB's of AMD acts as good as 16GB of Nvidia, Nvidia is the one who will need to step their game up.
 
kruk said:
If 470 doesn't compete with 1060, then 1050 Ti also doesn't compete with 470. Period!
Still waiting for the 80% difference ...
Click to expand...

Didn't say they did compete. The 470 is AMD's most efficient card, and the 1050 Ti, 1070, and 1080 all beat it by >60%. I think 60% is a lot.

And I'd love to see some verified testing of new Polaris cards that shows they really have 50% greater efficiency than when first introduced. The only thing I can find are rumors from 3 months ago.
 
rruff said:
Didn't say they did compete. The 470 is AMD's most efficient card, and the 1050 Ti, 1070, and 1080 all beat it by >60%. I think 60% is a lot.

And I'd love to see some verified testing of new Polaris cards that shows they really have 50% greater efficiency than when first introduced. The only thing I can find are rumors from 3 months ago.
Click to expand...

But with the 1060 3GB that is closest with the performance it's sub 20% difference. What's your point?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top