AMD Vega 10 3DMark Fire Strike Results Surface

[bug]

I thought 1080ti was only 17% faster than vanilla at 1080P... The real gains were at 4K (showcasing the terrible scaling of pascal).

I fail to see what 1080Ti has to do with Fury sucking at 4k. Pick any Fury review you want, you'll see in many titles where it can't deliver an average of 60fps. In several titles it struggled to deliver 30. It may scale better than the competition, but is not a card built for 4k. That's just a marketing line to divert attention from the fact that it gets stomped on by competition at FHD.

 

[dozenfury]

Given AMD's history of leaks, and performance nearly every time not aligning with what was leaked, I'd suggest it's probably prudent to wait on concluding anything. It's not bad info to see and speculate on. But before the 480X came out we had "leaks" showing it anywhere from faster than sli'd 980ti's (lol, in hindsight) to slower than an AMD 380.

Even after release and third-party reviews people will still blame drivers for poor numbers on either side.

 

[medi01]

performance nearly every time not aligning with what was leaked

You are seriously blaming AMD for existence of some made up bullcrap by who knows whom?

 

[bug]

You are seriously blaming AMD for existence of some made up bullcrap by who knows whom?

He's just highlighted how well past leaks have aligned with actual products.

 

[evernessince]

Apart from AMD's own marketing team*, nobody believes Fury was built for 4k. Because it can't actually do 4k@60fps without lowering settings.

*and they're paid to believe it

The Fury X had a problem at 1080p because the schedulers couldn't keep the GPU cores loaded. The GCN architecture was never designed to have that many cores under each cluster. Vega has an improved scheduler designed specifically to fix that issue so we are not only going to see performance improvements from the other changes but you will finally see them taking advantage of all of those hardware resources. 4K doesn't have as many draw calls so it makes sense that the Fury X performed better at that resolution.

 

[diatribe]

I really hope AMD can knock one out of the park with Vega's release. I'm just afraid that it may be too little too late as Nvidia has been releasing competing products for a year without much competition from AMD.

From a strategic standpoint Nvidia is killing AMD due to their much stronger R&D and capital investments. I truly believe that AMD is doing their best to release strong products, but they are limited by their resources to truly compete with Nvidia.

 

[EarthDog]

Hopefully the lower SKU... the flagship had better fall between 1080-1080ti!!!

You are seriously blaming AMD for existence of some made up bullcrap by who knows whom?

I mean we already blame them for their own made up bullcrap they release...why not this?

 

[medi01]

Remind me Zen/Ryzen leaks pretty please.

Or 290 leaks.
Or 290x leaks.
Or, goddamn Fury X leaks.
Or, perhaps, 4xxx, 5xxx, 6xxx, 7xxx series leaks.
(I don't recall when wccftech has been created)

You know, I want to see a goddamn pattern and not feel like it's just somebody's FUD repeated multiple times.

 

[dwade]

WCCF is the CNN of PC hardware.

 

[EarthDog]

WCCF is the CNN of PC hardware.

hahahahahahaha omg... no. Jesus no. Holy moly no. Its not like foxnews either... sweet marmalade just no.


Wccf is like TMZ or one of those gossip magazines or something...

 

[idx]

People! calm down, I checked my cooking pot and I can confirm this is just a click-bait started to spread through 3 other websites ( I guess someone was hopping to make some drama specially on the market side on AMD). I'm 100% sure that VEGAs is faster than the GP104 and a little bit slower than the GP100 ( we will see.. right ?).

Chill ! people chill !

Edit: I realized that I posted in the wrong thread.. posting it again.