Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [KitGuru] AMD Radeon RX Vega caught hiding in plain sight
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[KitGuru] AMD Radeon RX Vega caught hiding in plain sight - Page 9

post #81 of 664
Quote:
Originally Posted by iLeakStuff View Post

If Vega comes out equal to GTX 1080, AMD have failed bigtime.
It will be 2 freaking years after GTX 1080 was released and they only now come out with something competitive to that?

Slap on HBM2 and hope that is enough for sales?
AMD should sell their GPU IPs to a company that wants to compete for the sake of their customers if true.

This is BS. Better be fake
Zen was going to be a miserable failure. There was no way AMD could come up with a part that competed with Intel. They were so far behind that expecting a competitive part until, at the very least, Zen+, is foolish dreaming. Most of their engineering talent left and their management is just not capable.

The 14nm process AMD was using was so bad that anything over 2.5 GHz would require insane voltages. The process simply won't scale.

Board makers were probably going to rebel because of the tight AM4 spec requiring better-quality parts than the low-grade stuff mandated by FM2 and AM3+, causing Zen to not have any useful boards at launch and causing terrible sadness.

AMD has no idea how to make decent L2 caches so the part is going to be really hampered by the L2.

Jim Keller left prematurely because Zen was going to be a failure.

Yeah, I remember all that.
post #82 of 664
Quote:
Originally Posted by CynicalUnicorn View Post

Well... Vega and Fiji both have 4096 cores. A Fury X runs at 1GHz while Vega hits 1.2GHz boost. Polaris is about 15% faster per core per clock than 28nm GCN. TPU has overall benchmarks for the reference 1080Ti and some older cards here: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1080_Ti/30.html
Source for Vega with 1.2GHz boost? And pls don't tell me you mean that kitguru article. AMD confirmed NCU (and that means Vega) is optimized for higher clock speeds



Polaris is (now) able to hit 1.4GHz+ and you believe that Vega is going to be something like 1.2GHz? Sorry, but that's not gonna happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CynicalUnicorn View Post

I don't think Vega will be competing with Nvidia's high-end, unfortunately, but it should do as well as or maybe a bit better than GP104. I think AMD's biggest issues right now are clockspeeds. Their 14nm chips just aren't hitting high enough frequencies to really be competitive, while Pascal is near 2GHz easily.
Pascal (1060) ~2GHz = ~1.4GHz Polaris in terms of Performance.

Don't see a problem there.
post #83 of 664
Quote:
Originally Posted by CynicalUnicorn View Post

Well... Vega and Fiji both have 4096 cores. A Fury X runs at 1GHz while Vega hits 1.2GHz boost. Polaris is about 15% faster per core per clock than 28nm GCN. TPU has overall benchmarks for the reference 1080Ti and some older cards here: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1080_Ti/30.html

A Fury X is 60% as fast as a 1080Ti. Vega therefore should be (0.6)(1.2)(1.15) = 83% as fast, putting it right around a reference 1080.

I don't think Vega will be competing with Nvidia's high-end, unfortunately, but it should do as well as or maybe a bit better than GP104. I think AMD's biggest issues right now are clockspeeds. Their 14nm chips just aren't hitting high enough frequencies to really be competitive, while Pascal is near 2GHz easily.
Comparing cards only based on shaders is honestly just pure madness, if you don't even try to account for the difference in ROP throughput and bandwidth the comparison is really quickly inaccurate enough to be completely meaningless. When TPU also uses arithmetic average for their results and runs half of the benches at pointless framerates (<45 or >180) it's only compound interest, without even mentioning the validity of the card specifications.

It really is quite hilarious following many people spouting the "GCN shaders are poorly utilised and need more TFLOPS to perform equally to Nvidia x" train when the actual case has been worse pixel fill and geometry throughput, lacking a good 30-50% (or in some cases even more) behind the Nvidia cards. Heck, the one actual thing AMD was ahead in was chosen as the specific metric for comparison, while only being one of the performance factors.

If we take the Fury X vs 980 ti for example, the worse performance of the FX is usually a mix of lower than expected memory bandwidth, GPU being poorly fed, Nvidia's better inherent DX11 driver or a mix of those, along with worse performance in the specific areas already mentioned. Simply looking at the Fury vs Fury X should tell you all you should know, despite having an eight of the shaders cut and clock speed being reduced by 5% the performance is rarely worse even by that 5%.

When they've supposedly revamped the front end to actually feed the shaders, massively improved geometry throughput (already in Polaris and another time in Vega, if they're not literally lying in their slides) as well as increasing clock spees and changing up half of the memory subsystem the end performance is more than a bit of a question mark. I doubt even AMDs GPU division is capable of sitting on their asses enough to not make a reasonable improvement.

Multiplying Polaris numbers from 2304/64 to Vega's supposed 4096/64 while keeping the clocks same already puts it near the 1080 ti, with about a 10% advantage for the 1080 ti in FP32 throughput (lines up fairly well with the 180 ti having 13.3 TFLOPS @boost clock) and 50% advantage in pixel fill rate , others being nearly equal. As long as the memory bandwidth is better than on the Fury X, clocks go up from RX 480 and the additional units scale properly Vega should have no issue beating the 1080 and close in on the 1080 ti. If the improvements are large enough it's not impossible that it could beat even the 1080 ti, but I'd still say the reasonable estimate is a bit over the halfway between those two.
Quote:
Originally Posted by superstition222 View Post

What's not surprising is that multi-GPU support has become so weak because Nvidia alone occupies the high end, incentivizing developers to not support multiple GPUs so Nvidia's highest-margin GPUs will sell better.
It certainly does not help. I've had a chat with a few game developers (who've mostly worked on the technical side) and there seems to have been even more of a split of those who actively push the engine side and those that don't care much and mod the engine the other team made or they made a decade ago and try to make the new game work without it crashing and burning horribly. ME:A is pretty much exactly that, some of the best things about Frostbite are gone.
post #84 of 664
So fake LOL.

I expect near 1080 Ti performance for $100-$130 cheaper.
 
Black Beauty
(8 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
6950x @ 4.3/3.5  Titan X Pascal SLI +200/+575 64GB Crucial Sport LT @ 2800mhz 512GB Lite-On SSD 
Hard DriveOSPower
2 x 4TB WD HDD's Windows 10 OEM GOLD 1500w 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
7700K @ 5.0ghz 1.3v Delidded w/ CLU EVGA Z270 Classified K EVGA GTX 1080 TI Hybrid SLI 32GB Corsair Dominator @ 3733mhz 
Hard DriveCoolingPowerCase
3 x 525GB Crucial MX300 in Raid 0 EVGA CLC 120mm EVGA 1000W G2 NZXT S340 Elite 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 5820K 4.8GHZ EVGA Micro 2 X99 GTX 1080 FE SLI Corsair 32GB Dominator 3200MHZ 
CoolingOSMonitorPower
Corsair H100i V2 Windows 10 Seiki Pro SM32UNP 4K EVGA P2 850W Platinum  
Case
Corsair Air 240 
  hide details  
Reply
 
Black Beauty
(8 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
6950x @ 4.3/3.5  Titan X Pascal SLI +200/+575 64GB Crucial Sport LT @ 2800mhz 512GB Lite-On SSD 
Hard DriveOSPower
2 x 4TB WD HDD's Windows 10 OEM GOLD 1500w 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
7700K @ 5.0ghz 1.3v Delidded w/ CLU EVGA Z270 Classified K EVGA GTX 1080 TI Hybrid SLI 32GB Corsair Dominator @ 3733mhz 
Hard DriveCoolingPowerCase
3 x 525GB Crucial MX300 in Raid 0 EVGA CLC 120mm EVGA 1000W G2 NZXT S340 Elite 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 5820K 4.8GHZ EVGA Micro 2 X99 GTX 1080 FE SLI Corsair 32GB Dominator 3200MHZ 
CoolingOSMonitorPower
Corsair H100i V2 Windows 10 Seiki Pro SM32UNP 4K EVGA P2 850W Platinum  
Case
Corsair Air 240 
  hide details  
Reply
post #85 of 664
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBlademaster01 View Post


​Price is still a pretty big factor. If it's $500 and say within 5% of a 1080 Ti, I would consider it very successful tbh. GP104 performance ~5-6 months in 2017 is a fail IMO.

When we discuss pure performance, in terms of applied tech, price is irrelevant. If 500mm2 of brand new NCU cannot match a pascal chip of comparable size, AMD failed. Selling the end product cheap would be the result of that failure. That being said, I expect a card that will compete VERY well with GP102.
Edited by Kuivamaa - 4/29/17 at 5:43pm
Mastodon Ryzen
(12 items)
 
HP Z220
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1800X Asus Crosshair VI Hero Asus R9 Nano Gskill TridentZ 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Pny SSD 240GB Crucial MX100 CM Nepton 280L Win 10 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
Acer Predator XG270HU Freesync XFX 750W Pro HAF XM Logitech G502 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsCooling
i7 3770 HP Quadro K2000 HP 
OSPowerCaseMouse
Win 7  HP 400W HP CMT RAT 7 
  hide details  
Reply
Mastodon Ryzen
(12 items)
 
HP Z220
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1800X Asus Crosshair VI Hero Asus R9 Nano Gskill TridentZ 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Pny SSD 240GB Crucial MX100 CM Nepton 280L Win 10 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
Acer Predator XG270HU Freesync XFX 750W Pro HAF XM Logitech G502 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsCooling
i7 3770 HP Quadro K2000 HP 
OSPowerCaseMouse
Win 7  HP 400W HP CMT RAT 7 
  hide details  
Reply
post #86 of 664
I'm calling complete bogus based on the Tflops alone. I'd bet 10 bucks to a donut full Vega runs at the very least 11 Tflops. Probably closer to 12 or 13 Tflops. Doesn't mean it will best Nvidia's flagship GPU's in real world performance, but to say Vega will only be 1 Tflop ahead of the Fury X is just silly.
post #87 of 664
Quote:
Originally Posted by iLeakStuff View Post

If Vega comes out equal to GTX 1080, AMD have failed bigtime.
It will be 2 freaking years after GTX 1080 was released and they only now come out with something competitive to that?

Slap on HBM2 and hope that is enough for sales?
AMD should sell their GPU IPs to a company that wants to compete for the sake of their customers if true.

This is BS. Better be fake
The 1080 has been out for barely 11 months, how did you jump to 2 years?
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5 3570K [Delid] Asrock Z77E-ITX XFX Radeon R9 Fury X G.SKILL 2133MHz 8GB DDR3 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Crucial M4 256GB Silicon Power S60 120GB Western Digital Blue Scorpio 1TB Seagate Constellation 2 1TB 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Swiftech Apogee Drive II XSPC RX240+EX240 [Painted White] 5x 2150RPM Gentle Typhoons PWM [Painted Black+W... Bitspower Water Tank Z-Multi 80 Inline Reservoir  
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Windows 10 LG 34UC88-B 34" Ultrawide 3440x1440 75Hz HP ZR2240w IPS WASD CODE 87-Key [MX Clear + PBT Keycaps] 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Seasonix X-750 Case Labs Mercury S3 Logitech G502 Sennheiser HD 598 SE 
Audio
Micca OriGen 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5 3570K [Delid] Asrock Z77E-ITX XFX Radeon R9 Fury X G.SKILL 2133MHz 8GB DDR3 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Crucial M4 256GB Silicon Power S60 120GB Western Digital Blue Scorpio 1TB Seagate Constellation 2 1TB 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Swiftech Apogee Drive II XSPC RX240+EX240 [Painted White] 5x 2150RPM Gentle Typhoons PWM [Painted Black+W... Bitspower Water Tank Z-Multi 80 Inline Reservoir  
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Windows 10 LG 34UC88-B 34" Ultrawide 3440x1440 75Hz HP ZR2240w IPS WASD CODE 87-Key [MX Clear + PBT Keycaps] 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Seasonix X-750 Case Labs Mercury S3 Logitech G502 Sennheiser HD 598 SE 
Audio
Micca OriGen 
  hide details  
Reply
post #88 of 664
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuivamaa View Post

Anything less than 1080Ti is a massive disappointment regardless of hype. This is what we expect from the chip's size and the brand new tech it carries. No sugarcoating it, if it doesn't at least match GP102, it fails.

This. They even put out an ad saying Poor Volta. If it can't even beat Pascal, it has no chance of beating Volta. It will be a massive fail regardless of price. Pricing is irrelavent in a performance metric or any sugar coating.
post #89 of 664
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBlademaster01 View Post


​Price is still a pretty big factor. If it's $500 and say within 5% of a 1080 Ti, I would consider it very successful tbh. GP104 performance ~5-6 months in 2017 is a fail IMO.

Having the higher general costs of HBM2 in mind, this is very unlikely. Having the memory alone with a said to be 4096 shader GPU will never cost under 600-700 bucks. If Vega is remotely close to the 1080 Ti, AMD can price it similar .. maybe slightly cheaper. Offering their product would indicate they are weaker than Nvidia. AMD's CEO Lisa Su said that AMd does not want to be seen as the budget brand.

Ryzen was an exception because AMD was practically dead in the CPU section for years. There is as good as no brand reputation left and prizing the CPUs way cheaper was the only way to get back into the heads of the consumers.

(sorry this was not the answer to your post, but my quotes got missing and I am not willing to go through all comments to find it again thumb.gif)

Quote:
Originally Posted by starliner View Post

But what if it's half the price? eh?

Yeah, I duno. Fire sale on AMD stock biggrin.gif

Half the price is a myth. AMD tried this in the past to gain market share (and it failed miserably). People bought the stuff but AMD also lost lots of money, staying in the losses for years. It will be a wonder if they even get to 1080 Ti levels without another round of compromizes.

The AMD stock is nothing bug an object for high-risk gamblers. If Vega is not the mega-hit, it could theoretically drop dramatically again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by iLeakStuff View Post

If Vega comes out equal to GTX 1080, AMD have failed bigtime.
It will be 2 freaking years after GTX 1080 was released and they only now come out with something competitive to that?

You either meant Maxwell's GTX 980 Ti or had meant with 1 year delay after Pascal GTX 1080.

Of course it would be a fail, but if we consider the scarce ressources AMD is operating with, the result would not be a surprise. Ryzen took serious amount of the companies R&D budget. The RTG division must have suffered severely from this fact. In such a situation being competitive is outright ludicrous. Keep in mind AMD was already behind against Maxwell. Against Pascal they probably try to get as much ground as they can. Hard to do if there are so many road blocks and open issues to deal with but no time and money available.

Quote:
Originally Posted by iLeakStuff View Post

Slap on HBM2 and hope that is enough for sales?
AMD should sell their GPU IPs to a company that wants to compete for the sake of their customers if true.

This is BS. Better be fake

Your suggestion is actually my ideal scenario. Better sell the RTG and let someone take control who is up for the job. Being in a pseudo competion only and deliver medicre results will help nobody except maybe Nvidia.

On the other hand, this does not necesarily be a fake. The numbers are theoretcial, but for a strange reason they could match the smaller Vega. If true the smaller Vega comes 2017 and the bigger one .. let's say early 2018. With all the chaos in the AMD naming & model schemes it is totally confusing talking about their development.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nickyvida View Post

Only 1080 performance? Would have to guess it's a bust then. And to think they were saying Poor Volta. It should be Poor Vega. rolleyes.gif

You miss the point. It is not poor Volta, rather poor AMD marketing.
Their marketing campaigns have been questionable since a while. From Fiji's overclockers dream to "has a brain and a soul" nothing but nonsense came out of their sources. I wouldn't believe a single word they say. Especially since Polaris has been such a failure in technical terms.

Wait for final reviews and prices, then we can talk again.
post #90 of 664
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lipos View Post

Source for Vega with 1.2GHz boost? And pls don't tell me you mean that kitguru article. AMD confirmed NCU (and that means Vega) is optimized for higher clock speeds



Polaris is (now) able to hit 1.4GHz+ and you believe that Vega is going to be something like 1.2GHz? Sorry, but that's not gonna happen.
Pascal (1060) ~2GHz = ~1.4GHz Polaris in terms of Performance.

Don't see a problem there.

Polaris at 1.4GHz+ is past the efficient range of GCN. They had to bump up voltage to > 1.1V to achieve that. However, the Techpowerup made-up statistic had 1.2GHz boost clocks

1.4GHz Polaris is only equal to a 2GHz Pascal part if it is an optimized situation where there is no memory compression possible and use of more cores is better. In reality you're looking at less than Pascal GTX 1060 6GB performance because the RX 580 edges outs the GTX 1060 6GB at stock (at best) and not across the board.

The RX 480 / RX 580 is a 2304 shader part , the GTX 1060 6GB uses 1280 CUDA cores. That's 80% more cores. Those cores use up power even when idle, so you can't expect it to scale well if the same clocks are used.
Edited by AlphaC - 4/29/17 at 8:37pm
Workstation stuff
(407 photos)
SpecViewperf 12.0.1
(117 photos)
PGA 1331
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Zen SR7 octocore (Ryzen 7 1700) Overclockable AM4 motherboard X370 To be determined , AMD Vega? 2x8GB DDR4 low-profile or heatsink-less 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Samsung 950 Pro / 960 Evo / 960 Pro 256GB or 51... Samsung 850 Evo 1TB SSD Storage Black or black+white Twin tower air cooler or s... EK Vardar F2-140 140mm, Phanteks PH-F140SP 140m... 
CoolingOSMonitorPower
Fractal Design Dynamic GP14 (included with case) Win 10 Pro 64 bit 4K monitor with Freesync EVGA Supernova G3/P2 750W or 850W 
Case
Fractal Design Define R5 Blackout edition 
  hide details  
Reply
Workstation stuff
(407 photos)
SpecViewperf 12.0.1
(117 photos)
PGA 1331
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Zen SR7 octocore (Ryzen 7 1700) Overclockable AM4 motherboard X370 To be determined , AMD Vega? 2x8GB DDR4 low-profile or heatsink-less 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Samsung 950 Pro / 960 Evo / 960 Pro 256GB or 51... Samsung 850 Evo 1TB SSD Storage Black or black+white Twin tower air cooler or s... EK Vardar F2-140 140mm, Phanteks PH-F140SP 140m... 
CoolingOSMonitorPower
Fractal Design Dynamic GP14 (included with case) Win 10 Pro 64 bit 4K monitor with Freesync EVGA Supernova G3/P2 750W or 850W 
Case
Fractal Design Define R5 Blackout edition 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [KitGuru] AMD Radeon RX Vega caught hiding in plain sight