Vega Rumors

hey hey guys lets get off the polaris stuff, the rx580, rx480 same chip, both of these cards can use each others bioses lol, what does that tell us?


Revision or not, the rx580 is P10 with higher clocks along with that the crazy increase in power consumption we saw with overclocking the rx480.

And yeah gold FE with water cooling, as I stated with Fiji, there is NO reason to have water cooling on a card unless there is a NEED FOR IT.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NKD
like this
razor1 said:
hey hey guys lets get off the polaris stuff, the rx580, rx480 same chip, both of these cards can use each others bioses lol, what does that tell us?


Revision or not, the rx580 is P10 with higher clocks along with that the crazy increase in power consumption we saw with overclocking the rx480.

And yeah gold FE with water cooling, as I stated with Fiji, there is NO reason to have water cooling on a card unless there is a NEED FOR IT.
Click to expand...

If I flash 580 with 480 BIOS, does the driver detect it as 480?

A few weeks ago the new driver refused to support 6 cards and I tried to mod the old driver for 580 support and failed. I didn't try flashing BIOS though.
 
NKD said:
It doesn't necessarily have to be a new revision. It could just be GF has refined the process a little where there is a less voltage fluctuation and the cards can retain little higher clocks. almost all 580s clock 1400+ guaranteed. There is something certainly they tweaked, I think it just more refinement then anything. I don't think there are many changes here. I think this was evident in later generation 480s.
Click to expand...

If you print your essay on a different quality paper, did your essay get revised?
 
TheLAWNoob said:
If I flash 580 with 480 BIOS, does the driver detect it as 480?

A few weeks ago the new driver refused to support 6 cards and I tried to mod the old driver for 580 support and failed. I didn't try flashing BIOS though.
Click to expand...

Yeah it does, but sometimes flashing down will break the display outputs depending on the card model. Outputs make no difference for mining. I generally flash everything to a custom modded 480 4 Gig and go from there.
 
razor1 said:
hey hey guys lets get off the polaris stuff, the rx580, rx480 same chip, both of these cards can use each others bioses lol, what does that tell us?


Revision or not, the rx580 is P10 with higher clocks along with that the crazy increase in power consumption we saw with overclocking the rx480.

And yeah gold FE with water cooling, as I stated with Fiji, there is NO reason to have water cooling on a card unless there is a NEED FOR IT.
Click to expand...

Watercooling will be quieter for a smaller card size, at the sacrifice of having a radiator.

In the case of anyone actually buying a Vega FE, if sound is a concern at all they would want to spring for the gold version unless it carries an insane premium (over what will already be a premium priced card).

If I was putting it in a workstation in the same room as me I wouldn't want a blower personally. Especially if I was in the market they're advertising it for, people utilizing it for their 9-5 job, that's a lot of hours to listen to a turbine.
 
Magic Hate Ball said:
Watercooling will be quieter for a smaller card size, at the sacrifice of having a radiator.

In the case of anyone actually buying a Vega FE, if sound is a concern at all they would want to spring for the gold version unless it carries an insane premium (over what will already be a premium priced card).

If I was putting it in a workstation in the same room as me I wouldn't want a blower personally. Especially if I was in the market they're advertising it for, people utilizing it for their 9-5 job, that's a lot of hours to listen to a turbine.
Click to expand...


Its quieter really, still need a fan but now you need a pump too.

That wasn't the reason why Fury X needed it, and that won't be the reason why Vega FE will need it either. The reason why Fury X needed it was to keep temps in control, so power usage was in control. Companies don't give things away for free, an AIO adds cost to a product, if a company doesn't need it, they won't put it on. And it isn't for quieter ambience cause they can always go to a dual fan design with bigger fans.
 
razor1 said:
Its quieter really, still need a fan but now you need a pump too.

That wasn't the reason why Fury X needed it, and that won't be the reason why Vega FE will need it either. The reason why Fury X needed it was to keep temps in control, so power usage was in control. Companies don't give things away for free, an AIO adds cost to a product, if a company doesn't need it, they won't put it on. And it isn't for quieter ambience cause they can always go to a dual fan design with bigger fans.
Click to expand...

I agree with this logic because it addresses the cornerstone of business reality - cost control of components.
 
If they used a cooler like the Tri-X heat still wouldn't have been a problem. A blower would have.
 
razor1 said:
Its quieter really, still need a fan but now you need a pump too.

That wasn't the reason why Fury X needed it, and that won't be the reason why Vega FE will need it either. The reason why Fury X needed it was to keep temps in control, so power usage was in control. Companies don't give things away for free, an AIO adds cost to a product, if a company doesn't need it, they won't put it on. And it isn't for quieter ambience cause they can always go to a dual fan design with bigger fans.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's a premium feature. But you kind of contradicted yourself there. There was no reason the Fury X needed it versus something like the Sapphire Tri-X cooler setup. How do we know this? Because people who manage to unlock their Fury's to Fury X are able to cool them with it.

So no, the Fury X didn't NEED water cooling to keep it in check, it was for size and premium appeal. And probably more than a fair bit of putting on the image of OC-ability that was not realized with the silicon limitations.
 
razor1 said:
hey hey guys lets get off the polaris stuff, the rx580, rx480 same chip, both of these cards can use each others bioses lol, what does that tell us?


Revision or not, the rx580 is P10 with higher clocks along with that the crazy increase in power consumption we saw with overclocking the rx480.

And yeah gold FE with water cooling, as I stated with Fiji, there is NO reason to have water cooling on a card unless there is a NEED FOR IT.
Click to expand...

Doesn't the gold one have same clocks? I don't know why in that case AMD decided to be dumb and throw watercooler on it. Then again lot of the shit they do doesn't make sense. May be the gold one is overclocker's dream. Hehe
 
NKD said:
Doesn't the gold one have same clocks? I don't know why in that case AMD decided to be dumb and throw watercooler on it. Then again lot of the shit they do doesn't make sense. May be the gold one is overclocker's dream. Hehe
Click to expand...

Like I said, the only two options for it to make sense for the gold are:
A) It can actually overclock more than the thermal capacity of a blower cooler
B) It is significantly quieter in operation.
 
Magic Hate Ball said:
Yeah, it's a premium feature. But you kind of contradicted yourself there. There was no reason the Fury X needed it versus something like the Sapphire Tri-X cooler setup. How do we know this? Because people who manage to unlock their Fury's to Fury X are able to cool them with it.

So no, the Fury X didn't NEED water cooling to keep it in check, it was for size and premium appeal. And probably more than a fair bit of putting on the image of OC-ability that was not realized with the silicon limitations.
Click to expand...

Fury X was basically OC'd out of the box IMO.
 
Guys no way could the fury x keep to 275 watts if the core was at 50c with water and without it it would jump up to 80+ with air cooling, there is just no way to keep its power consumption down at that level.

Now with Vega, damn right 50mhs a .1 increase in Voltage, that might make or break PCI-e specs if its already close to the limit.

Thermal design is not an afterthought, they won't put water cooling on something unless its a necessity.
 
Magic Hate Ball said:
Just like the 2.1ghz Founder Edition GTX1080 running at a cool 68 degrees?
Click to expand...


Still don't need water cooling for any pascal card to hit 2 ghz.

Guys as I stated update btw just tested my 1070 rig, 6 cards going at 31.5 mhs at 91 watts each card dual mining, its much more efficient that my rx580 rig. But rate of return is still lower over all on the 1070 rig, just have to see how it plays out in the long run what cards are available.
 
razor1 said:
Still don't need water cooling for any pascal card to hit 2 ghz.

Guys as I stated update btw just tested my 1070 rig, 6 cards going at 31.5 mhs at 91 watts each card dual mining, its much more efficient that my rx580 rig. But rate of return is still lower over all on the 1070 rig, just have to see how it plays out in the long run what cards are available.
Click to expand...

And neither does a Fury X for its clocks?

Like I said, people have unlocked their Fury's with air coolers with no issues so I don't know why you keep bringing that up as an example.
 
razor1 said:
Still don't need water cooling for any pascal card to hit 2 ghz.

Guys as I stated update btw just tested my 1070 rig, 6 cards going at 31.5 mhs at 91 watts each card dual mining, its much more efficient that my rx580 rig. But rate of return is still lower over all on the 1070 rig, just have to see how it plays out in the long run what cards are available.
Click to expand...

Hitting it vs sustaining it is another thing. Plenty of people can hit that number but quite a few drop down from 2 ghz while playing a game.
 
NKD said:
Doesn't the gold one have same clocks? I don't know why in that case AMD decided to be dumb and throw watercooler on it. Then again lot of the shit they do doesn't make sense. May be the gold one is overclocker's dream. Hehe
Click to expand...


I think the gold one has higher clocks or can hit the max boost clocks on a regular basis.
 
Gideon said:
Hitting it vs sustaining it is another thing. Plenty of people can hit that number but quite a few drop down from 2 ghz while playing a game.
Click to expand...


hey my 1070 mining rig if I put up the power hits 2k all the time, 2.075 on all card now they are not playing games, but still, its all dependent on the program and if the cooling solution can keep the chip cool enough to sustain those clocks.
 
Magic Hate Ball said:
And neither does a Fury X for its clocks?

Like I said, people have unlocked their Fury's with air coolers with no issues so I don't know why you keep bringing that up as an example.
Click to expand...


nano was always throttling, and fury can't compare that cause its a cut down chip.
 
razor1 said:
nano was always throttling, and fury can't compare that cause its a cut down chip.
Click to expand...

You aren't reading my words.

Many people have unlocked all the cores on the Fury to make it the same 4096 as the Fury X. They did not need water coolers to keep running.

The Nano has power restrictions in BIOS that cause problems for people trying to OC and it is also freaking tiny for an air cooled card.
 
Magic Hate Ball said:
You aren't reading my words.

Many people have unlocked all the cores on the Fury to make it the same 4096 as the Fury X. They did not need water coolers to keep running.

The Nano has power restrictions in BIOS that cause problems for people trying to OC and it is also freaking tiny for an air cooled card.
Click to expand...


Did they give power usage figures? Just the math alone will tell me that its probably around 300 watts.
 
Magic Hate Ball said:
OR you could admit that you are wrong about the Fury X water cooling being required for it to hit its stock clocks?
Click to expand...


I'm not wrong, there is a 1 to 1 relationship with power and Temp of a chip, 1 degree c will increase the power consumption 1 watt, that is if additional voltage isn't need to keep signal cohesion.

Unless you want to tell me the laws of thermal dynamics don't apply to Fiji.......
 
razor1 said:
I'm not wrong, there is a 1 to 1 relationship with power and Temp of a chip, 1 degree c will increase the power consumption 1 watt, that is if additional voltage isn't need to keep signal cohesion.

Unless you want to tell me the laws of thermal dynamics don't apply to Fiji.......
Click to expand...

I'm dying here. 1c = 1 watt? For any chip? Are you drunk? Do you seriously think a GTX1050 going up a degree and a GTX1080Ti going up a degree both increase power draw the same amount?

I'm not going to repeat our Ryzen back and forth that annoyed everyone so have fun, I'll check back in when we have samples in reviewer's hands.
 
Magic Hate Ball said:
I'm dying here. 1c = 1 watt? For any chip? Are you drunk? Do you seriously think a GTX1050 going up a degree and a GTX1080Ti going up a degree both increase power draw the same amount?

I'm not going to repeat our Ryzen back and forth that annoyed everyone so have fun, I'll check back in when we have samples in reviewer's hands.
Click to expand...


watt for C yes they do, but the voltage variation on both the 1050 and 1080 are different so that changes things. You can't compare that way with the way nV's boosts work cause voltage changes too.

Yeah and were are you stable over 4 ghz 8 core Ryzen chips without water? How many people have them? How did your Noctua turn out? Why didn't AMD give us over 4 ghz stock Ryzen's? Cause they hit a wall.
 
razor1 said:
watt for C yes they do, but the voltage variation on both the 1050 and 1080 are different so that changes things. You can't compare that way with the way nV's boosts work cause voltage changes too.

Yeah and were are you stable over 4 ghz 8 core Ryzen chips without water? How many people have them? How did your Noctua turn out? Why didn't AMD give us over 4 ghz stock Ryzen's? Cause they hit a wall.
Click to expand...

I was running Noctua DH15S no problem at 4.0ghz once the 20c offset was revealed and I stopped worrying about it. Then I decided to sell my old motherboard/CPU/RAM to a friend and tossed it in for him and I picked up an x62 Kraken to make my PC even quieter.
 
Magic Hate Ball said:
I was running Noctua DH15S no problem at 4.0ghz once the 20c offset was revealed and I stopped worrying about it. Then I decided to sell my old motherboard/CPU/RAM to a friend and tossed it in for him and I picked up an x62 Kraken to make my PC even quieter.
Click to expand...


So didn't over 4 then? Why not 4.1, think that is what I stated to get over 4 ya need water cooling or some sort of exotic cooling.
 
Magic Hate Ball said:
Narp, but you said no 4ghz without water, so we both were wrong in different ways :)
Click to expand...


I stated over 4 lol, cause many other rumors pointed that at that point. There were professional overclockers and engineers stating that at that time too. But you just don't seem to understand everything is based on architecture and node. You were thinking you can do it because older Bulldozer chips did it. Just doesn't work that way man.
 
razor1 said:
I stated over 4 lol, cause many other rumors pointed that at that point.
Click to expand...

I remember distinctly, and you edit your posts so much that I can't trust whatever is in the thread now.

Anyway, let's say it here. Vega FE blower edition will run at the stated speed (may require additional fan speed above default settings, but not 100%).

I assume you disagree, we can check in 2 weeks.
 
Magic Hate Ball said:
I remember distinctly, and you edit your posts so much that I can't trust whatever is in the thread now.

Anyway, let's say it here. Vega FE blower edition will run at the stated speed (may require additional fan speed above default settings, but not 100%).

I assume you disagree, we can check in 2 weeks.
Click to expand...


They stated boost speeds (for their TFlops), so I don't think it will sustain boost at all times. No card ever does. Don't even need to wait for that ;).
 
lolfail9001 said:
Sure, but 300W blowers do not actually exist unlike 300W AIOs.
Click to expand...

Are you sure about that?

AMDRad_R9_290X_Birdseye_RGB_24in_575px.jpg


59320.png


The legendary jet engine wants to disagree with you when it runs turbo mode!
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
Magic Hate Ball said:
Are you sure about that?

AMDRad_R9_290X_Birdseye_RGB_24in_575px.jpg


59320.png


The legendary jet engine wants to disagree with you when it runs turbo mode!
Click to expand...

yup at 93C and still unable to sustain the clocks.. =).. that's not a 300W Blower cooler, a 300W should be able to keep temps WAY below of what Leakage due temp could affect.. that's why you see those cards even with simpler AIO running at 40C - 50C because they are truly able to dissipate the heat produced by the card, unlike the blower style cooler..
 
razor1 said:
that is total system watts, what is the wattage for the card?
Click to expand...

Per the review http://www.anandtech.com/show/7457/the-radeon-r9-290x-review

However at the same time how power consumption is being defined is getting far murkier: AMD doesn’t list the power consumption of the 290X in any of their documentation or specifications, and after asking them directly we’re only being told that the “average gaming scenario power” is 250W. We’ll dive into this more when we do a breakdown of the changes to PowerTune on 290X, but in short AMD is likely underreporting the 290X’s power consumption. Based on our test results we’re seeing 290X draw more power than any other “250W” card in our collection, and in reality the TDP of the card is almost certainly closer to 300W. There are limits to how long the card can sustain that level of power draw due to cooling requirements, but given sufficient cooling the power limit of the card appears to be around 300W, and for the moment we’re labeling it as such.
 
Magic Hate Ball said:
Per the review http://www.anandtech.com/show/7457/the-radeon-r9-290x-review

However at the same time how power consumption is being defined is getting far murkier: AMD doesn’t list the power consumption of the 290X in any of their documentation or specifications, and after asking them directly we’re only being told that the “average gaming scenario power” is 250W. We’ll dive into this more when we do a breakdown of the changes to PowerTune on 290X, but in short AMD is likely underreporting the 290X’s power consumption. Based on our test results we’re seeing 290X draw more power than any other “250W” card in our collection, and in reality the TDP of the card is almost certainly closer to 300W. There are limits to how long the card can sustain that level of power draw due to cooling requirements, but given sufficient cooling the power limit of the card appears to be around 300W, and for the moment we’re labeling it as such.
Click to expand...


Yeah given sufficient cooling in red, guess what its cooler wasn't made to do that.
 
Araxie said:
yup at 93C and still unable to sustain the clocks.. =).. that's not a 300W Blower cooler, a 300W should be able to keep temps WAY below of what Leakage due temp could affect.. that's why you see those cards even with simpler AIO running at 40C - 50C because they are truly able to dissipate the heat produced by the card, unlike the blower style cooler..
Click to expand...

On Uber mode it dropped... 10mhz off max clock in CoH2 according to their testing http://www.anandtech.com/show/7457/the-radeon-r9-290x-review/19

And dropped clocks for Furmark, which... duh?

I'm not arguing that it's a good idea, I'm saying it's physically possible because it has already been done.

Titan X Pascal OC guide from Guru3d has this handy chart of them using the blower cooler in overclocking.

index.php
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top