Vega Rumors

If all things are equal power can be a differentiator.

IMO AMD needs to be -20% on cost at equal performance (FPS) for me to even consider them with all things considered. Probably -30% to be a done deal. So Vega RX, the 1080 version, would need to be about $399 assuming the 1080 stays around $499.

Freesync isn't even a consideration for me. I am not locking myself into a vendor that struggles to deliver. Right now I have a vanilla 3440x1440 so it doesn't apply yet...
 
NKD said:
Did I argue FE didn't have a gaming mode? I am not saying vega might be super good. Ofcourse it has gaming mode, no shit! everyone has said that! There is absolutely no difference when it comes to gaming mode or pro mode. Gaming mode turns on more settings in control panel. Dude I am not arguing the fact there might be no difference.

I am going by repeated AMD statements that RX vega will have better optimizations. Who the fuck in their right mind would buy FE for gaming when RX vega will be half the price. if AMD is telling you to wait for rx vega for gamin is it too hard to do? Regardless of performance to continuously hammer the fuckin point that amd is asking you to pay 1000 dollars for a product that is not recommended for gaming. When there will another one launched in 2 damn weeks that might be half the price. Yea twist the statement about turn on gaming mode to amd saying FE is specifically for gaming. Ignorance has no cure, sorry. If you don't understand me I apologize.
Click to expand...

It's laughable at best to think that these "optimizations" that Radeon RX Vega supposedly have is going to turn the table.
 
Elios said:
the point is its pulling almost 500W of power JUST get slightly better then 1080 performance

i would not expect consumer Vega to come any where near 1080 numbers btw why sell a card for 1/2 the price thats just as fast? even if it has a bit less ram
Click to expand...

Hey, it beats having to try and get Nvidias drivers working properly and then having to use their piss poor interface, and try and fix error code 43 in device manager.

I own 4x 1070, a 1060 and a 1050ti

Not sure why the freak out about the 500w total system power consumption 1080FE was around 330W Stock OC'ed 388W in Crysis 3
 
shad0w4life said:
Hey, it beats having to try and get Nvidias drivers working properly and then having to use their piss poor interface, and try and fix error code 43 in device manager.

I own 4x 1070, a 1060 and a 1050ti

Not sure why the freak out about the 500w total system power consumption 1080FE was around 330W Stock OC'ed 388W in Crysis 3
Click to expand...


talking about system or card?

Cause 1080 fe can't do 330watts without voltage mods, just not possible. Not only that doesn't have the pci-e connectors to do that.

With Vega FE we are talking about drawing 500 watts for the card.
 
Elios said:
GN got readings of ~400w at the PCIE cables when oc'ed to 1700mhz add the 75w its likely pulling from the slot and your getting close to 500w
Click to expand...
Wow that is atrocious, 400 watts from the two 8 pins connectors.
 
pretty sure its the highest,

gtx 580 the highest it ever got was just under 400 watts if I remember correctly
 
lolfail9001 said:
System, i think.

Is it the highest for single GPU on ambient? I don't think i remember numbers that high ever.
Click to expand...

The last time something got that hot with two big wires plugged into it your mother was involved and it sold 25,000 copies.

No I don't recall a single GPU card that ate that much juice either. Even the dual radeons mostly behaved.

We should just call it Fermi II.
 
Simplyfun said:
The last time something got that hot with two big wires plugged into it your mother was involved and it sold 25,000 copies.

No I don't recall a single GPU card that ate that much juice either. Even the dual radeons mostly behaved.

We should just call it Fermi II.
Click to expand...

Vermi?
 
http://imgur.com/a/ImPz1

some stuff worth noting here the HMB stacks are OVERVOLTED on the stock Vega FE card... seems Vega FE was clocked as high as AMD could get it to start with with out pulling stupid power
 
All I know is if anyone who complains about AMD new vega using a ton of power (and no joke about it, it does), better not be using a new X299 Skylake-x or Kaby Lake-x.....lol
 
Brackle said:
All I know is if anyone who complains about AMD new vega using a ton of power (and no joke about it, it does), better not be using a new X299 Skylake-x or Kaby Lake-x.....lol
Click to expand...

That's different since the extra power creates useful output above and beyond what is available from the competitor. Like the 7900x uses 50% more power but is 40% faster vs. a 1800x (for cinebench that PCPER tested).... Vega is 0% faster for 200% more power. See the difference?

PySOiro.gif
 
of course I know the difference. I am talking about Watt's at the wall. Not what kind of performance there is compare to the watts used. AMD Vega's are power hungry just like Intel's new CPU's. Not once did I mention performance.
 
http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2986-amd-vega-hybrid-mod-results-overclocking-liquid-vs-air

Now I understand why BZ said GN hit the silicon lottery, air cooled they were able to get their card to 1660 mhz, which is 30 mhz higher then what BZ or anyone else seemed to have gotten with the FE.

Interesting that the card looks to be thermal limited at 85 c.

Good example of 30 degrees cooler 30 less watts being used too, directly correlating with leakage amounts as well.
 
Brackle said:
of course I know the difference. I am talking about Watt's at the wall. Not what kind of performance there is compare to the watts used. AMD Vega's are power hungry just like Intel's new CPU's. Not once did I mention performance.
Click to expand...

.... I don't get that logic to be honest. At least compare apples to apples. Like a 7700k vs a 1800x or something.

We're talking about wattage at certain performance levels and how AMD is not even close. You could pull 400 watts each for Titan X Maxwell or a 5960x ... but the performance was there.
 
Last edited:
razor1 said:
http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2986-amd-vega-hybrid-mod-results-overclocking-liquid-vs-air

Now I understand why BZ said GN hit the silicon lottery, air cooled they were able to get their card to 1660 mhz, which is 30 mhz higher then what BZ or anyone else seemed to have gotten with the FE.

Interesting that the card looks to be thermal limited at 85 c.

Good example of 30 degrees cooler 30 less watts being used too, directly correlating with leakage amounts as well.
Click to expand...


Not really surprising Pascal reacts pretty much the same. Cooler you can keep it the better you can overclock it. Pascal tends to become unstable the hotter it gets, I had to tweak some stuff before I got mine stable at 2100 MHz. Just that Pascal starts at a lower wattage then Vega does right now. Now Pascal wont let you overclock beyond a certain TDP and that is the main reason water cooling it is kind of a waste so Nvidia put a hard limit on it. Couple more weeks and will see the gaming version and will have a much better picture of what Vega can do.
 
Does sound like the FE is one stout design for power or a well built card if it can handle over 400w. Gaming performance for that power usage is terrible. Other usage maybe it is OK, now who here will be using the FP16 capability? That might be the only area where it is untouched but in the scheme of things not used too much in general.
 
noko said:
Other usage maybe it is OK, now who here will be using the FP16 capability? That might be the only area where it is untouched but in the scheme of things not used too much in general.
Click to expand...
FP16 and even INT8 look like they may be seeing a lot of use. Still need confirmation, but they may be the programmable texture filtering and blending often buried in TMUs and ROPs. So any HDR/Freesync2 title should be using it. That wouldn't account for particles, physics, sound, etc.
 
Anarchist4000 said:
FP16 and even INT8 look like they may be seeing a lot of use. Still need confirmation, but they may be the programmable texture filtering and blending often buried in TMUs and ROPs. So any HDR/Freesync2 title should be using it. That wouldn't account for particles, physics, sound, etc.
Click to expand...

What does freesync have to do with any of that :p?
 
Elios said:


WOW its not looking for Vega
Click to expand...


We all know vega fe uses a lot of power. We have to see where RX vega lands. Watercooled seems to be the one at 375w and pushed to limits. RX Vega XTX, other two are rated at 285 or 275 I believe of total board power and 220 for the chip itself. So AMD seems to have tweaked the gaming cards little better then FE. Now we just have to see where performance lands on rx vega.
 
its the same die for RX... im not sure what you are expecting from it

and i 100% can guaranty you that the lower TDP RX cards are ether lower clocked or have disabled compute cores or both

prediction right now

XTX = to FE or slightly slower

XT = or lower then 1070

XL = between 1060 and 1070
 
Elios said:
its the same die for RX... im not sure what you are expecting from it

and i 100% can guaranty you that the lower TDP RX cards are ether lower clocked or have disabled compute cores or both

prediction right now

XTX = to FE or slightly slower

XT = or lower then 1070

XL = between 1060 and 1070
Click to expand...

Dude you know everything. Like you knew about it using 500 watts not knowing that it only uses 25 from PCI-e and then stopped responding to my post when I gave you a source proving it. Don't ever guarantee anything 100% if you don't have facts to back it up. I am going by AMDs word that rx vega will be more optimized and I expect it to not blow the world out of water. Lets say its 10% better worst case it will be faster then FE, anything else? You keep assuming I expect vega to be a miracle. I don't expect shit from it. I am giving benefit of the doubt to AMD who repeatedly said it rx vega will be much better optimzed for latest titles and will be faster then FE. Just look at your conclusion.

I think it will likely be this.

XTX in between 1080 - 1080 ti
XT equivalent to 1080
xl equivalent to 1070

Looking at the power usage it looks like XTX will be highly clocked and if it is little better optimized for games even 10% you are looking at faster than 1080. No I don't guarantee this 100% because I don't have the cards and I could be wrong. But I suspect this will be case.
 
It is beyond obvious where they will land. 1070, 1080, and slightly above 1080, all at better price points and higher power usage then Nvidia.
Kinda how it has been for how many generations now?
I mean their own marketing slides show 2016 Polaris for Mainstream. 2017 Vega for Enthusiast. 2018 Navi for Flag-ship.
AMD did not have the $ for an all out GPU assault, especially with CPU being so important to them. Unlike Polaris, Vega is brand new. Their first crack at this architecture and it will have teething issues for sure. Will it improve over time? I would bet on it. Will it be fan-boi super sauce for the win? Nope.
Will it be competitive for the price? Of course.
 
funkydmunky said:
It is beyond obvious where they will land. 1070, 1080, and slightly above 1080, all at better price points and higher power usage then Nvidia.
Kinda how it has been for how many generations now?
I mean their own marketing slides show 2016 Polaris for Mainstream. 2017 Vega for Enthusiast. 2018 Navi for Flag-ship.
AMD did not have the $ for an all out GPU assault, especially with CPU being so important to them. Unlike Polaris, Vega is brand new. Their first crack at this architecture and it will have teething issues for sure. Will it improve over time? I would bet on it. Will it be fan-boi super sauce for the win? Nope.
Will it be competitive for the price? Of course.
Click to expand...

Couldn't have said it better. AMD will use more watts for now. They hit the nail on the head with ryzen and its power efficiency. Its clear where the R&D went for last few years and GPUs took the back seat. Navi will probably be much more power efficient. Vega will be more power hungry but will likely have pretty decent price/performance ratio but will use more power. Thats RTG for you now.
 
funkydmunky said:
It is beyond obvious where they will land. 1070, 1080, and slightly above 1080, all at better price points and higher power usage then Nvidia.
Kinda how it has been for how many generations now?
Click to expand...
idk about that. Fury X was an abject failure. If RX Vega is a repeat of that (vs the 1080 or 1080 Ti) it will also be a failure but with even higher power usage, apparently.
If miners don't buy these cards then they might be competitive in the current market, since everything else is jacked up.
 
funkydmunky said:
"IF"
Good argument.
Click to expand...
"How it's been for how many generations now"... meaning not Fury X? It was their previous flagship from the most recent generation. Vega shares a lot of similarities with Fiji architecturally, and HBM. If you're looking for a gen to compare Vega with, Fiji is the best choice and that's not good news.

Otherwise you should be more specific about which generation you expect Vega to take after. AKA cherry pick.
 
Last edited:
Digital Viper-X- said:
Don't really care too much about power when gaming, mining yes, gaming no. Cost and performance will be what drives my decision most of the time when it comes to gaming. I can see why some people would care, as they are running in mAtx, or silent builds, or their PSU is not beefy enough to handle it and they don't want to upgrade(cost again!)
Click to expand...
I don't care too much about power consumption per se but higher power consumption = higher heat output, which I don't want. My study gets hot enough in the summer already.
 
If Vega IS indeed 1080ish in performance, and Fury X can be considered a 'failure', then Vega is a disaster.

Fury X at least had no problems beating 980 and was up there with 980ti, and was released within weeks of 980ti.

Vega is 'down' there with 1080, and is released months behind 1080ti, with Volta looming on the horizon.

EDIT: Even though Vega hasn't been truly released to the gamers yet, I wonder if it'd be better if AMD just completely scrap Vega and speed up Navi's production instead.
 
Chimpee said:
Wow that is atrocious, 400 watts from the two 8 pins connectors.
Click to expand...

its not stock. I don't understand why you are all are going crazy over a modded card that is being pushed to its limits. 400 watts + 25 from PCI-e so 425 but stock it does use less than 300. Still its obvious AMD will lag behind nvidia in power/performance and will do for the near future. No way they match nvidia design and r&d for now. May be with Navi, but even if they don't I wouldn't be surprised. Costs money to build a good design which the GPU division is lacking with AMDs heavy focus on zen.
 
NKD said:
its not stock. I don't understand why you are all are going crazy over a modded card that is being pushed to its limits. 400 watts + 25 from PCI-e so 425 but stock it does use less than 300. Still its obvious AMD will lag behind nvidia in power/performance and will do for the near future. No way they match nvidia design and r&d for now. May be with Navi, but even if they don't I wouldn't be surprised. Costs money to build a good design which the GPU division is lacking with AMDs heavy focus on zen.
Click to expand...

Wait, so now managing to keep boost clock is considered overclocking?
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
idk about that. Fury X was an abject failure. If RX Vega is a repeat of that (vs the 1080 or 1080 Ti) it will also be a failure but with even higher power usage, apparently.
If miners don't buy these cards then they might be competitive in the current market, since everything else is jacked up.
Click to expand...
All Furys sold out, so not a failure at all. May not have out performed Nvidias top performer but it did hang with it.
 
funkydmunky said:
It is beyond obvious where they will land. 1070, 1080, and slightly above 1080, all at better price points and higher power usage then Nvidia.
Kinda how it has been for how many generations now?
I mean their own marketing slides show 2016 Polaris for Mainstream. 2017 Vega for Enthusiast. 2018 Navi for Flag-ship.
AMD did not have the $ for an all out GPU assault, especially with CPU being so important to them. Unlike Polaris, Vega is brand new. Their first crack at this architecture and it will have teething issues for sure. Will it improve over time? I would bet on it. Will it be fan-boi super sauce for the win? Nope.
Will it be competitive for the price? Of course.
Click to expand...

Vega isn't new design as it wasn't polaris, as it wasn't Fiji, as it wasn't Tonga as it wasn't hawaii, the base architecture it's basically the same 5.5years old GCN. AMD launched "Mainstream Tonga" before Fiji to have a time to refine drivers, same with "Mainstream Polaris" to VEGA.. Fiji was already a very refined GCN part with a lot of their weakness against nvidia treated, limited by that consumer useless HBM, most of the performance gained in Fiji vs Hawaii was due brute forcing more Cores going from 2816 to 4096, VEGA it's a refinement of that with more efficient geometry performance, and as they can't add more cores all the gains comes from the Extra Core speed..

trandoanhung1991 said:
Wait, so now managing to keep boost clock is considered overclocking?
Click to expand...

technically, yes. boost clock is never guaranteed, but now AMD is playing a new card to avoid their impossibility to reach boost clock calling it "Peak Engine clock" and "Typical Engine Clock", nice marketing move but useless.. so, base clock 1382mhz and max boost 1600mhz (unreachable typically according marketing words)..
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
idk about that. Fury X was an abject failure. If RX Vega is a repeat of that (vs the 1080 or 1080 Ti) it will also be a failure but with even higher power usage, apparently.
If miners don't buy these cards then they might be competitive in the current market, since everything else is jacked up.
Click to expand...


This launch is much worse than Fury X, we are talking about a power differential to the ti model of 125watts which is 50% differential vs 10% differential and the performance is behind by much more.

PS this is the air cooled top end version, the water cooling version won't give much more performance either its more like a trophy wife that isn't even a trophy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top