Vega Rumors

Regarding price increase on RX Vega 64 air & water versions...

If you look at each & every RX Vega on NewEgg right now, you will see they are all $100 more than the original MSRP (okay, SEP), but they all include the two 'free' games from the bundles...

So, it seems, in a sense there was no price raise, NewEgg just didn't offer the cards as stand-alone products...?

Well, they DID have the MSI black reference model listed for $499, but that has disappeared from the website...
 
razor1 said:
That is kinda shady, Gibbo usually doesn't lie like that. As it right now, it seems like AMD really is pushing for people to buy their packs, lets wait and see what is what. I am surprised AMD would increase prices like that, really makes no sense it just makes their cards look worse then where they are now......
Click to expand...
If that ends up true every reviewer needs to update their reviews to reflect that. Vega becomes an absolutely stupid buy if the price goes up by $100.
 
Boil said:
Regarding price increase on RX Vega 64 air & water versions...

If you look at each & every RX Vega on NewEgg right now, you will see they are all $100 more than the original MSRP (okay, SEP), but they all include the two 'free' games from the bundles...

So, it seems, in a sense there was no price raise, NewEgg just didn't offer the cards as stand-alone products...?

Well, they DID have the MSI black reference model listed for $499, but that has disappeared from the website...
Click to expand...
If that is the case then those are really expensive free games.
 
Dayaks said:
We know sold out means nothing. AMD sells out every launch and it has no correlation to market share.

The real trials come when Volta hits or mining goes to hell. If Volta hits and mining goes to hell at the same time team "red" will really live up to their color.
Click to expand...
The thing is, people WANT competition. While the power numbers/temps may not be pleasing, AMD supplied a card @ $499 (well, soon to be available, hopefully) that trades blows with a 1080 which his currently priced about the same or slightly higher. Does it take the top card spot from Ti? No, but it provides options. We all know that the largest market is well below the top end card so provided Vega56 has a good showing, AMD could do well this time around.
 
Presbytier said:
If that is the case then those are really expensive free games.
Click to expand...

Hence the 'free' notation... And most new games run about 60 bucks these days, so if one were looking to get those two particular games anyway, one would actually save 20 bucks...
 
Presbytier said:
If that is the case then those are really expensive free games.
Click to expand...
It looks like Newegg is only carrying the Packs for the most part. Hell good business for them, more so than AMD. I wanted the 32" Freesync monitor 16:9, but because of the Packs and Newegg only listing the one 34" 21:9, that is what I am getting.
 
JustReason said:
It looks like Newegg is only carrying the Packs for the most part. Hell good business for them, more so than AMD. I wanted the 32" Freesync monitor 16:9, but because of the Packs and Newegg only listing the one 34" 21:9, that is what I am getting.
Click to expand...

I absolutely love 21:9. A Vega can drive it very well too.

It fills my peripheral without crazy high megapixels like 4k.
 
Dayaks said:
I absolutely love 21:9. A Vega can drive it very well too.

It fills my peripheral without crazy high megapixels like 4k.
Click to expand...
My wifes 1080P 21:9 looks good, great actually and freesync makes it all the more impressive. But going from 32" 16:9 to 34" 21:9 is going to shorten the display abit. Although the picture quality on the Samsung 21:9 is going to bury the POS 32" I have now. Don't get me wrong it looks good but not great and a few dead pixels.
 
razor1 said:
That is kinda shady, Gibbo usually doesn't lie like that. As it right now, it seems like AMD really is pushing for people to buy their packs, lets wait and see what is what. I am surprised AMD would increase prices like that, really makes no sense it just makes their cards look worse then where they are now......
Click to expand...

The only reason I can think of that make some semblance of sense is really gouging the hardcore AMD fans before dropping price down again once initial sales taper off.
 
FrameBuffer said:
lulz.. and so it begins.. #WaitForVolta.. except of course, NV has already said no (gaming) Volta until at least 2018

So I guess should be #WaitForVolta2018!!
Click to expand...

I said this don't remember how many times. Like shit load. And people told me I don't know better. I kept saying if vega is shit Nvidia still has more efficient GPUs and faster. They have no reason to rush Volta. Always said it will be a Q1 2018 release at the earliest. Nvidia will even win more mindshare now since Vega ended up being big disappointment. AMD better hit a home run with Navi or they are pretty much done for sure and they will lose the pc gaming market share big time and will only be making console stuff.
 
NKD said:
I said this don't remember how many times. Like shit load. And people told me I don't know better. I kept saying if vega is shit Nvidia still has more efficient GPUs and faster. They have no reason to rush Volta. Always said it will be a Q1 2018 release at the earliest. Nvidia will even win more mindshare now since Vega ended up being big disappointment. AMD better hit a home run with Navi or they are pretty much done for sure and they will lose the pc gaming market share big time and will only be making console stuff.
Click to expand...
I think it is safe to say their market share is already abysmal.

AIB-pr1.PNG
 
NKD said:
I said this don't remember how many times. Like shit load. And people told me I don't know better. I kept saying if vega is shit Nvidia still has more efficient GPUs and faster. They have no reason to rush Volta. Always said it will be a Q1 2018 release at the earliest. Nvidia will even win more mindshare now since Vega ended up being big disappointment. AMD better hit a home run with Navi or they are pretty much done for sure and they will lose the pc gaming market share big time and will only be making console stuff.
Click to expand...


I wouldn't say done for but I would say the only for them to catch up after that is if nV F's up. PS they have been loosing marketshare prior to this launch. So expect them to loose more.
 
SighTurtle said:
https://hardforum.com/threads/new-mining-block-chain-driver-for-amd.1941931/

Apparently AMD is offering mining specific drivers now.
HotHardware also took a look with the new driver and it's impact on mining.
Click to expand...


Just installed give ya an update if it changes anything.....

worthless lol, undervolting, overclocking just doesn't stick anymore, can't save anything with afterburner, and using wattman for these things is not really an option. Hmm something might have went wrong, let me reinstall with clean install.

yeah it breaks pretty much everything lol. Going back to my older drivers
 
Last edited:
Snowdog said:
Are you using NVida Fast-sync, which is a driver feature to do triple buffer + vsync?
Click to expand...
I tested Fast-Sync for a bit. At first it seemed good, but on closer inspection it was causing unevenness of frames and intermittent stutter.

It seems it's a better experience to adjust settings to try to reach 60FPS+ and just enable V-Sync. Adaptive-Sync on Nvidia is also an option if you want to remove the stutter of V-Sync at the cost of tearing.

AMD also has a new Enhanced-Sync, which I'm not 100% sure how it works but I am eager to give it a shot and see if it's any better than the Nvidia implementation.

Not sure if I asked this before, but are you the same Snowdog as on the Oculus forums?
 
Last edited:
gerardfraser said:
In Canada you can get these cards for about MSRP/SEP of course if you want you can also buy them for way more.

AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 8G HBM2 HDMI/3XDP Premium Graphic Card w/ Liquid Cooling-704 USD
http://www.ncix.com/detail/sapphire-amd-radeon-rx-vega-77-142105.htm?promoid=1970


AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 8G HBM2 HDMI / 3xDP Limited Edition Premium Graphic Card-618 USD
http://www.ncix.com/detail/sapphire-amd-radeon-rx-vega-77-142106.htm?promoid=1970
Click to expand...

I am sure NCIX appreciates the ads, but the issue is the supposed $500 air cooled cards, that is the only one that is currently for sale that is close to reasonable.

Once you move up to $600 Vega, that is more than a GTX 1080, so not worth considering.
 
cybereality said:
I tested Fast-Sync for a bit. At first it seemed good, but on closer inspection it was causing unevenness of frames and intermittent stutter.

It seems it's a better experience to adjust settings to try to reach 60FPS+ and just enable V-Sync. Adaptive-Sync on Nvidia is also an option if you want to remove the stutter of V-Sync at the cost of tearing.

AMD also has a new Enhanced-Sync, which I'm not 100% sure how it works but I am eager to give it a shot and see if it's any better than Nvidia implementation.

Not sure if I asked this before, but are you the same Snowdog as on the Oculus forums?
Click to expand...

Yeah, saw the Enhanced-Sync notes on AMD, sounds very similar, and after I asked I watched the video and saw the jitter that NV Fast Sync can introduce. In theory it seems like it should be perfect, but needs more work I guess.

Nope, I am not on any Oculus forums.
 
Seems the $599 cards were supposed to come with 2 free games? AMD is giving out codes?


 
SighTurtle said:
https://hardforum.com/threads/new-mining-block-chain-driver-for-amd.1941931/

Apparently AMD is offering mining specific drivers now.
HotHardware also took a look with the new driver and it's impact on mining.
Click to expand...

Still don't think its worth it, till they can show what Vega mines at under bolted.

Rough estimates inc... All cards are treated as 6x, due to it being a common mining configuration.

  • GTX 1070
  • Roughly 32-33/192-198 MH/s - some hash at 34-35/204-210 MH/s
  • Roughly 160w (80% power), x6 = 960 watts
  • Priced better than Vega 64 due to scalpers and maybe Vega 56 later
  • Radeon RX Vega 56 Stock = 288 watts x6 = 1728 watts (don't know possible power savings through under volting)
  • Roughly 29/174 MH/s
  • Radeon RX Vega 56 1900MHz Memory = 290 watts x6 = 1740 watts (don't know possible power savings through under volting)
  • Roughly 36/216 MH/s
  • Radeon RX Vega 64 Stock = 360 watts x6 = 2160 watts (don't know possible power savings through under volting)
  • Roughly 30/180 MH/s
  • Radeon RX Vega 64 2GHz Memory = 361 watts = 2166 watts (don't know possible power savings through under volting)
  • Roughly 35/210 MH/s
Again rough estimates, right now the Vega 56 looks better than the 64, but overall power usage and quick web calc on profits at .12 KW/h, calc done at crypto compare.
1070 198 MH/s - $373 Per Month
1070 210 MH/s - $400 Per Month
Vega 56 174 MH/s - $251 Per Month
Vega 56 OC 216 MH/s - $347 Per Month
Vega 64 180 Mh/s - $228 Per Month
Vega 64 OC 210 MH/s - $296 Per Month

Don't have time to go into total system cost at current prices, but you get the idea, right now its not profitable to mine on Vega.
 
Last edited:
LOL, I can't believe Raja is so damn desparate. Mining specific drivers for vega that get you extra 2 mh. Where is the rumored 70-100mh.

Lets be real. Vega sucks at gaming and its no better at mining. RTG failed on both fronts. Congratu-FUCKIN-lation, lol!

Okay I am being too harsh. Vega 56 is decent for the price. It just shows how far they have pushed GCN cores when it comes to Vega 64, the new names are nothing but bullshit. Architecture is done, hopefully Navi is truly built from ground up. I have no idea how they can possibly push this architecture further.

Vega 64 is pushed so much harder than 56 and you get less and less returns. Inefficiency shows all over the place.

wait is vega 56 price a lie too? Where the price is actually gonna be 499.99 instead of 399.99 lol.
 
NKD said:
LOL, I can't believe Raja is so damn desparate. Mining specific drivers for vega that get you extra 2 mh. Where is the rumored 70-100mh.

Lets be real. Vega sucks at gaming and its no better at mining. RTG failed on both fronts. Congratu-FUCKIN-lation, lol!

Okay I am being too harsh. Vega 56 is decent for the price. It just shows how far they have pushed GCN cores when it comes to Vega 64, the new names are nothing but bullshit. Architecture is done, hopefully Navi is truly built from ground up. I have no idea how they can possibly push this architecture further.

Vega 64 is pushed so much harder than 56 and you get less and less returns. Inefficiency shows all over the place.

wait is vega 56 price a lie too? Where the price is actually gonna be 499.99 instead of 399.99 lol.
Click to expand...

Seems that the extra $100 was a games bundle. See my post above.
 
Hakaba said:
Still don't think its worth it, till they can show what Vega mines at under bolted.

Rough estimates inc...

  • GTX 1070
  • Roughly 32-33/192-198 MH/s - some hash at 34-35/204-210 MH/s
  • Roughly 160w (80% power), x6 = 960 watts
  • Priced better than Vega 64 due to scalpers and maybe Vega 56 later
  • Radeon RX Vega 56 Stock = 288 watts x6 = 1728 watts (don't know possible power savings through under volting)
  • Roughly 29/174 MH/s
  • Radeon RX Vega 56 1900MHz Memory = 290 watts x6 = 1740 watts (don't know possible power savings through under volting)
  • Roughly 36/216 MH/s
  • Radeon RX Vega 64 Stock = 360 watts x6 = 2160 watts (don't know possible power savings through under volting)
  • Roughly 30/180 MH/s
  • Radeon RX Vega 64 2GHz Memory = 361 watts = 2166 watts (don't know possible power savings through under volting)
  • Roughly 35/210 MH/s
Again rough estimates, right now the Vega 56 looks better than the 64, but overall power usage and quick web calc on profits at .12 KW/h, calc done at crypto compare.
1070 198 MH/s - $373 Per Month
1070 210 MH/s - $400 Per Month
Vega 56 174 MH/s - $251 Per Month
Vega 56 OC 216 MH/s - $347 Per Month
Vega 64 180 Mh/s - $228 Per Month
Vega 64 OC 210 MH/s - $296 Per Month

Don't have time to go into total system cost at current prices, but you get the idea, right now its not profitable to mine on Vega.
Click to expand...

Am I reading that right. You can make $400/month profit mining on one GTX 1070?
 
Ieldra said:
What kind of horseshit is this? You just posted a graph of a CPU bottlenecked AMD leaning game at 1080p where balanced and power saver are identical perf, Turbo is lower.

Yeah. GPU power saving features in a CPU bound game can reduce power draw without affecting performance, real astute observation Sherlock.
Pray tell us more of your incredible technical insights.
Click to expand...
Yet if the game is CPU bottlenecked, the card should be idling and consuming less power. Not spinning it's tires at high clocks. That wouldn't appear to be the case here. Current power savings mode is probably how AMD should have shipped the cards. 10-15% less performance at 150W less with the understanding drivers, packed math, etc would eventually overtake the competition. Ideally all that happens for launch, but no plan is perfect.

razor1 said:
Fiji had issues with MSAA performance too remember, why the Fiji review guide had MSAA turned off or set low on most titles?

This is not something with drivers, its something with the architecture and the bandwidth requirements for MSAA.

That is evidence for you that the MSAA issue and scaling issues are not a one off driver issue, its a uarch issue.
Click to expand...
It's probably a driver thing. Unless you think a couple TB/s of bandwidth is insufficient? MSAA samples are next to each other and should hit the cache. In this case the drivers probably didn't assume the right tile/bin size and blew out a cache. As I mentioned before, even is DSBR is enabled AMD will need to configure the settings properly accounting for a number of conditions.

As for Fiji, the storage requirements of high MSAA were the bigger issue with performance. Shader based AA works fine.

bigbeard850 said:
AMD is wasting an enormous amount of money on their failed GPU division. Even when they first bought it, it destroyed AMD.

To release a card like this, at this point, considering the performance and power draw in comparison to a gtx 1080, no one in their right minds should ever buy one. I can only imagine this is a no-choice buy for those locked into free-sync.
Click to expand...
Yet they are selling all the cards they produce at higher than expected MSRP. For most businesses moving lots of product at inflated prices is a good thing. That division is also what's been making them money recently and even beating estimates thanks to mining.

razor1 said:
You don't see Intel, nV doing such things, we have never seen them do such things period even when they had bad products. Why, when AMD has a shit product they need to show it in the best light and giving reviewers free reign will NOT do this. There is not a single review that can recommend Vega over Pascal, why, that is what is came down to, Vega is an inferior product.
Click to expand...
Why would they? Intel would need something to demonstrate first hand like a display. Nvidia wouldn't want anyone comparing a higher priced VRR to the competition that in all likelihood couldn't tell a difference.

Ieldra said:

I love how things you post on the internet are hard to take back. It's fun to see all these shit tier websites have to eat crow
Click to expand...
No reason to think they were wrong. Plans change and AMD joined the gold rush.

razor1 said:
That is kinda shady, Gibbo usually doesn't lie like that. As it right now, it seems like AMD really is pushing for people to buy their packs, lets wait and see what is what. I am surprised AMD would increase prices like that, really makes no sense it just makes their cards look worse then where they are now......
Click to expand...
What does "look worse" really mean when nobody but miners are purchasing them? Until supply increases it's a bit irrelevant. Also gives more time to get drivers in order. Just look at the open source Linux drivers that are 30-500% faster in games than AMDs just released proprietary ones shared with Windows. Only OpenGL there, but even in some pro apps they're already ahead of 1080ti and close on Linux games against Nvidia's best drivers.

JustReason said:
It looks like Newegg is only carrying the Packs for the most part. Hell good business for them, more so than AMD. I wanted the 32" Freesync monitor 16:9, but because of the Packs and Newegg only listing the one 34" 21:9, that is what I am getting.
Click to expand...
I just with they had better packs. That 32:9 Samsung with HDR and Freesync2 for example. Or better yet throw in a Threadripper and 3x Vegas or something. Sell the extras to pay for the screen. Worst case miners buy those and discount Threadripper and UWHD FreeSync2 inventory floods the market. Probably even find some memory makers to sponsor a Threadripper deal like that.

NKD said:
LOL, I can't believe Raja is so damn desparate. Mining specific drivers for vega that
Click to expand...
That may require some algorithm work beyond just the drivers to use the new INT8/16 and hashing instructions. The big miners are probably doing that already.
 

lol. Another way to bullshit and get more people to buy. Reviews speak for themselves. I can't believe I am about to say this. I used to be a Ruby fan, radeon lover. But man they are behind. Now to what I wanted to say, Vega is actually worse than rx 480 launch. Atleast the rx 480 was priced decent for its performance, but Vega is power hungry, priced 100 more than what amd said everywhere. close to 1080, mostly a little slower. Uses almost double the power. There is just too much wrong here.

RTG is like trump. They turn a blind eye to everything and believe their own glorified stories about vega. Thats the only truth that exists to them and I am sure they have alternative facts to support Vega is some how better than Gtx 1080 and wroth the 100 dollar extra.
 
I think now that I have read everything there is to read about Vega and looked at the pricing, I can safely make the following comment.

YOU HAVE TO BE A COMPLETE ****ING IDIOT TO BUY ONE.

I am sorry but that is the truth. I know you guys think I hate AMD and love NVidia but this is worst than Fury X launch. The pricing is same as Fury X but performance is not close to a 980 Ti (at launch) of Fury X. Scalpers are causing stock outs and card is over priced.

I know one thing for sure. 1080 Ti was always out of stock but when it did come in stock, the price was OK. I purchased mine at 779 for ASUS Strix which was MSRP. 749 for MSI Gaming X which was MSRP after trying for weeks.

But Vega, is not listed at MSRP anywhere and to buy a bundle is the most retarded thing I have seen.

Anyways, I am out of this thread. I don't have anything more to say here. Vega is worse than Fury X launch IMO.
 
KickAssCop said:
YOU HAVE TO BE A COMPLETE ****ING IDIOT TO BUY ONE.
Click to expand...

I'd agree, but only at these prices. And the prices are irrelevant as there's no stock to begin with.

Gotta wonder if stock levels of the Vega 64 and the GP104 cards start leveling off if the price- and thus the price/performance metric- might start looking attractive.
 
JustReason said:
It looks like Newegg is only carrying the Packs for the most part. Hell good business for them, more so than AMD. I wanted the 32" Freesync monitor 16:9, but because of the Packs and Newegg only listing the one 34" 21:9, that is what I am getting.
Click to expand...

I would have some reservations about that pack, rumour goes that the Samsung model in question has some Freesync issues
 
NKD said:
lol. Another way to bullshit and get more people to buy. Reviews speak for themselves. I can't believe I am about to say this. I used to be a Ruby fan, radeon lover. But man they are behind. Now to what I wanted to say, Vega is actually worse than rx 480 launch. Atleast the rx 480 was priced decent for its performance, but Vega is power hungry, priced 100 more than what amd said everywhere. close to 1080, mostly a little slower. Uses almost double the power. There is just too much wrong here.

RTG is like trump. They turn a blind eye to everything and believe their own glorified stories about vega. Thats the only truth that exists to them and I am sure they have alternative facts to support Vega is some how better than Gtx 1080 and wroth the 100 dollar extra.
Click to expand...

Don't think anyone at RTG will be wearing a sporty orange jumpsuit any time soon ;) .

I'm not really concerned about the reference editions of the Vega card. I wonder are you ? The thing is that you are forgetting one thing from the blind test . When your gaming is not revolving around getting the best frame rate but just what your monitor can handle then it can be a valid option but this is for a very small segment of people.

AMD prolly has more marketing done for Vega then anything else you could argue this is a test of the department on how much stuff they can have an influence over and see it back in sales.

In reality Vega is not the card to get unless you have a Freesync monitor and don't care about getting higher frame rates then your refresh rate.
 
FrameBuffer said:
lulz.. and so it begins.. #WaitForVolta.. except of course, NV has already said no (gaming) Volta until at least 2018

So I guess should be #WaitForVolta2018!!
Click to expand...
It is being taken out of context, having to mention this in another thread.
In those financial calls Nvidia NEVER talk about products or segments that are not yet announced/launched.
Case in point financial call Q1 2016 in May, they briefly talk about GP104 (it was announced the week before) when asked but gave no indicators that it would impact heavily in a positive way on Q2 results (pretty sure their forecasts showed it would do very well with their price and performance), however also critically that financial call did not mention Pascal Titan nor did it mention GP106, nor any indicator of GP104 as Tesla/Quadro that they still announced August 2016 (albeit actually launched Oct).
Pascal Titan was an important GPU for Nvidia because it has strong synergy with P100, would be the most powerful 'gaming' GPU, and also gave the narrative for Int8 inferencing, yet no indicators in that call such a product was ever coming to market when asked about future Pascal....

Jen-Hsun context is as before, the foreseeable future current product is still very strong because nothing else has been announced to talk about so far.
It may or may not launch end of this year or early next year, but one cannot use his financial call quote as any conclusion, same way publications made a lot of wrong conclusions about Pascal last year.
Those publications also misunderstood how P100 launched and so kept on about it being a 2017 product when it was in freaking full production Q3 2016 and widely available in 8-slot DGX-1 node configuration with 3-7 days turnaround from order.

Cheers
 
Last edited:
Anarchist4000 said:
It's probably a driver thing. Unless you think a couple TB/s of bandwidth is insufficient? MSAA samples are next to each other and should hit the cache. In this case the drivers probably didn't assume the right tile/bin size and blew out a cache. As I mentioned before, even is DSBR is enabled AMD will need to configure the settings properly accounting for a number of conditions.

As for Fiji, the storage requirements of high MSAA were the bigger issue with performance. Shader based AA works fine.
Click to expand...

They never fixed it in Fiji, yet you think its a driver thing in Vega? Come on its the same damn architecture with fp16.......:banghead:


What does "look worse" really mean when nobody but miners are purchasing them? Until supply increases it's a bit irrelevant. Also gives more time to get drivers in order. Just look at the open source Linux drivers that are 30-500% faster in games than AMDs just released proprietary ones shared with Windows. Only OpenGL there, but even in some pro apps they're already ahead of 1080ti and close on Linux games against Nvidia's best drivers.
Click to expand...


No fuckin miner is buying Vega, just go over to some of the mining forums and ask, they will laugh you out of the forum. Only newbie idiots that believed in Gibbo's BS about 100 mhs and that is about it. Anyone that is serious about mining as a business would not take Gibbo's word for it. What did Ryan say a day before Vega was launched, and that is all I had to hear, Vega no longer interested me for mining. Still have to get one eventually, I'll just wait on it though get a used one on the cheap for dev.


That may require some algorithm work beyond just the drivers to use the new INT8/16 and hashing instructions. The big miners are probably doing that already.
Click to expand...

BS already told you its bandwidth limited, FP16 and Int8 in the algorithm will not change the bandwidth needs!. Also the algorithm doesn't change it is what it is period. Why the hell do you guys make this shit up. God damn it, the algorithm is what it is, the entire blockchain is based on one algorithm! You change that damn algorithm there is no blockchain! Dags are not the algorithm. That is just the file that has the block chain info. The dag number changes as its updated by the blockchain, the dag file gets larger as more mining gets done. So it has nothing to do with the algorithm! its just reading that info, that is why Dag199 was slower before because its a bigger file and needs more bandwidth. What AMD did with its newer driver was how to read that file to insure it doesn't get bandwidth bound or more likelly memory bound as the bigger dag files hit the 4gb cards get hit more than the 8gb cards.

Holy fuckin shit!

http://www.legitreviews.com/ethereu...op-might-coming-amd-nvidia-gpus-tested_195702

ethereum-mining-dag-size.jpg
 
Last edited:
I wonder if the lack of supply is just AMD not buying too much inventory cause they figure they can't sell it anyway in the first place. Unless for some reason Global Foundries screwed up again. HBM2 supply issues maybe? Saving the chips for Vega 56?
 
AMD also making sure its artificially low stock? why make a card that probably won't sell well? Pretty much what nV did with the fx 5800
 
SighTurtle said:
I wonder if the lack of supply is just AMD not buying too much inventory cause they figure they can't sell it anyway in the first place. Unless for some reason Global Foundries screwed up again. HBM2 supply issues maybe? Saving the chips for Vega 56?
Click to expand...

Not sure how graphics cards are, but practically every other industry in the world there's a tooling cost and NRE (non reoccuring engineering) to setup a product line. They may have only setup a low number of lines to mitigate risk. Also having extra inventory is a risk both from tying up cash and also that you won't sell it.
 
Do we actually have a figure for cards available at launch worldwide? If I remember right Fury had only 16,000 units available at launch.

I wonder how this launch compares. Especially since AMD said they were delaying launch to build up inventory to make sure gamers got a card.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top