AMD, where are you?

What some people here don't get is this: It's not just about beating NVIDIA, but also about turning a profit.

Vega is a huge catastrophe.

AMD didn't recoup a penny that was spend on developing Vega.

In fact, at one point AMD was losing money on every Vega video card sold.

It's a big part of why Raja was shown the door.
 
Vega 10's ROI might be a disappointment but the Vega architecture overall has been used in Raven Ridge, Kaby G, and consoles to high praise
 
God damn. My local microcenter has 1080 ti's for $650. Vega 64 is $700. Come the fuck on, AMD. You need to fucking get something out that can at LEAST compete with a 1080 at the same price point. Only having shit tier cards or cards that are outclassed by cheaper cards is just fucking retarded.

I WANT to buy an AMD card, and Vega 64 isn't THAT far behind a 1080 ti. Nvidia has been super scummy recently, and I don't want to give them money. I could make that performance concession if the price reflected it, but it's the opposite. Dumb. Dumb dumb dumb.

/rant
 
Sextron said:
God damn. My local microcenter has 1080 ti's for $650. Vega 64 is $700. Come the fuck on, AMD. You need to fucking get something out that can at LEAST compete with a 1080 at the same price point. Only having shit tier cards or cards that are outclassed by cheaper cards is just fucking retarded.

I WANT to buy an AMD card, and Vega 64 isn't THAT far behind a 1080 ti. Nvidia has been super scummy recently, and I don't want to give them money. I could make that performance concession if the price reflected it, but it's the opposite. Dumb. Dumb dumb dumb.

/rant
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. I just broke down and went with a used 1080TI because the price was super good and as much as I hate Nvidias business practices lately, I can't wait for AMD to figure out if they are going to get serious about competing in this area again.
 
AMD has nothing to go against Nvidia. With Turing coming out, basically AMD is not the company to go with when it comes to graphics. Maybe with 7nm cards come out? But I would not get my hopes up IMO.

Even right now, Nvidia is basically going to have to complete against their own pascal cards. In a lot of ways if you own a 1080 or 1080ti, I would skip the RTX series imo.
 
VulnoX said:
Couldn't agree more. I just broke down and went with a used 1080TI because the price was super good and as much as I hate Nvidias business practices lately, I can't wait for AMD to figure out if they are going to get serious about competing in this area again.
Click to expand...

Might have to go the used route. At least then Nvidia doesn’t get more money.

Brackle said:
AMD has nothing to go against Nvidia. With Turing coming out, basically AMD is not the company to go with when it comes to graphics. Maybe with 7nm cards come out? But I would not get my hopes up IMO.

Even right now, Nvidia is basically going to have to complete against their own pascal cards. In a lot of ways if you own a 1080 or 1080ti, I would skip the RTX series imo.
Click to expand...

I have a non-ti 980. Any Vega 64 / 1080 / 1080 ti would be a huge upgrade for me.
 
Sextron said:
Might have to go the used route. At least then Nvidia doesn’t get more money.



I have a non-ti 980. Any Vega 64 / 1080 / 1080 ti would be a huge upgrade for me.
Click to expand...

Well I would not put the Vega 64 in the same upgrade bracket as a 1080. Not only is it over $150-200 more than the 1080 but it isn't even any faster. If you want to spend money on a Vega 64, get a 1080ti for around the same price.

You can pick up brand new 1080's for around $450 now.

Edit: You can now pickup a 1080ti for $609 after MIR....

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814137111&ignorebbr=1
 
  • Like
Reactions: Surly
like this
Brackle said:
Well I would not put the Vega 64 in the same upgrade bracket as a 1080. Not only is it over $150-200 more than the 1080 but it isn't even any faster. If you want to spend money on a Vega 64, get a 1080ti for around the same price.

You can pick up brand new 1080's for around $450 now.

Edit: You can now pickup a 1080ti for $609 after MIR....

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814137111&ignorebbr=1
Click to expand...

I probably worded it badly, but that's kind of my point. Performance wise, a Vega 64 competes with a 1080. Even though it's not the best card out right now, it's still pretty good. If a Vega 64 cost the same as a 1080, I'd be satisfied with a Vega 64.

But it's not. It's fucking $250 more expensive, which is absolutely absurd. And nothing else AMD has comes anywhere close, performance wise.
 
Sextron said:
God damn. My local microcenter has 1080 ti's for $650. Vega 64 is $700. Come the fuck on, AMD.
Click to expand...

How do some people still not get this? Yeah, Vega wasn’t good for gaming, but it killed Nvidia in compute, and AMD cards have been flying off the shelves making AMD a lot of money. Not from gamers, but from miners. This won’t help AMD next generation, though, now that miners are moving to ASICS. They had little R&D money and they took their pro/compute architecture and shoehorned it to a gaming card. Didn’t work great, but mining saved them. You’d hope they learned to keep compite and gaming separate for Navi.
 
Last edited:
Well, i often sell people RX 570 based systems with 144Hz Freesync monitors for the same price as 1050 systems with GSync, so if you factor in monitor selection, a Vega GPU with 1440p Freesync monitor is MUCH faster than spending the same money on an Nvidia GSync solution...
 
Sextron said:
God damn. My local microcenter has 1080 ti's for $650. Vega 64 is $700. Come the fuck on, AMD. You need to fucking get something out that can at LEAST compete with a 1080 at the same price point. Only having shit tier cards or cards that are outclassed by cheaper cards is just fucking retarded.

I WANT to buy an AMD card, and Vega 64 isn't THAT far behind a 1080 ti. Nvidia has been super scummy recently, and I don't want to give them money. I could make that performance concession if the price reflected it, but it's the opposite. Dumb. Dumb dumb dumb.

/rant
Click to expand...

Maybe you shouldnt buy at your MC then. Vega 64 has been around $550-$570 for weeks now on newegg. Vega 56 has been down around the $480 point for months.
 
Algrim said:
AMD had multiple problems:
  • When they were on top they bled money partying like, well, you can fill in your own meme here.
  • Once staggering after all the partying, Intel used anti-competitive tactics to hold AMD back whilst coming back with a competing chip.
  • AMD purchased ATI thus turning a two-company war (AMD vs. Intel) into a three-company war (Intel vs. ATI/RTG vs. nVidia).
  • ATI/RTG allowed marketing and management to initiate the hype train; fanbois pushed the throttle of this train to 11.
  • ATI/RTG made cards with a Bill Of Materials (BOM) too high vs. the competition.
Any one of the above points would hurt a company. Having all of them? Thankfully, Lisa Su appears to be someone who is distinctly against bullshit and I anticipate that, like with the CPU division, she will bring about order to the GPU division for some sorely needed competition.
Click to expand...

  • AMD was on the performance top of the pile in enthusiast circles, but not when it came to retail, workstation and server market sales. AMD never had the production capacity to meet OEM demands even if Intel allowed AMD to flourish to its potential.
  • Absolutely.
  • I don't think this is all that important. They are separate markets and if the resources had been there and both companies could compete well in each space, it wouldn't have mattered. The GPU and CPU divisions could, should and for the most part are run separately. I did think AMD put too much money into its Fusion shit, but that's only part of the problem. There are many problems and complexities that kept each division from competing well against their rivals but AMD simply being in both spaces isn't one of them.
  • True. AMD was high on hype and low on delivery.
  • This is true, but only part of the problem. It wouldn't have mattered as much had AMD been more competitive on the performance front.

R&D shit aside, AMD has been mismanaged from around the Pentium era. Its cannibalized profitable divisions to sink money into the CPU market where it's found limited success during its history. The company has lacked the focus its needed to succeed anywhere consistently.
 
_mockingbird said:
So Vega is great because it's better than Intel HD Graphics?

What a joke!
Click to expand...

Somewhat yes, somewhat not. Vega integrated APU's are better on mobile platforms, such as laptops, simply because they provide better performance than anything Intel has to offer, and even beats a good amount of discrete mobile GPU's, while consuming less power.

While people can be pissed that AMD isn't competing in the high end GPU market, they are focusing on where they can make the most profit right now. Console's, APU's, servers, desktop parts. They can't simply throw a heaping amount of money at R&D for a top tier GPU if they don't have the budget to do so.

A lot of people would be seriously mistaken if they didn't believe datacenter's and businesses are looking at EPYC for their next hardware refresh. They've partnered with Cisco for a new line of EPYC driven UCS blades. With the announcement of the latest Intel security flaws essentially disabling hyper-threading and causing a 30% performance loss on OLTP workloads that's a huge NO BUENO. Hosting providers, large scale internal datacenters (thing hospital networks) simply can't lose 50% of their vCPU's while also taking a huge hit to performance. The talks are happening and Cisco is scaling up production of EPYC parts. Intel is about to lose a sizable portion of it's server market. Quickly. AMD's stock supports that.
 
My guess is that they'll abandon the high end gpu market for the time being. Since they can't compete, they're better off using the Vega 64 / 56 dies for compute cards and actually making a profit. Roll the profits into the next gen architecture and compete with nVidia in high end gaming in 2020/2021 timeframe.
 
Sextron said:
I probably worded it badly, but that's kind of my point. Performance wise, a Vega 64 competes with a 1080. Even though it's not the best card out right now, it's still pretty good. If a Vega 64 cost the same as a 1080, I'd be satisfied with a Vega 64.

But it's not. It's fucking $250 more expensive, which is absolutely absurd. And nothing else AMD has comes anywhere close, performance wise.
Click to expand...

Where are you getting your insane prices from? Here, it took me 30 seconds to find you a top of the line 64 for under $600. You also get 3 free TRIPLE AAA games to go with it that you do not get with Nvidia. Let's say those games are only worth $25 each instead of $60, you are still only paying $504 for the card. I even found you one that has the free 5 month no interest financing since you seem to be really concerned about money.

Go buy the card, and then I will give you the settings you need to make it as fast (or faster) then a 1080 with roughly the same power draw. You can enjoy freesync to boot. Thanks me later.

https://www.amazon.com/Radeon-Overc...7?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1535573869&sr=1-7
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
As far as what AMD is doing, I would personally love to see them push a 500 series with 40~45CUs (this would get it on a par or faster then a 1070ti IMO) with a GDDR5x refresh. Considering that 5x is pin compatible with '5, all it will take is AMD's will to make the card.

VEGA had a really rough launch. Raja was rushing things,and after over hyping them like he usually does, he was in a panic to get the cards out. AMD should have delayed them ~3 weeks and had their driver team working 60 hours a week tweaking the software. It took us launch week guys a few days to have the cards flying (my 56s were on a par with a 1080 even with the drivers then) with WAAAY less power then the insane 1.2V default Vcore they shipped the reference cards at. It was a stupid move, that earned them some criticism from the Power Police Crowd.

Honestly at this point even binned VEGAs on the current 14nm Process should be able to consistently hit boost clocks ~100+Mhz higher then the shipping cards with less voltage to boot. Now that us miners are not sucking up the entire supply, It would be great to see a AIB offer a binned card with some nice AIO WC unit and the updated HBM speeds (although all of my Samsung cards have been able to do 1100Mhz HBM out of the box with 850mV).
 
ccityinstaller said:
Where are you getting your insane prices from? Here, it took me 30 seconds to find you a top of the line 64 for under $600. You also get 3 free TRIPLE AAA games to go with it that you do not get with Nvidia. Let's say those games are only worth $25 each instead of $60, you are still only paying $504 for the card. I even found you one that has the free 5 month no interest financing since you seem to be really concerned about money.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I'd label Strange Brigade and Star Control as AAA titles; you can currently buy Star Control for $35 and Brigade will be under $20 before you know it. MicroCenter has 1080s under $500 and 1080Tis under $650 without needing to sell games (though you can probably get $50 for the Destiny 2 + Season Pass bundle if you buy the EVGA card). I think it's hard to justify Vega for over $500 unless you have a Freesync monitor and need a card right now.
 
ccityinstaller said:
As far as what AMD is doing, I would personally love to see them push a 500 series with 40~45CUs (this would get it on a par or faster then a 1070ti IMO) with a GDDR5x refresh. Considering that 5x is pin compatible with '5, all it will take is AMD's will to make the card.

VEGA had a really rough launch. Raja was rushing things,and after over hyping them like he usually does, he was in a panic to get the cards out. AMD should have delayed them ~3 weeks and had their driver team working 60 hours a week tweaking the software. It took us launch week guys a few days to have the cards flying (my 56s were on a par with a 1080 even with the drivers then) with WAAAY less power then the insane 1.2V default Vcore they shipped the reference cards at. It was a stupid move, that earned them some criticism from the Power Police Crowd.

Honestly at this point even binned VEGAs on the current 14nm Process should be able to consistently hit boost clocks ~100+Mhz higher then the shipping cards with less voltage to boot. Now that us miners are not sucking up the entire supply, It would be great to see a AIB offer a binned card with some nice AIO WC unit and the updated HBM speeds (although all of my Samsung cards have been able to do 1100Mhz HBM out of the box with 850mV).
Click to expand...

There is probably a good chance that there is a certain number of chips cannot be undervolted effectively and why AMD chooses 1.2 volt to ensure majority of their chip will run at that setting. Of course, no one knows the exact figure except AMD but I think that is why they did it.
 
ccityinstaller said:
Where are you getting your insane prices from? Here, it took me 30 seconds to find you a top of the line 64 for under $600. You also get 3 free TRIPLE AAA games to go with it that you do not get with Nvidia. Let's say those games are only worth $25 each instead of $60, you are still only paying $504 for the card. I even found you one that has the free 5 month no interest financing since you seem to be really concerned about money.

Go buy the card, and then I will give you the settings you need to make it as fast (or faster) then a 1080 with roughly the same power draw. You can enjoy freesync to boot. Thanks me later.

https://www.amazon.com/Radeon-Overc...7?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1535573869&sr=1-7
Click to expand...
Those aren't AAA games. I didn't even bother redeeming mine.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
ccityinstaller said:
Where are you getting your insane prices from? Here, it took me 30 seconds to find you a top of the line 64 for under $600. You also get 3 free TRIPLE AAA games to go with it that you do not get with Nvidia. Let's say those games are only worth $25 each instead of $60, you are still only paying $504 for the card. I even found you one that has the free 5 month no interest financing since you seem to be really concerned about money.

Go buy the card, and then I will give you the settings you need to make it as fast (or faster) then a 1080 with roughly the same power draw. You can enjoy freesync to boot. Thanks me later.

https://www.amazon.com/Radeon-Overc...7?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1535573869&sr=1-7
Click to expand...

It seems you can't math. A $600 video card with $100 of free games doesn't make the video card cost any less. Just like a buy one get one half off doesn't make the first one cheaper, for example. If you don't need the second one, it doesn't give you anything of value. It just tricks you into spending more money.

Just like those free games . I don't want them. Not only do they NOT reduce the price of the card, they don't add any value to me, period.

That's still a $600 card. A stock 1080 is $450. You're paying $150 more for no noticeable performance gain over a 1080.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Sextron said:
It seems you can't math. A $600 video card with $100 of free games doesn't make the video card cost any less. Just like a buy one get one half off doesn't make the first one cheaper, for example. If you don't need the second one, it doesn't give you anything of value. It just tricks you into spending more money.

Just like those free games . I don't want them. Not only do they NOT reduce the price of the card, they don't add any value to me, period.

That's still a $600 card. A stock 1080 is $450. You're paying $150 more for no noticeable performance gain over a 1080.
Click to expand...

You are sort of shifting the goal post "a bit" on the pricing aspect. I clearly hinted at the fact you could sell the games for $25 each, making the card a much lower net cost to you. I apologize for saying they are Triple AAA games, when I really should have said "New releases". That being said, NewEgg and others have had Vega 56s and 64s on sale for sub $500 prices out the door. Set up a NowInStock alert like I did for my launch cards and you can buy them pretty easily. There is a still a ton of demand for these cards, since they are great at mining the future of crypto, CN lite coins. Yeah I said it. Anyone that disagrees can SS this and come back and laugh at me in 2~3 years if I am wrong but I do not think I will be ;-)...


As far as my experience with undervolting cards, it goes like this. 98% of every V56 I have seen can easily undervolt to insanely low levels. I have only worked with a sample size of say ~500 cards or so, but those cards have come from every corner of the world at different times so I think it offers a *Decent* sample size. The V64s can undervolt as well, but it is a bit more trial and error, as the extra shaders like to have a bit more power. I am currently running my 3 56s @ 100% load mining away @ 1360/1125Mhz HBM @ .87V with a -20% PL which allows each card to draw ~113W.

You can actually game at these settings and have better results then a balls to the wall OC'd Fury X or a highly OC'd 580 (I have a lot of experience with top binned 580s from my old mining farm). Now these power results are a bit skewed since my cards are currently running @ 36C Core/44C HBM but it can be be achieved on air as well. I have been playing Mad Max at 1440P max settings and I haven't bothered running the single 56 I am using anywhere near its fully speed since (~1500Mhz/1100Mhz HBM with the card using ~135Wish) Freesync is just so damn good at making everything buttery smooth (which is why I get such a kick outta people like IdiotInCharge who love to scream about how bad FreeSync is and how superior G-sync is. I have owned both and the experience my cheapest $145 FS panel has offered has more then rivaled the $450 G-Snyc panel I had paired with an Oc'd 980TI).

I do not mean to sound like a VEGA fan boy, even though I am sure I do. The cards have gotten a bad rep with the launch issues and the inflated pricing, which is unfortunate for AMD. They have still made a ton of money selling them to us miners, just as we have made a ton of money using them, but I would have loved to see more cards in the hands of Gamers. One thing I will mention is that I would have zero issues buying a used card on the cheap from an eBay seller that has really good feedback. VEGA does not perform well at high temperatures for mining, so if you get a card from a good seller you can rest assured it was run at very low (for air cooling) temperatures. Buy them with a CC that offers a warranty on your purchases, and you are good to go.

Pair these cards with a decent FreeSync panel and the experience is the best I have had gaming, aside from the days when StarSeige Tribes was the rage and I ran it maxed out with my OC'd V3000 AGP and a high res/high refresh CRT. I had really kind of gotten out of gaming since Frame Rate drops and input lag etc really mess with my chronic migraine issue but FreeSync has honestly made that a thing of the past for me.
 
ccityinstaller said:
You are sort of shifting the goal post "a bit" on the pricing aspect. I clearly hinted at the fact you could sell the games for $25 each, making the card a much lower net cost to you. I apologize for saying they are Triple AAA games, when I really should have said "New releases". That being said, NewEgg and others have had Vega 56s and 64s on sale for sub $500 prices out the door. Set up a NowInStock alert like I did for my launch cards and you can buy them pretty easily. There is a still a ton of demand for these cards, since they are great at mining the future of crypto, CN lite coins. Yeah I said it. Anyone that disagrees can SS this and come back and laugh at me in 2~3 years if I am wrong but I do not think I will be ;-)...


As far as my experience with undervolting cards, it goes like this. 98% of every V56 I have seen can easily undervolt to insanely low levels. I have only worked with a sample size of say ~500 cards or so, but those cards have come from every corner of the world at different times so I think it offers a *Decent* sample size. The V64s can undervolt as well, but it is a bit more trial and error, as the extra shaders like to have a bit more power. I am currently running my 3 56s @ 100% load mining away @ 1360/1125Mhz HBM @ .87V with a -20% PL which allows each card to draw ~113W.

You can actually game at these settings and have better results then a balls to the wall OC'd Fury X or a highly OC'd 580 (I have a lot of experience with top binned 580s from my old mining farm). Now these power results are a bit skewed since my cards are currently running @ 36C Core/44C HBM but it can be be achieved on air as well. I have been playing Mad Max at 1440P max settings and I haven't bothered running the single 56 I am using anywhere near its fully speed since (~1500Mhz/1100Mhz HBM with the card using ~135Wish) Freesync is just so damn good at making everything buttery smooth (which is why I get such a kick outta people like IdiotInCharge who love to scream about how bad FreeSync is and how superior G-sync is. I have owned both and the experience my cheapest $145 FS panel has offered has more then rivaled the $450 G-Snyc panel I had paired with an Oc'd 980TI).

I do not mean to sound like a VEGA fan boy, even though I am sure I do. The cards have gotten a bad rep with the launch issues and the inflated pricing, which is unfortunate for AMD. They have still made a ton of money selling them to us miners, just as we have made a ton of money using them, but I would have loved to see more cards in the hands of Gamers. One thing I will mention is that I would have zero issues buying a used card on the cheap from an eBay seller that has really good feedback. VEGA does not perform well at high temperatures for mining, so if you get a card from a good seller you can rest assured it was run at very low (for air cooling) temperatures. Buy them with a CC that offers a warranty on your purchases, and you are good to go.

Pair these cards with a decent FreeSync panel and the experience is the best I have had gaming, aside from the days when StarSeige Tribes was the rage and I ran it maxed out with my OC'd V3000 AGP and a high res/high refresh CRT. I had really kind of gotten out of gaming since Frame Rate drops and input lag etc really mess with my chronic migraine issue but FreeSync has honestly made that a thing of the past for me.
Click to expand...

I mean, you sound like an AMD fanboy, not a Vega one. In all of your comparisons your only comparing to other AMD products, while completely ignoring the fact that Nvidia absolutely dominates the top end, while remaining price competitive against AMD at lower performance levels, too. Sure, compared to other AMD cards Vega is nice, but that's mainly because the AMD cards are pretty garbage at this point. Nvidia cards are better at the vast majority of price points right now.
 
Sextron said:
I mean, you sound like an AMD fanboy, not a Vega one. In all of your comparisons your only comparing to other AMD products, while completely ignoring the fact that Nvidia absolutely dominates the top end, while remaining price competitive against AMD at lower performance levels, too. Sure, compared to other AMD cards Vega is nice, but that's mainly because the AMD cards are pretty garbage at this point. Nvidia cards are better at the vast majority of price points right now.
Click to expand...

I am definitely a fanboy of VEGA. I should be, considering I own 8 of them, and have they have, and continue to make me a great deal of money. I find the Arch very interesting, especially once it is tweaked properly. Stuff that geeks like to do. That is what this hobby was about in the old days. Taking HW and tweaking it and pushing it in every way you possibly can.

I am not a Faboy of any one company, but I will admit I had a preference toward AMD in the last two years based on the actions of Nvidia, and the actions of Intel over the last 12 years. How can you not at least admire a company that has competed with TWO GIANTS (let's ignore the way these "Giants" got to be what they are) for basically ever with the tiny, tiny amount of R&D capital the other two have? If it were not for AMD, you would just now be getting Maxwell cards, with the 2000 series reserved for 2025 and we will still be stuck with quad core CPUs on the high end of things. There would be no $700 1080Tis and $1000 8+ core CPUs that you can OC to the moon.

I have built dozens of gaming rigs, using parts from every major manufacturer out there in the last 4 years. How many have you built? I do not press upon the customer to buy any sort of brand. I help them choose the best value for their money if they ask for my opinion. I have stayed more toward AMD cards in my personal rigs (aside from the 980TI I owned until a few months ago) since FreeSync panels are lovely. If I am a Fanboy of anything, it is VRR, and it's current form, that makes AMD the best deal around (until VRR via HDMI 2.1 hits the market).

As for Nvidia being "better" at the vast majority of the price points right now, I disagree a bit. If we were to back up 3 weeks, so the 1080 series were not getting massive price cuts ahead of the 2XXX series launch, I think AMD offered the same or better value/performance at every price point up to the 1080ti. As I mentioned, you could get V64s for under $500 without using a witch doctor or finding some sort of "price mistake". Again, It is very, very hard to beat the value that a sub $150 FreeSync panel adds to your GPU purchase. A value you cannot get with Nvidia without spending at least $100~150 more. With the current price cuts, it does make the 1070ti/1080/1080Ti market much more attractive. I will give you that.


I would love to see AMD make a top teir card again, I would buy one if it continued to support FreeSync (dunno why it would not) assuming it was priced in line with it's performance. With Raja gone, I think the next 3-5 years will be an exciting time for EVERY [H]ard member, despite their brand of choice! :).
 
ccityinstaller said:
You are sort of shifting the goal post "a bit" on the pricing aspect. I clearly hinted at the fact you could sell the games for $25 each, making the card a much lower net cost to you. I apologize for saying they are Triple AAA games, when I really should have said "New releases". That being said, NewEgg and others have had Vega 56s and 64s on sale for sub $500 prices out the door. Set up a NowInStock alert like I did for my launch cards and you can buy them pretty easily. There is a still a ton of demand for these cards, since they are great at mining the future of crypto, CN lite coins. Yeah I said it. Anyone that disagrees can SS this and come back and laugh at me in 2~3 years if I am wrong but I do not think I will be ;-)...


As far as my experience with undervolting cards, it goes like this. 98% of every V56 I have seen can easily undervolt to insanely low levels. I have only worked with a sample size of say ~500 cards or so, but those cards have come from every corner of the world at different times so I think it offers a *Decent* sample size. The V64s can undervolt as well, but it is a bit more trial and error, as the extra shaders like to have a bit more power. I am currently running my 3 56s @ 100% load mining away @ 1360/1125Mhz HBM @ .87V with a -20% PL which allows each card to draw ~113W.

You can actually game at these settings and have better results then a balls to the wall OC'd Fury X or a highly OC'd 580 (I have a lot of experience with top binned 580s from my old mining farm). Now these power results are a bit skewed since my cards are currently running @ 36C Core/44C HBM but it can be be achieved on air as well. I have been playing Mad Max at 1440P max settings and I haven't bothered running the single 56 I am using anywhere near its fully speed since (~1500Mhz/1100Mhz HBM with the card using ~135Wish) Freesync is just so damn good at making everything buttery smooth (which is why I get such a kick outta people like IdiotInCharge who love to scream about how bad FreeSync is and how superior G-sync is. I have owned both and the experience my cheapest $145 FS panel has offered has more then rivaled the $450 G-Snyc panel I had paired with an Oc'd 980TI).

I do not mean to sound like a VEGA fan boy, even though I am sure I do. The cards have gotten a bad rep with the launch issues and the inflated pricing, which is unfortunate for AMD. They have still made a ton of money selling them to us miners, just as we have made a ton of money using them, but I would have loved to see more cards in the hands of Gamers. One thing I will mention is that I would have zero issues buying a used card on the cheap from an eBay seller that has really good feedback. VEGA does not perform well at high temperatures for mining, so if you get a card from a good seller you can rest assured it was run at very low (for air cooling) temperatures. Buy them with a CC that offers a warranty on your purchases, and you are good to go.

Pair these cards with a decent FreeSync panel and the experience is the best I have had gaming, aside from the days when StarSeige Tribes was the rage and I ran it maxed out with my OC'd V3000 AGP and a high res/high refresh CRT. I had really kind of gotten out of gaming since Frame Rate drops and input lag etc really mess with my chronic migraine issue but FreeSync has honestly made that a thing of the past for me.
Click to expand...
Nobody is going to pay $25 each for those dog shit games.
 
I would take a Vega 64 and a FreeSync monitor over the 1080. The price of Gsync monitors of any worth is utterly ridicules. Except maybe getting a Gsync Monitor here:
Now a 1080 Ti versus a Vega 64 -> I would say gaming wise the 1080 Ti is the way to go. We just have to wait for Turing cards to hit to see if they are even remotely worth it.

AMD first needs to get their Vegas at MSRP, that would be a good start.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
_mockingbird said:
The same question was asked internally.

You'll get your wish.
Click to expand...

yea it was mind boggling. I mean Raja can complain about not having all the resources. But There was more than few things wrong with every launch he had. Like the 480s pulling too much from PCI-e. I mean common, that the fuck do you let that go though quality control. Put a damn 8 pin on it. That was a giant fail.

I do believe you Vega was costing them shit load. Thats why I was saying you can't tell me they couldn't add more shader cores to polaris and slap on gddr5x and leave vega the hell alone to professional cards. I mean that should have been something Raja could have come up with. Its the decisions that he made I think that led to Lisa running the show.

Navi 7nm if its mainstream and designed to launch first half of the year. I am not sure we see 12nm Polaris. Then again. If they feel like they cant make navi 7nm in large quantities and 7nm needs another few months to mature then it might make sense. But honestly since they are saying they are going all in on 7nm and they are confident then probably no 12nm polaris.
 
Right now I'm more interested in what could intel bring to the table.
 
NKD said:
yea it was mind boggling. I mean Raja can complain about not having all the resources. But There was more than few things wrong with every launch he had. Like the 480s pulling too much from PCI-e. I mean common, that the fuck do you let that go though quality control. Put a damn 8 pin on it. That was a giant fail.

I do believe you Vega was costing them shit load. Thats why I was saying you can't tell me they couldn't add more shader cores to polaris and slap on gddr5x and leave vega the hell alone to professional cards. I mean that should have been something Raja could have come up with. Its the decisions that he made I think that led to Lisa running the show.

Navi 7nm if its mainstream and designed to launch first half of the year. I am not sure we see 12nm Polaris. Then again. If they feel like they cant make navi 7nm in large quantities and 7nm needs another few months to mature then it might make sense. But honestly since they are saying they are going all in on 7nm and they are confident then probably no 12nm polaris.
Click to expand...

AMD continues to work on both Polaris and Vega.

Vega has a big part of the die dedicated to things that either don't work or have no place in consumer graphics cards.

That's why Vega refresh is currently for workstation only.

That's also why "Navi" will also likely be based on Polaris, and not Vega.

Now, I put "Navi" in quotation for a reason.

Navi (as it is internally know) is based on Polaris, but if that doesn't work out for some reasons, AMD can release "Navi" based on Vega.

So, remember the distinctions between Navi and "Navi": the former is an internal codename, while the later is a marketing name.
 
_mockingbird said:
AMD continues to work on both Polaris and Vega.

Vega has a big part of the die dedicated to things that either don't work or have no place in consumer graphics cards.

That's why Vega refresh is currently for workstation only.

That's also why "Navi" will also likely be based on Polaris, and not Vega.

Now, I put "Navi" in quotation for a reason.

Navi (as it is internally know) is based on Polaris, but if that doesn't work out for some reasons, AMD can release "Navi" based on Vega.

So, remember the distinctions between Navi and "Navi": the former is an internal codename, while the later is a marketing name.
Click to expand...


I wonder if they are making tweaks to reduce bottlenecks on Navi to put shaders to work more efficiently. I know GDDR6 will likely be on the cards and should get cheaper by next year should help with bandwidth there. I just think if they can match 1080ti for now with Navi at mainstream pricing it would be pretty damn good. Atleast with freesync monitors. Then let next gen architecture handle the true high end.
 
_mockingbird said:
What some people here don't get is this: It's not just about beating NVIDIA, but also about turning a profit.

Vega is a huge catastrophe.

AMD didn't recoup a penny that was spend on developing Vega.

In fact, at one point AMD was losing money on every Vega video card sold.

It's a big part of why Raja was shown the door.
Click to expand...

I would think Vega video cards where just some novice R&D project as it was more about the 2200G-2700U where Vega has noting in it's way as Intel plays catch up Vega 2 APU's are yet to come but pure HTPC applies to Vega 8 and 10 .
 
Let me know when they release a gaming version. Otherwise, I'm not interested.
 
9700 Pro came out of nowhere and batted it right out of da park. Don't underestimate them....lthough that was ATI....
 
testicle said:
It's coming!!!

https://wccftech-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/wccftech.com/amd-confirms-new-7nm-radeon-graphics-cards-launching-in-2018/amp/?amp_js_v=0.1#amp_tf=From %1$s&ampshare=https://wccftech.com/amd-confirms-new-7nm-radeon-graphics-cards-launching-in-2018/
Click to expand...

Thats just same old news recycled by WTFtech. I can't believe how they misrepresent the titles to get people to click on it. AMD said this in June of this year, that 7nm vega was coming at the end of the year to pro industry. This guys just took the repeated info pasted radeon all over it like it was the gaming GPUs. Leave it up to them to hype things to get clicks.

There title made it seem like AMD just announced mulptile radeon GPUs were coming to 2018 this year including gaming lol! Then the description was totally different. LOL!

Yes amd could surprise us but that article is just misrepresenting facts for clicks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top