AMD Vega prices to cost significantly more than expected

N4CR said:
I have followed this quite in-depth since 780Ti (as 10Bit can benefit some of my work) and you are correct. And I hate banding with a passion. Although newer monitors are getting better at this across the board with 10bit LUT etc.

Regarding topic at hand, I was right. I said they'd mark it up at least in my country for launch (they did) but I also expected the mining performance to be better. Seems everyone else is having fun marking it up globally..
I'm going to wait another month before deciding, see what AA improvements they can bring. Not being invested in any active sync gives me more options and might be able to save some $ buying in EU or DXB.
And fuck Gibbo. What a slimy motherfucker, hope his audience is pissed at him.
Click to expand...


Gibbo is a salesmen, all salesmen are slimy but to what degree.... Can't blame him for trying to make a buck, but the mining rumor, that was him being stupid, he has been around graphics cards long enough to know that was fictitious. He probably got it from a AIB partner salesmen who extrapolated from Fiji, memory clocks and frequency. Actually if he did that they would end up at 100mhs lol, all that but forgetting the differences between the bus sizes.
 
razor1 said:
Gibbo is a salesmen, all salesmen are slimy but to what degree.... Can't blame him for trying to make a buck, but the mining rumor, that was him being stupid, he has been around graphics cards long enough to know that was fictitious. He probably got it from a AIB partner salesmen who extrapolated from Fiji, memory clocks and frequency. Actually if he did that they would end up at 100mhs lol, all that but forgetting the differences between the bus sizes.
Click to expand...

The "vega awesome at mining" "rumor" is clearly perpetuated by AMD itself, since all the review sites that are the most brown-nosing to AMD are all reporting it as fact. If it was false those sites would probably be ordered by AMD to not report that as true when they asked AMD to confirm the rumor.

This is corroborated by the fact that they literally listed "cryptocurrency architectural optimization" as one of the "new features" of Vega architecture on their official slide-deck that they sent to reviewers in their "reviewer's guide".
 
If miners didn't want these midrange cards so bad, I'd get one for my friends new build. Hopefully the discount is still around when I make it. Happy to see 1070/vega 56 around the same price.
 
Communism said:
AMD boosted their sales of R9 290(x) and R9 390(x) by specifically having "TheStilt" aka an AMD engineer on community liaison service making officially AMD Golden Signature signed BIOS's optimizing them for memory latency sensitive hashing algorithms.

AMD specifically touted "cryptocurrency architecture enhancements" for the Vega in their slides.

I would bet that AMD will ninja release mining BIOS and release their own forks of the mining software with optimizations explicitly for VEGA if/when they have massive inventory of the card and no gamers buy it.

They won't likely release it before they have large inventories of VEGA that people aren't buying.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This is of course all under the supposition that AMD isn't simply lying out of their ass like they always do and that they are competent, so take this analysis with a grain of salt.
Click to expand...

Wow, didn't know they officially did that for the 2/390x but when you see the performance compared to cards 3 years newer, it makes sense.
To be honest, they can't drop prices too much with higher BOM cost, they can't compete with Volta, so throwing mining drivers out as a joker card might just be the ticket to clearing stock off shelves. And they know vega isn't hot shit so I would not put it past them to plan similar. AMD is often quite predictable, it's those outlier hardware solutions that are not though. Very interesting.

razor1 said:
Gibbo is a salesmen, all salesmen are slimy but to what degree.... Can't blame him for trying to make a buck, but the mining rumor, that was him being stupid, he has been around graphics cards long enough to know that was fictitious. He probably got it from a AIB partner salesmen who extrapolated from Fiji, memory clocks and frequency. Actually if he did that they would end up at 100mhs lol, all that but forgetting the differences between the bus sizes.
Click to expand...

Well said and it also suprised me too he pushed for it. I guess bit of both - good for sales and plausible deniability for him because sources.

VEGA OVER 9000 MHS though lol...
 
N4CR said:
Wow, didn't know they officially did that for the 2/390x but when you see the performance compared to cards 3 years newer, it makes sense.
To be honest, they can't drop prices too much with higher BOM cost, they can't compete with Volta, so throwing mining drivers out as a joker card might just be the ticket to clearing stock off shelves. And they know vega isn't hot shit so I would not put it past them to plan similar. AMD is often quite predictable, it's those outlier hardware solutions that are not though. Very interesting.



Well said and it also suprised me too he pushed for it. I guess bit of both - good for sales and plausible deniability for him because sources.

VEGA OVER 9000 MHS though lol...
Click to expand...

AMD cannot possibly claim "TheStilt" is anything other than an AMD engineer assigned to community liaison duties after he signed the R9 290(x) and R9 390(x) bioses with AMD's Golden Signature Hash. (Which he had to do since AMD locked down the BIOS signitures on R9 290(x) and R9 390(x) (like they are doing currently on the Vega series)).
 
Last edited:
razor1 said:
Pascal should have it set up for 10 bit color. Unless I'm mistaken. I don't have an HDR monitor so that setting doesn't show up for me. But nV has been pushing HDR monitors with Pascal cards so...... They also talked about at launch too.
Click to expand...

I can confirm 1080 and 1080ti output 10bit color. I have an NEC professional monitor and use 10bit for photo work.
 
Get it while the getting is good boys!!! #YOLO
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5977.PNG
    IMG_5977.PNG
    342.9 KB · Views: 67
I really really wanted vega and was waiting a long time for it. Instead just ordered 3 1080s.
 
I was holding off rebuilding for a couple months now on the hopes of solid Vega performance, and if the Vega 56 was actually at MSRP I would be sitting on a sweet new rig. Instead I'm forced to just hold out on this one. No point in buying a new board/chip when my GPU will bottleneck, no point on buying a new GPU until prices are more stable.
 
Ycarcomed said:
I was holding off rebuilding for a couple months now on the hopes of solid Vega performance, and if the Vega 56 was actually at MSRP I would be sitting on a sweet new rig. Instead I'm forced to just hold out on this one. No point in buying a new board/chip when my GPU will bottleneck, no point on buying a new GPU until prices are more stable.
Click to expand...

Get an 1800X and board, you will get more mileage out of that XFX R9 290 DD for sure. (What you have now is good but, why not spread out the upgrade instead of doing it all at once?) I have a 1700X at 3.8 Ghz and a Sapphire R9 Fury and it is faster than the FX 8300 at 4.5GHz I was using before.
 
{NG}Fidel said:
I'm just talking price gouging and shortages.
Click to expand...

It was easy to get a 1080 without price hikes when it was released. Also supply was fine, but so is Vega if you just check the retailers that got the cards.

Vega production will be low and short. Nobody is going to sit in with a huge pile of these cards because they wont sell. Buying 1080 performance at 2x the power 15 months later at 100-200$ more requires a special type of person.

And Vega is forever hugely disadvantaged in costs. Even with no profit anywhere in the chain I think you look at 400$+.
 
Last edited:
ManofGod said:
Get an 1800X and board, you will get more mileage out of that XFX R9 290 DD for sure. (What you have now is good but, why not spread out the upgrade instead of doing it all at once?) I have a 1700X at 3.8 Ghz and a Sapphire R9 Fury and it is faster than the FX 8300 at 4.5GHz I was using before.
Click to expand...

I actually had my 290 DD fry on me :( I'm using an HD 5770 I found in my closet. No point in getting Vega when I have an 8320e and 8gb DDR3, but if I'm going to upgrade the processor or memory etc. I may as well just build fresh. I've been playing the new PoE and getting ~30fps with dips to like 10, all low settings @ 1680x1050. It's awful. I decided I'm going to buy a cheap (~60-80 used) card and just wait a few months at least until I get a new system all together (minus a few parts.)
 
Ycarcomed said:
I actually had my 290 DD fry on me :( I'm using an HD 5770 I found in my closet. No point in getting Vega when I have an 8320e and 8gb DDR3, but if I'm going to upgrade the processor or memory etc. I may as well just build fresh. I've been playing the new PoE and getting ~30fps with dips to like 10, all low settings @ 1680x1050. It's awful. I decided I'm going to buy a cheap (~60-80 used) card and just wait a few months at least until I get a new system all together (minus a few parts.)
Click to expand...
If you registered your card soon enough, your XFX R9 290 DD should have a lifetime warranty from XFX.
 
Shintai said:
It was easy to get a 1080 without price hikes when it was released. Also supply was fine, but so is Vega if you just check the retailers that got the cards.

Vega production will be low and short. Nobody is going to sit in with a huge pile of these cards because they wont sell. Buying 1080 performance at 2x the power 15 months later at 100-200$ more requires a special type of person.

And Vega is forever hugely disadvantaged in costs. Even with no profit anywhere in the chain I think you look at 400$+.
Click to expand...
I was a day one buyer but it wasn't easy to get multiple cards. I visited micro center over and over and got my 1080 for 745.00 with tax included. The price gouging and the lack of availability remind me of the 1080 launch
 
Shintai said:
It was easy to get a 1080 without price hikes when it was released. Also supply was fine, but so is Vega if you just check the retailers that got the cards.

Vega production will be low and short. Nobody is going to sit in with a huge pile of these cards because they wont sell. Buying 1080 performance at 2x the power 15 months later at 100-200$ more requires a special type of person.

And Vega is forever hugely disadvantaged in costs. Even with no profit anywhere in the chain I think you look at 400$+.
Click to expand...
Well I don't see too many 1080 owners seeing an upgrade path from their one year old plus video cards with RTG. Even the 1070 owners are probably scratching their heads looking at selling and buying a 1080Ti for a real upgrade. Available 56? Once the newness of the new Radeon wears off and the continue poor pricing/performance, enthusiasm will probably turned into disappointment and anger.
 
$650CAD was the cheapest I could see for the 56 in Canada, it didn't mention if any games were included so I would assume not. There were also listings at $699 and $749, what a joke.
 
Its quite clear the 399 56 and 499 64 was nothing but a PR stunt and the "unofficial" AMD price is in reality 499 and 599 (and above) because that's what cost demands. At this point the 56 isn't even listed in Europe yet as of 10:00. How many 56 got sold at 399? 50? Then we can act like its someone else fault. But without the direct rebate its not a price that can be hit unless someone else takes a loss.
 
BassTek said:
$650CAD was the cheapest I could see for the 56 in Canada, it didn't mention if any games were included so I would assume not. There were also listings at $699 and $749, what a joke.
Click to expand...

At those price points it's like comparing 1070 performance at nearly a 1080ti price level. It just does not make sense right now. I think AMD should abandone HBM because obviously cost is too high and in lower supply compared to GDDR5x. AMD has proven that HBM has no advantage in performance. Nvidia is clearly the better choice before and after VEGA was released.
 
Nirad9er said:
At those price points it's like comparing 1070 performance at nearly a 1080ti price level. It just does not make sense right now. I think AMD should abandone HBM because obviously cost is too high and in lower supply compared to GDDR5x. AMD has proven that HBM has no advantage in performance. Nvidia is clearly the better choice before and after VEGA was released.
Click to expand...
I remember when hbm was going to be the slam dunk life changer. And even the rumors nvidia was going to be using it on cards. Nvidia basically said... no. The performance and yields aren't there. AMD fanboys said oh yea it's gonna be awesome. And now 2 generations of cards later amd' s cards are still very expensive and can't outperform a 1080ti.

Don't get me wrong. Lower the price of these cards by 30-40% and most of us would give it a shot.
 
jmilcher said:
I remember when hbm was going to be the slam dunk life changer. And even the rumors nvidia was going to be using it on cards. Nvidia basically said... no. The performance and yields aren't there. AMD fanboys said oh yea it's gonna be awesome. And now 2 generations of cards later amd' s cards are still very expensive and can't outperform a 1080ti.

Don't get me wrong. Lower the price of these cards by 30-40% and most of us would give it a shot.
Click to expand...

It is so expensive that you can't afford the Nvidia Pascal version with HBM2 ;)
 
The thing with ram prices, each piece of ram is not dictated by the technology price, its dictated by supply. HBM is the same way, until HBM supply is relieved its price will remain high. GDDR is the same way, DDR is the same way, but both these have many more manufacturers and the volume is higher and their prices are lower.......

You still have to factor in interposer and manufacturing costs but those are much less than the current HBM price.
 
People have to accept from a cost perspective, HBM was a massive failure from day 1. The only way HBM would ever be a consumer success would be if GDDR wasn't there or anything else cheaper with the same performance metrics.
 
Shintai said:
People have to accept from a cost perspective, HBM was a massive failure from day 1. The only way HBM would ever be a consumer success would be if GDDR wasn't there or anything else cheaper with the same performance metrics.
Click to expand...
Looks like it is good for Tesla just has not panned out yet on the consumer level.

HBM is also tied to RTG/AMD other plans which may or may not come about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top