NVIDIA CEO Jensen Huang Dismisses the Radeon VII as "Underwhelming"

maybe jensen huang should go play with his hypercars and let someone else take over nvidia and turn it around.
what a joke
 
HockeyJon said:
You don’t get nothing. You get, apparently, 2080 raster performance and 16GB of VRAM for $699. That’s not nothing, particularly considering early benchmarks of the 2080 are showing you “get ray tracing”, but at a performance hit significant enough that most gamers are either not going to use it, or will be limited as to where they actually can. I don’t consider ray tracing in this generation of Nvidia cards as something that would make me want to go out and make a purchase given how terrible it’s performing.
Click to expand...

When it released people were complaining that the 2080 was only trading blows with the 1080TI in most games. And with AMD you get 1080TI performance, the same feature set, a couple of years late, and all for the same price...Yay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fleat
like this
Well.. I know one thing he doesn't.... MY NEXT CARD IS GOING TO BE AMD! I have a couple 1080ti's right now.. When I get the bug to upgrade out of my current box, it will all AMD.

I may just buy two GPU's from AMD and keep one in the box for shits and giggles.
 
"Turn on RT and we'll crush it", I guess that's technically true since the AMD card doesn't have it at all, but I'll take a playable/enjoyable gaming experience over the joke that is currently RT any day. The only promising feature of the 20 series was/is DLSS, and that's only when/if it starts working with titles. It would have been nice if nvidia had said this generation of cards "we have something big in the works, it's going to change gaming and other digital visual media" and only included the DLSS capability with slight different price points to fund more RT R&D before releasing it to the public to beta test for them. It would have given the gaming/digital visual media markets time to implement changes to go along with an RT release, and may have actually been a decent product and experience.

Though I was really hoping for Navi with much better price points, this is a decent piece as a stop gap to Navi, they should have hit the $599 price point instead imo, but it is what it is.
 
I don't understand why he needs to bash AMD. Are that they pitty?

They also took shots at Intel too.

If your product is vastly better you let the numbers speak for themselves and you don't have to say anything other than a professional statement if you asked to comment.

Honestly it's time for Nvidia to get a new CEO IMO between this, the stock falling out, and desperately trying to sell RTX.

What happened to Nvidia just a few short years go with Maswell and Pascal making big performance leaps?
 
Bankie said:
When it released people were complaining that the 2080 was only trading blows with the 1080TI in most games. And with AMD you get 1080TI performance, the same feature set, a couple of years late, and all for the same price...Yay.
Click to expand...
That's because you're hearing two different crowds. One wants top of the line performance, they already have the best so when the next gen doesn't improve other than some features you cant use yet it's disappointing. The other is looking to upgrade, they're a few generations back and just want as close to the best they can get for their money. One cares more about performance, the other cares more about money, features be damned either way.
 
Wow what a childish rant he went on. I have lost all respect on nvidia when they took us for fools with the GTX 970 trying to hide the fact that the last 512MB of the 4GB of ram was piss poor slow. Always wondered why framerates were tanking so hard when I was using 3800MB in games on my 970 SLI setup. Managed to return both cards with with no restocking fees (thanks consumer protection laws) and I bought a Fury X. First few months was not always awesome, they had a few bugs in the drivers but I have to say it aged well, works flawlessly now, freesync is awesome and work great and theres no way in hell im buying a Nvidia card until hes out.

However I am a little disapointed AMD does not have a 8GB Radeon VII for 499 or something (or that Ryzen 3700X is not buyable now oh well), i'd be all over that, not that I need to, the Fury is still very much enough for 2560x1080... One day ill have one of those Samsung 5120×1440 120Hz 32:9 freesync screens and then I'll see :)
 
Hameeeedo said:
You judge RTX based on one game, wait for more before you can judge anything. Also DXR support is not a joke, it's a DirectX version. 2080 also has Tensor Cores for AI acceleration.

No, DXR is an industry standard now, the industry is moving into the direction of ray tracing, AMD is just late to the party as usual.
Click to expand...
You're also praising nvidia cards to high heaven based on RTX support in 15 games that hasn't yet materialized in any meaningful way. Wait until RTX comes out before calling it the second coming. I mean, I'm sure it'll be great myself, but I'm not fooling myself either. I can play games just fine without it.
 
16GB of VRAM gives you benefits right away, nVidia's RT cores may or may not be useful down the road. I've been Team Green for a decade but I'm willing to forsake CUDA to be able to get decent GPU rendering without having to buy Quadro.
 
readeh said:
Only thing Jensen got right was the last part which is true.
Click to expand...

Freesync doesn't work??

Wtf are you smoking, it took me about 10 seconds to enable it.

My G-sync was problematic as all hell, 8 FPS if you didn't play fullscreen, if you played borderless full etc etc 8 FPS.
 
Skiddywinks said:
I'm personally not arsed about RT/DLSS either, I just want as much rasterisation performance as possible for my money. But objectively speaking they do add value, it's just that value ranges from "Nothing" to "Must own" depending on the person.

Frankly, as much as it hurts to say, depending on the actual retail prices (vs the MSRP), the RTX 2080 actually is better value. If this came in at $600 it would be a much more interesting launch for like-minded people. $500 and the internet would be on fire.
Click to expand...

RTX 2080 is $100 more with less performance. How exactly is it a better value again?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DF-1
like this
Hameeeedo said:
You judge RTX based on one game, wait for more before you can judge anything. Also DXR support is not a joke, it's a DirectX version. 2080 also has Tensor Cores for AI acceleration.
Click to expand...
This is DirectX10 all over again where Nvidia was first to have it but turning on DX10 shadows the games run twice as slow. Sound familiar? Then AMD released their DX10 cards but they were DX10.1 and that gave a massive performance boost to games that utilized it like Assassin's Creed, except that magically the support for DX10.1 was removed and never seen again.
No, DXR is an industry standard now, the industry is moving into the direction of ray tracing, AMD is just late to the party as usual.
Click to expand...
I see you know nothing of graphics history. AMD/ATI has been late a number of times but they're also innovators most of the time. They have too as Nvidia has more market share. The few times that Nvidia beat AMD/ATI was DirectX8 and DirectX10. AMD had to create Mantle to push the industry to make Vulkan and DX12.

As for Ray-Tracing you don't really need DXR to do it. Hybrid Ray-Tracing is not a new thing and could be done on DX11 as show by this Japanese demo. Both the Unreal engine guys and Battlefield V said they had Ray-Tracing working without Nvidia's RTX cards. Makes one wonder if you just need a good CPU instead of wasting half a GPU to do Ray-Tracing?
 
DukenukemX said:
. AMD had to create Mantle to push the industry to make Vulkan and DX12.
Click to expand...
Minor correction: DX12 was in development concurrently with mantle. When mantle came out, many ideas were taken from it and DX12 as it was to create what we know today as DX12 and Vulkan.
 
DukenukemX said:
This is DirectX10 all over again where Nvidia was first to have it but turning on DX10 shadows the games run twice as slow. Sound familiar? Then AMD released their DX10 cards but they were DX10.1 and that gave a massive performance boost to games that utilized it like Assassin's Creed, except that magically the support for DX10.1 was removed and never seen again.

I see you know nothing of graphics history. AMD/ATI has been late a number of times but they're also innovators most of the time. They have too as Nvidia has more market share. The few times that Nvidia beat AMD/ATI was DirectX8 and DirectX10. AMD had to create Mantle to push the industry to make Vulkan and DX12.

As for Ray-Tracing you don't really need DXR to do it. Hybrid Ray-Tracing is not a new thing and could be done on DX11 as show by this Japanese demo. Both the Unreal engine guys and Battlefield V said they had Ray-Tracing working without Nvidia's RTX cards. Makes one wonder if you just need a good CPU instead of wasting half a GPU to do Ray-Tracing?
Click to expand...


Agreed, and whom do we think is placed better to have CPU resources available for a real effort in Ray Tracing? AMD of course. I can envision reserving cpu cores for ray tracing while playing a full on ray tracing game done right.
 
I don't get all the hate on price.... Ryzen was a HUGE step up, and AMD charged appropriately for it, this boosted their R&D budgets, and now we'll have Ryzen 3XXX.

Vega was cool, a little late, but cool. They sold a ton of cards, turned out a derivative card with 25% more power, also cool. I hope they sell a lot of cards so they can boost their R&D for graphics and then come out with something that competes better, or surpasses nVidia.
 
SpeedyVV said:
As an AMD fanboi I'm underwhealmed by the VII.

7nm but not really any better price/performance to show for it.

I might still buy it when it comes out, to replace my Vega 64, but can't say I'm excited about the launch.

Anyways, I'll wait to see [H]'s review, then decide.

EDIT: any chance this card is the equivalent of the Vega 56, and there is actually a 2nd card that is more powerful?
Click to expand...

From a "non-gaming" perspective, this VII GPU is the "cut-down, repurposed for gaming" version of the Radeon Instinct prosumer card. So yes, you're correct, for "non-gaming" purposes.

Basically, this card sells off the defective Radeon Instinct Vega 20 GPUs, giving AMD some market presence (and getting rid of "spare parts") while they get ready for a Navi release.

Lisa Su did say that there would be more GPU talk in the future …

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13832/amd-radeon-vii-high-end-7nm-february-7th-for-699

I'm tempted to get this myself, to play with, but I think Navi will be the one to watch. This is a "ok" placeholder, though.

As for Jensen's ranting? Either he's really panicking over AMD's potentials, or he just got off some nasty discussion earlier (in-house fight? private shareholder meeting? who knows), and his bad mood is carrying over into his commentary.

Fun side note: Jensen, himself, is an alumnus of AMD -- so that makes all 3 places he describes (AMD, NVIDIA, Intel) "holders" of AMD alumni ...
 
DPI said:
Yes, the anti-Nvidia crowd will continually try to frame the argument like the only thing RTX cards can do is raytracing.

Raytracing has always been the holy grail. And if it was AMD instead of Nvidia doing the heavy lifting of blazing this trail and creating this bleeding edge market segment and taking action to break what would otherwise be a chicken/egg cycle of it never happening, the raytracing antagonists wouldn't be shutting up about how wonderful it is.
Click to expand...
No, if AMD did this instead of NVIDIA, we’d still be bashing it. It’s not anti-something just because people complain about something. It’s a legitimate concern.
 
N4CR said:
Speak for yourself? A V64 is already as fast as a 1080 (faster than a 1070Ti) and you're saying a 7nm VII at 25% faster is 'around' a 1070Ti now?
And you really think AMD would release a card as fast as a 2080Ti for 30-40% of the price? Lol come on. They ain't giving that shit away to you.


Yeah mr objective here, DLSS is a nothing (FFXV demo lol!) and RTX is a low fps, low res cluster fuck which doesn't even ray trace much of the scene. I bet you said the same about the 780Ti vs the 290X - look at where that extra gb of ram got 290X users over lifetime of ownership, 290X is noticeably faster in later years especially when VRAM comes in to play. Calling it now, VII will definitely age better than the 2080.
Click to expand...

If Lisa is to be believed then we're looking at game developers actually supporting the Vega features that have been on the first gen parts for some time as well as these 7nm parts. So... This might be me reaching a bit but Lisa did even bring up Rapid Packed Math in her keynote... That would indicate that not only will these new parts get an uplift from game developers, the older generation parts will as well at some point.

Adoption of the features of AMD cards is going to happen because this hardware is in all the new next gen consoles moving forward. I would expect that we will see some impressive performance gains with that support across older and newer product lines (finally). I don't think it's going to be the holy Grail or anything, but I'm expecting there to be incremental gains across damn near all AMD's video products and we will see it.

This may not be the card people were hoping for in terms of a killing blow to Nvidia.... However, none of us expected that (though we may have hoped for it).

This D-Bag is exhibiting a couple things here. He's a bully, he's actually worried and he's unprofessional as all hell. So, he's bitter no one wants his space invaders in their next gen consoles.

That's what I'm looking forward to with my 2080Ti, bizarre issues and eventual space invaders. After the announcement from AMD I really wish I hadn't dumped a mortgage payment and a half into the latest Nvidia product...
 
I think the strong selling points for the VII are the 16 GB of HBM 2 and FP64 performance. The gaming performance should be nearly identical to the RTX 2080.


I don't think Nvidia has comparables in the same price range.

Radeon VII
FP16 (half) performance
27,648 GFLOPS (2:1)
FP32 (float) performance
13,824 GFLOPS
FP64 (double) performance
864.0 GFLOPS (1:16)


RTX 2080
FP16 (half) performance
20,137 GFLOPS (2:1)
FP32 (float) performance
10,068 GFLOPS
FP64 (double) performance
314.6 GFLOPS (1:32)

Quadro RTX 5000 $2300USD (16GB RAM).
FP64 (double) performance
348.5 GFLOPS (1:32)


Titan V is an FP64 monster though at $3000, (12GB of RAM)
FP64 (double) performance
7,450 GFLOPS (1:2)

I've seen a few people say they have workloads that would benefit from the extra ram and fp64 performance. I'm not sure how the big the market is for those particular metrics. Gamers have historically favored nvidia (as a %) and I suspect if it's equivalent for gaming for the same price that more gamers will continue to buy nvidia.
 
Last edited:
andrewaggb said:
I think the strong selling points for the VII are the 16 GB of HBM 2 and FP64 performance. The gaming performance should be nearly identical to the RTX 2080.


I don't think Nvidia has comparables in the same price range.

Radeon VII
FP16 (half) performance
27,648 GFLOPS (2:1)
FP32 (float) performance
13,824 GFLOPS
FP64 (double) performance
864.0 GFLOPS (1:16)


RTX 2080
FP16 (half) performance
20,137 GFLOPS (2:1)
FP32 (float) performance
10,068 GFLOPS
FP64 (double) performance
314.6 GFLOPS (1:32)

Quadro RTX 5000 $2300USD (16GB RAM).
FP64 (double) performance
348.5 GFLOPS (1:32)


Titan V is an FP64 monster though at $3000, (12GB of RAM)
FP64 (double) performance
7,450 GFLOPS (1:2)
Click to expand...

Yeah, this really looks like a prosumer card at a killer price. I expect OpenCL types will jump on it.
 
Time to sell my 1080Ti Wont support a Dbag like he is being ,PLUS consumers and stockholders see it too which is why the stock is down 45% time to switch right along with my Ryzen CPU AMD go go go!
 
Glad to see him lose his cool. AMD must be doing something right.

The card is really what AMD needs right now. Faster than thier current flagship card. 7nm before anyone else which is a great accomplishment and good PR.

I too wish pricing was a little bit better but the market leader is dictating prices right now.

Personally super happy with my Vega 64 I put under water to ride out until Navi.

But the Vega ii is tempting! Actually glad it’s not 550-600 as I would probably cave..
 
Jensen pretty much told the truth. I don't like the demeanor or tone but everything he said was pretty much how I felt. AMD releasing what is pretty much a 1080TI with more VRAM in 2019 at $700 is very underwhelming indeed. I was really pysched up this CES to make an upgrade from the 1080TI I have and was looking forward to what AMD had for me. I didn't expect Nvidia to allow Freesync on their GPUs nor AMD to following Nvidia with their pricing schemes.

If the Radeon 7 was cut down to 8GB of HBM2 and $499 we'd have different story here, unfortunalely that isn't the case. BTW I have found a few 2080s at the $699 pricing. Now the 2080ti still seems to hover at $1200+, just can't find one at $999.
 
I have no ill feelings towards AMD, Nvidia or any gpu company. But this guy makes everyone at Nvidia look bad and needs to shut it.
 
TAP said:
I was really pysched up this CES to make an upgrade from the 1080TI I have and was looking forward to what AMD had for me.
Click to expand...

With how underwhelming the 20xx cards are and how great the 1080ti is, why would you feel the need to upgrade? What game are you trying to play you can;t play maxed-out? Is Crysis 4 out or something?
 
Bahn Yuki said:
Jensen pretty much told the truth. I don't like the demeanor or tone but everything he said was pretty much how I felt. AMD releasing what is pretty much a 1080TI with more VRAM in 2019 at $700 is very underwhelming indeed. I was really pysched up this CES to make an upgrade from the 1080TI I have and was looking forward to what AMD had for me. I didn't expect Nvidia to allow Freesync on their GPUs nor AMD to following Nvidia with their pricing schemes.

If the Radeon 7 was cut down to 8GB of HBM2 and $499 we'd have different story here, unfortunalely that isn't the case. BTW I have found a few 2080s at the $699 pricing. Now the 2080ti still seems to hover at $1200+, just can't find one at $999.
Click to expand...


Exactly, this is Vega with a 20% performance bump, no new features, and a big increase in cost. There was an MSI 2080 in the Hot Deals section for $630 that came with Anthem and BFV; I'm guessing that NV has a bit of wiggle room on the price if they need it.
 
Delicieuxz said:
I have to ask: Is this trolling or intentional Nvidia shilling? Is it paid for?

Why would AMD name their GPU after an Nvidia GPU's performance? That would be like AMD proclaiming they're a follower of Nvidia, and of a mid-tier GPU from their previous generation. That would be self-opposing PR.

According to the benchmarks shown, Radeon 7 is equal to RTX 2080 performance, or slightly higher in performance than an RTX 2080. It isn't GTX 1070 Ti performance. The GTX 1070 Ti is 2 tiers of GPU performance beneath the RTX 2080.

The price of Radeon 7 does suck though - just like the prices of Nvidia's RTX cards.
Click to expand...

No I am not trolling. I've giving everyone else back their own words. None of this is me, my numbers, my anything. This is all the information that I'm simply repeating.

When you say "above" 2080 performance ... are you just inventing this? I mean, the head of AMD said "below" but now it's .... "above?"

2080 and 2080 Ti are very very close in performance. So how far below is the performance? If it's below a 2080 and the 2080 and the 1080 ti are give or take 5 or so frames apart then does that mean it's the performance of a 1070 ti? These are statements and questions.

I saw some numbers today, some benchmarks ... some of those numbers are close to 1070 Ti numbers on some game reviews I saw but no one is talking about that ..... not all but some.

And honestly, there is going to be markup and tax almost for sure. I will use Newegg as an example ... $699 will turn into $725 or $750 possibly? Tax on top of that ... $70 to $75 dollars ... ok, so you have "below" 2080 performance for .... $825 or os dollars? How does any of this even make sense? It doesn't ...

I really hope you guys spend your money wisely. I've said it many many many times. I'm a fan of performance ... I don't care ... repeat, don't care who's name is on my video card. Never have and never will.

This is not trolling ... I'm just playing the role of Devil Advocate. Lot of you dudes are getting caught up in hate, anger, hysteria, against nVidia .... just general bs emotions that will cost all of you a lot of money and less performance. Who cares what the CEO of nVidia had to say. When your in your bedroom gaming, don't let one mans words cost you better performance or money. That would be craziness.

Do yourself a favor and stop being fanboys to a brand ... it will just end up costing you guys a lot of money. Consider your purchase with two factors, price and performance and only those two metrics nothing else.

For $825 dollars all of you can certianly buy a 1070 ti or 1080 Ti ... as an example, used for $300 to $500 dollars on average. What's 5 frames per second? Hell, that extra $300 can buy you a 8700K or a 2700K or whatever AMD's CPU is called.

That's all I want to pointed out.

Lot of misplaced emotion going on here and if anything, I'm not trolling but trying to be the voice of reason.

Trust me, when AMD releases a 16 Core gaming CPU what rivals Intel's 9900K in all metrics ... I will buy it hands down screaming take my money.
 
So far I rate ray tracing as underwhelming, and given the current adoption of the 20xx series it will remain underwhelming for at least a generation.

I am glad nVidia brought it to the table, but its a joke to stand up and beat your chest claiming it to be 'all that'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top