Place your bets on Vega

How good will fastest Vega be on "Game Play" as per [H] Review.

  • Better than 1080Ti

    Votes: 30 8.2%

  • Same as 1080Ti

    Votes: 28 7.7%

  • Better than 1080

    Votes: 126 34.6%

  • Same as 1080

    Votes: 97 26.6%

  • Better than 1070

    Votes: 42 11.5%

  • Same as 1070

    Votes: 12 3.3%

  • Complete piece of shit!

    Votes: 29 8.0%
  • Total voters
    364
Status
Not open for further replies.
So now they are saying 16000 cards will be available in the next 3 months. I doubt that will affect 1080 and 1070 prices.
 
Three months out for the most people.

2-3 months out and then 1 month later they might be in stock. :confused:

RX480s were rare as unicorn feathers for about a month after launch. I know because I was trying desperately to get one for a buddies new rig for a LAN party. I couldn't get one. He ended up with a nvidia 970 because we ran out of time. Funny enough the same thing might happen again to a different friend. He wants Vega, but we got a big LAN party happening on July 28.
 
Last edited:
I guess that means they will price them higher than we are hoping. May be they have such a killer card they will command a premium and sell less of it? Or they will have a 1070 performance at 1080 prices?
 
Bahanime said:
As opposed to having nothing at all? lol

That's initial shipments, followed by more shipments.
Click to expand...

Reason I say that, is that a lot of people (like myself) aren't going to want to wait for three, possibly 4 months to get the card. We've waited long enough. I'll end up just grabbing a GTX 1080.
 
polydiol said:
I'm currently running at 1080ti on a Freesync monitor - no problems at all but I'll be getting a G-sync monitor when this one dies.
Click to expand...

That's what I'm about to do. I'm done with this shit company.

The Asus Poseidon series 1080Ti looks nice, I wonder if any AiO coolers would be able to be rigged to work with it.
 
I don't understand how they can only have 16k units for months. Even if the card delivers and beats the Titan Xp, no one will be able to get one short of trading their kidney on CraigsList.

I mean, if Vega is junk and they only sell 16k or less that seems like a flop. Or Vega hits it out the park performance-wise, but no one can buy one without paying the scalper's tax (in which case price/performance is gone and you might as well buy Nvidia). I'm not sure this can end well.
 
bezant said:
I guess that means they will price them higher than we are hoping. May be they have such a killer card they will command a premium and sell less of it? Or they will have a 1070 performance at 1080 prices?
Click to expand...

Same shit that happened with the mining craze and HD7900 Series together with the launch of R9 290(x)series those cards were over 900$.
 
Might be because of bad yields, limited HBM2 availability or both.

That said, although I'm all for innovation and progress that benefits the consumer, Nvidia is playing it smart by sticking with high performance GDDR5X/6 tech for their consumer parts and reserving HBM2 for their professional SKUs. Their strategy is working wonders for their revenues.
 
jologskyblues said:
Might be because of bad yields, limited HBM2 availability or both.

That said, although I'm all for innovation and progress that benefits the consumer, Nvidia is playing it smart by sticking with high performance GDDR5X/6 tech for their consumer parts and reserving HBM2 for their professional SKUs. Their strategy is working wonders for their revenues.
Click to expand...

HBM2 products have been used for a little year now and sold big time. Its about what you are willing to pay and that's where the consumer segment instantly runs out. Not to mention that GDDR5X/GDDR6 completely nuked HBM2 for that segment as well because HBM2 offers nothing there. Its just a pointless increased cost.

That Nvidia bothered to spend 100M$+ on a GDDR5X design with GP102 says it all.

On top of that Vega seems to have bad clock yields. Or rather realistic clocks. 1500Mhz out the door, welcome to 1200 and 1346Mhz.

So now you have HBM2 at 1.4 and 1.6Ghz instead of 2Ghz. 4GB stacks only and not 8GB. 1200 and 1346Mhz instead of 1500Mhz. 225 and 300W instead of 225W top. Its just a cascade of bad design decisions. Fiji got burned on its memory capacity, Vega will have both bandwidth and capacity issues. Something using 4 stacks at least could have solved for the HPC segment.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: spine
like this
GoldenTiger said:
7970 was outmoded by the gtx 680 pretty quickly. The gtx 680 was fifty bucks cheaper and around ten pct faster, while running cooler and quieter.
Click to expand...
Come on you know better than this. The 680 was boosting at release which most reviews DID not state making the 680 look stronger. Once AMD released the GE series they took the lead and held the crown for quite some time trill the overpriced Titan released. The 7970 having more Vram and clocking quite well proved to be quite the strong card and was apparent as it became the choice card for OCers and benchers alike.
 
Yeah I agree, the 7970 was a fantastic card, never owned one but all of the reviews were pretty great. The 200 series wasn't bad, but it hasn't really evolved much since then sadly.
 
Decko87 said:
The 200 series wasn't bad, but it hasn't really evolved much since then sadly.
Click to expand...

Completely agree. Their flagships have just been re-releases of the 290. Squeezing out every little ounce of performance they can. The 390X is my biggest GPU purchase regret ever.
 
HeavensCloud said:
Completely agree. Their flagships have just been re-releases of the 290. Squeezing out every little ounce of performance they can. The 390X is my biggest GPU purchase regret ever.
Click to expand...

Why is that. I always thought the 390x AIB cards were pretty good. They still perform quite well today. Did you go from a 290x or something along those lines.
 
Maddness said:
Why is that. I always thought the 390x AIB cards were pretty good. They still perform quite well today. Did you go from a 290x or something along those lines.
Click to expand...

GTX 970. I knew beforehand it was only a small jump, but I was wholly disappointed by how small that jump was especially considering the price difference at the time. I shouldn't have had to turn settings to low on some games @ 1440p with it.
 
HeavensCloud said:
GTX 970. I knew beforehand it was only a small jump, but I was wholly disappointed by how small that jump was especially considering the price difference at the time. I shouldn't have had to turn settings to low on some games @ 1440p with it.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I never managed to find a 390x in stock in this part of the world. I ended up holding out until the RX480 Strix launched. Not a bad card by any means. Still, i'm hoping Vega can finally get AMD close to Nvidia in the high end.
 
HeavensCloud said:
GTX 970. I knew beforehand it was only a small jump, but I was wholly disappointed by how small that jump was especially considering the price difference at the time. I shouldn't have had to turn settings to low on some games @ 1440p with it.
Click to expand...

Heh, I'm the opposite with my latest AMD card (Haven't had one since the unlocked 6950 2gb I owned). I bought it for $225 back in November, and I love for the performance for how cheap it was. But considering the price cuts that came down the line, I'm sure plenty of people feel a little burnt on the 390x. Still though, it should out perform the GTX 970 by a decent margin, even the 390 did as far as I remember.
 
jologskyblues said:
Might be because of bad yields, limited HBM2 availability or both.

That said, although I'm all for innovation and progress that benefits the consumer, Nvidia is playing it smart by sticking with high performance GDDR5X/6 tech for their consumer parts and reserving HBM2 for their professional SKUs. Their strategy is working wonders for their revenues.
Click to expand...
Or, they're pulling a Nintendo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
Unless AMD makes massive, massive improvements in power efficiency for Vega, I just can't see how they will compete with a 1080Ti.

The RX580 draws about the same amount of power as a GTX 1080 while under load:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-580-review,5020-6.html

The RX580 and GTX 1060 perform close to the same, but the GTX 1060 draws close to half as much watts under load.

The GTX 1080Ti is a 250W TDP card. If AMD doesn't improve power efficiency, then their equivalent Vega card will draw near 450W, which is just insane, and require a giant water block for the reference card. That might happen (like with the 295X2), but it will probably slot in close to the 1080 in performance, but 250W~280W TDP on air instead.

I hope I'm wrong.
 
Last edited:
zeroyon04 said:
Unless AMD makes massive, massive improvements in power efficiency for Vega, I just can't see how they will compete with a 1080Ti.

The RX580 draws about the same amount of power as a GTX 1080 while under load:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-580-review,5020-6.html

The RX580 and GTX 1060 perform close to the same, but the GTX 1060 draws close to half as much watts under load.

The GTX 1080Ti is a 250W TDP card. If AMD doesn't improve power efficiency, then their equivalent Vega card will draw near 450W, which is just insane, and require a giant water block for the reference card. That might happen (like with the 295X2), but it will probably slot in close to the 1080 in performance, but 250W~280W TDP on air instead.

I hope I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

we don't know any of that. There are so many enhancements amd has mentioned. Vega is suppose to have much higher efficiency then polaris according to leaks and their architecture chart. Looks like Vega has been in the works for a while.
 
NKD said:
we don't know any of that. There are so many enhancements amd has mentioned. Vega is suppose to have much higher efficiency then polaris according to leaks and their architecture chart. Looks like Vega has been in the works for a while.
Click to expand...

Polaris was hailed as the second coming of blowjob jesus, and it turned out to be a 970, literally the same TDP and performance of the then-year-old 970. It was simply a die-shrink of GCN, nothing more.

Now AMD are toutng Vega to be the next coming of titty-f*** moses malone skywalker, and we all know how this is going to turn out. I cant remember the last AMD launch that didnt feel like a sad handjob: sure, it beats nothing at all, but not by much.
 
NKD said:
we don't know any of that. There are so many enhancements amd has mentioned. Vega is suppose to have much higher efficiency then polaris according to leaks and their architecture chart. Looks like Vega has been in the works for a while.
Click to expand...

And what about all the enhancements of Polaris and all the endless slideware. 2x perf/watt and what not. It turned out to be a big pile of BS. Primitive Discard, Enhanced geometry engines, improved shader efficiency etc. Does all this ring a bell? Maybe its because you heard parts of it from Vega already.

Even for the Polaris 20 series, the words associated with it while it just turned out to be a part they pumped more power into while lowering the perf/watt even further down into GCN 28nm level.

Polaris Evolved, Refined and Enhanced. Ye into a bigger turd than ever.
 
Last edited:
I don't think Vega will be a turd... but I highly doubt it will make waves in the ultra-high-end space. If it is as fast as a 1080, then AMD will have to sell it for a big discount in order to overcome Nvidia's mindshare.
 
KazeoHin said:
I don't think Vega will be a turd... but I highly doubt it will make waves in the ultra-high-end space. If it is as fast as a 1080, then AMD will have to sell it for a big discount in order to overcome Nvidia's mindshare.
Click to expand...

And being a year late, and being less efficient than a 1080, and not overclocking as well as a 1080 and so on.
 
Shintai said:
And being a year late, and being less efficient than a 1080, and not overclocking as well as a 1080 and so on.
Click to expand...
You know, how about giving us those OC stats on a 1080. Keep in mind you have to count the boost as base.
 
KazeoHin said:
Polaris was hailed as the second coming of blowjob jesus, and it turned out to be a 970, literally the same TDP and performance of the then-year-old 970. It was simply a die-shrink of GCN, nothing more.

Now AMD are toutng Vega to be the next coming of titty-f*** moses malone skywalker, and we all know how this is going to turn out. I cant remember the last AMD launch that didnt feel like a sad handjob: sure, it beats nothing at all, but not by much.
Click to expand...

I thought the 970 was two years old when rx480 came out? Isn't the 970 about three years old now?
Edit
Yep just looked it up. Sept 2014.

I know for a fact I was trying to buy an 8gb RX 480 for pretty much all of the month of August for a friend's build for a LAN party in August 2016 and we couldn't find one in stock anywhere, not online, nor in store -- I was even watching and getting alerts from those in stock alert sites. Still no dice. We ended up buying a 970 for his new rig so he could play at the LAN party. So yeah. Two years older.
 
Well, I see the standard Nvidia lovers are here in force. :D Oh well, I am content with my 2 x Furies in my Ryzen 1700X build, they should be good for a couple of years. (Bad thing is, I just know I will get the upgrade bug long before I really find a need to upgrade and do so anyways, then wonder why I did since I do not play all that many games anymore.) :D
 
JustReason said:
You know, how about giving us those OC stats on a 1080. Keep in mind you have to count the boost as base.
Click to expand...

Gladly. Official boost is 1733 which, with an OC of 2030mhz, would give us a 17.3% bump.

clock_vs_voltage.jpg


If we go by this average it's 14% bump.

Naturally this doesn't account for memory overclock.

For comparison, the RX480 cards would have to regularly clock to 1485mhz to match this OC headroom

RX 580 would have to hit 1571mhz regularly
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top