Radeon 7 (Vega 2, 7nm, 16GB) - $699 available Feb 7th with 3 games

The card is DOA. The 2080 is not $800 anymore. Several models have been sub-$650 in recent weeks and even a brand new EVGA right now is $700 flat with a 2-game bundle.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487415

As for the DXR discussion, you can simply buy the 2080 and just never enable DXR and it's functionally the same as Vega 2. Except you also get DLSS. And I don't need to say that I have never been a proponent for either of these features. But if it's the difference between NOT having them and HAVING THEM for $0 price difference... Hello... Get the RTX.

And it's probably a silly comparison anyway since the 3 game charts they showed all favor AMD, particularly Far Cry 5 (BF5 to a lesser degree). It may end up being 5-10% SLOWER than the 2080 on average.

As for now this is a repeat of the Vega 1 launch except this time AMD has the RAM advantage so I have a pretty good idea what the next few weeks are going to sound like. AMD can launch an 8GB Vega 2 for a lot cheaper and maybe that card will be enticing.
 
Nightfire said:
Ever notice that when someone is called out for having a love affair with brand X, they immediately respond with "I have owned several brand Y products too!!!"

Anyhow, the price isn't fantastic, but neither was Vega 64. Hopefully we will get a Vega 56 replacement that battles the GTX 2070 for significantly less.
Click to expand...
kinda happy i snagged my vega64 for $350 couple weeks ago....Ill take a Radeon7 when the price is right lol:)
 
I hope Radeon VII is a bit faster than the 2080, need more competition in the market.
 
The big problem with the original Vega was being launched over a year after the competition (well, and availability at MSRP wasn't as easy as it could have been). If AMD can hold close to the MSRP, keep the performance profile and price close to the competition, and do so before a year has elapsed, AMD will be in a much better position than with the original Vega launch.
 
I don't mind the price. $699 gives AMD plenty of room to price cut as they need to in order stay competitive.

If 1800mhz is truly a boost clock of this card, I wonder if there will be any chance of a 2ghz OC. Lets say power consumption no object.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
The card is DOA. The 2080 is not $800 anymore. Several models have been sub-$650 in recent weeks and even a brand new EVGA right now is $700 flat with a 2-game bundle.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487415

As for the DXR discussion, you can simply buy the 2080 and just never enable DXR and it's functionally the same as Vega 2. Except you also get DLSS. And I don't need to say that I have never been a proponent for either of these features. But if it's the difference between NOT having them and HAVING THEM for $0 price difference... Hello... Get the RTX.

And it's probably a silly comparison anyway since the 3 game charts they showed all favor AMD, particularly Far Cry 5 (BF5 to a lesser degree). It may end up being 5-10% SLOWER than the 2080 on average.

As for now this is a repeat of the Vega 1 launch except this time AMD has the RAM advantage so I have a pretty good idea what the next few weeks are going to sound like. AMD can launch an 8GB Vega 2 for a lot cheaper and maybe that card will be enticing.
Click to expand...
No, their card undercuts NVIDIA by $100. The Founder's Edition of the 2080 is still $799. AMD's VII is $699. When third-parties release their cards, they'll be under $699, just like the 2080 from third-parties is cheaper. And yes, NVIDIA is doing a two-game special right now ... and AMD is doing 3. Would I have liked to see this card for cheaper? Of course, but you're comparing the wrong things here. Also, you're argument that you should just buy NVIDIA even if you never use their other features makes about zero sense. FreeSync monitors are also a lot cheaper than G-Sync.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
The card is DOA. The 2080 is not $800 anymore. Several models have been sub-$650 in recent weeks and even a brand new EVGA right now is $700 flat with a 2-game bundle.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487415

As for the DXR discussion, you can simply buy the 2080 and just never enable DXR and it's functionally the same as Vega 2. Except you also get DLSS. And I don't need to say that I have never been a proponent for either of these features. But if it's the difference between NOT having them and HAVING THEM for $0 price difference... Hello... Get the RTX.

And it's probably a silly comparison anyway since the 3 game charts they showed all favor AMD, particularly Far Cry 5 (BF5 to a lesser degree). It may end up being 5-10% SLOWER than the 2080 on average.

As for now this is a repeat of the Vega 1 launch except this time AMD has the RAM advantage so I have a pretty good idea what the next few weeks are going to sound like. AMD can launch an 8GB Vega 2 for a lot cheaper and maybe that card will be enticing.
Click to expand...

I would say it would holds higher value then the RTX 2080 the ram is faster the bundle is better and it doesn't come with ray tracing.
Considering that ray tracing is a non factor because the games that are out there are simply not worth playing with ray tracing (FPS rule).
The deal that you get with Nvidia is dependant on Nvidia to implement features on games and that is not exactly going that smooth.

You are not forced into the Nvidia ecosystem nor do you contribute to anti competitive measures which cripples competition.
 
El Derpo said:
No, their card undercuts NVIDIA by $100. The Founder's Edition of the 2080 is still $799. AMD's VII is $699. When third-parties release their cards, they'll be under $699, just like the 2080 from third-parties is cheaper. And yes, NVIDIA is doing a two-game special right now ... and AMD is doing 3. Would I have liked to see this card for cheaper? Of course, but you're comparing the wrong things here. Also, you're argument that you should just buy NVIDIA even if you never use their other features makes about zero sense. FreeSync monitors are also a lot cheaper than G-Sync.
Click to expand...
It was throwing me off when everyone was talking about price, like the Founders Edition dropped in price. It will be easier to compare when AIBs get ahold of the GPU. Considering they decided to go with HBM, I figured the price would be around $600-$700. All in all, I'm still on the fence.
 
El Derpo said:
No, their card undercuts NVIDIA by $100. The Founder's Edition of the 2080 is still $799. AMD's VII is $699. When third-parties release their cards, they'll be under $699, just like the 2080 from third-parties is cheaper. And yes, NVIDIA is doing a two-game special right now ... and AMD is doing 3. Would I have liked to see this card for cheaper? Of course, but you're comparing the wrong things here. Also, you're argument that you should just buy NVIDIA even if you never use their other features makes about zero sense. FreeSync monitors are also a lot cheaper than G-Sync.
Click to expand...
Traditionally, custom cards are more expensive than the reference model. Usually about $20-$50 for the generic models, sometimes the cheapy ones (blowers) are the same price.

Just because Nvidia has toyed with their MSRP in recent years does not mean you will see the same on AMD's side. I certainly would not expect them to be cheaper than the ref MSRP. AMD is 6 months behind on sales so they have catching up to do.

As for AMD-exclusive benefits like FreeSync and Vulkan performance: These are not new. These benefits existed on all their past launches, including Vega1, and it did not save those cards from being failures. It's actually worse this time with Nvidia slowly rolling out FreeSync support and Turing handling DX12/Vulkan better than Pascal.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
Traditionally, custom cards are more expensive than the reference model. Usually about $20-$50 for the generic models, sometimes the cheapy ones (blowers) are the same price.
Just because Nvidia has toyed with their MSRP in recent years does not mean you will see the same on AMD's side. I certainly would not expect them to be cheaper than the ref MSRP. AMD is 6 months behind on sales so they have catching up to do.
Click to expand...
Yeah I suppose you're right. It's a wait-and-see game at this point. I usually go for the AIO liquid cooled version or waterblock ... just depends on if I'm too lazy to build a custom loop or not ... so I usually pay more anyway. :oops:
 
Snowdog said:
Which games need more than 8GB of VRAM today?
Click to expand...
Deus Ex Mankind Divided can easily saturate 11GB (maybe more, couldn't test) at 4K Ultra settings.

However, it was also running at like 10 fps, so not a realistic benchmark.
 
cybereality said:
Deus Ex Mankind Divided can easily saturate 11GB (maybe more, couldn't test) at 4K Ultra settings.

However, it was also running at like 10 fps, so not a realistic benchmark.
Click to expand...
I could never get that game to ever not run like total crap at those settings. I've never seen a more poorly optimized game.
 
I agree. It's not well optimized on PC, but it does use more than 8GB RAM on the higher settings. It would be interesting to see if it ran better with 16GB of RAM.
 
I want to see benchmarks with VSR on and see if 5K can really saturate that 16GB of RAM. If so this would be perfect for my 1440p monitor.
 
McClintoc said:
Even though I am a Radeon fan-boy, I won't expect much from the new Vega 2 - given AMD's track record. All their current cards perform noticeably worse than the Nvidia card they are claimed to compete with.

The current Vegas are supposed to compete with the 1080s but they are much slower. The 580s and 590s are supposed to compete with the 1070s but they are more like 1060s.

AMD says the new Vega 2 will compete with the 2080? I doubt it. The new Vega 2s are probably what will finally compete with the 1080s. AMD is always a step behind, unfortunately.
Click to expand...


Really? Vega 64 competes with 1080 just fine not sure what you are talking about. May be you need to do fact check. You are saying Vega 7nm is same as Vega 64? lol.
 
Last edited:
TaintedSquirrel said:
The card is DOA. The 2080 is not $800 anymore. Several models have been sub-$650 in recent weeks and even a brand new EVGA right now is $700 flat with a 2-game bundle.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487415

As for the DXR discussion, you can simply buy the 2080 and just never enable DXR and it's functionally the same as Vega 2. Except you also get DLSS. And I don't need to say that I have never been a proponent for either of these features. But if it's the difference between NOT having them and HAVING THEM for $0 price difference... Hello... Get the RTX.

And it's probably a silly comparison anyway since the 3 game charts they showed all favor AMD, particularly Far Cry 5 (BF5 to a lesser degree). It may end up being 5-10% SLOWER than the 2080 on average.

As for now this is a repeat of the Vega 1 launch except this time AMD has the RAM advantage so I have a pretty good idea what the next few weeks are going to sound like. AMD can launch an 8GB Vega 2 for a lot cheaper and maybe that card will be enticing.
Click to expand...


Lol if it it competes with 2080 it’s fine. On top you are getting more than just a gaming card. Plus 16GB HBM2. I am sure there will be plenty of buyers for this card for multiple applications. Not sure what the issue is lol. It’s clearly not for you or may not be for me because I am waiting on Navi. I think Navi will launch with Ryzen 3000 series at computex.
 
NKD said:
Really? Vega 64 competes with 1080 just fine not sure what you are talking about. May be you need to do fact check. You are saying Vega 7nm is same as Vega 64? lol.
Click to expand...
Yea, the real issue with Vega 56/64 was being a year late.
 
The real question is, who the heck comes up with these marketing names? I thought the whole model system was okay (RX 450/460/470/480 > RX 550/560/570/580). Then they decided to name Vega after the number of CU's (Vega 3, 8, 10, 56, 64), which seemed okay as well (since you could quickly ballpark the performance).

Now this Vega VII? wtf? Why not just Vega II 60 or something?

Also, looks like the speculation was right about Vega and Fury X being starved by ROP count.
 
dexvx said:
The real question is, who the heck comes up with these marketing names? I thought the whole model system was okay (RX 450/460/470/480 > RX 550/560/570/580). Then they decided to name Vega after the number of CU's (Vega 3, 8, 10, 56, 64), which seemed okay as well (since you could quickly ballpark the performance).

Now this Vega VII? wtf? Why not just Vega II 60 or something?

Also, looks like the speculation was right about Vega and Fury X being starved by ROP count.
Click to expand...

I think it has to do more with AMD using the 7nm process for Radeon VII.
 
Like the card but the price is high. The 1080ti launched around Feb/Mar of 17 at about $699... Near 2 years later and after generational upgrades from both camps we are still stuck at essentially the same performance for the same price... That sucks.
 
Wait,

25% faster than Vega 64 is 2080 levels?

Vega 64 is 1070 levels for sure.
2080 is 1080TI levels for sure.

25% faster than 1070 level is NOT 1080Ti level.


The hierarchy comparison seems off.


EDIT: apparently I'm wrong - Vega 64 trades blows with the 1080.
 
Last edited:
Explains why nvidia decided to support freesync...imagine how much more attractive this card would be if it was the fastest card supporting freesync/vrr.
 
El Derpo said:
No, their card undercuts NVIDIA by $100. The Founder's Edition of the 2080 is still $799. AMD's VII is $699. When third-parties release their cards, they'll be under $699, just like the 2080 from third-parties is cheaper. And yes, NVIDIA is doing a two-game special right now ... and AMD is doing 3. Would I have liked to see this card for cheaper? Of course, but you're comparing the wrong things here. Also, you're argument that you should just buy NVIDIA even if you never use their other features makes about zero sense. FreeSync monitors are also a lot cheaper than G-Sync.
Click to expand...

That is a completely unsubstantiated opinion. Were AIB Vega Cards cheaper than the official AMD MSRP? They were not.

That and you can buy RTX 2080 for $699 today.

If anything you will probably be able to find RTX 2080 cheaper than Vega 7 for some time.
 
Archaea said:
Wait,

25% faster than Vega 64 is 2080 levels?

Vega 64 is 1070 levels for sure.
2080 is 1080TI levels for sure.

25% faster than 1070 level is NOT 1080Ti level.


The hierarchy comparison seems off.
Click to expand...

Vega 64 is not 1070 level. If it was nvidia had no reason to release 1070ti. Pretty sick of this misinformation. Have you seen the benches lately? 1070 and vega 56 tend to trade blows. vega 64 trades blows with 1080 not 1070. Not sure why few people here keep saying this. vega 64 is competing with 1080 not 1070.
 
RAutrey said:
That's where it went wrong. My Vega 64 is a good bit faster than my son's 1070.
Click to expand...

yea vega 64 trades blows with 1080 not sure why some people here keeping repeating this mis information.
 
Snowdog said:
That is a completely unsubstantiated opinion. Were AIB Vega Cards cheaper than the official AMD MSRP? They were not.

That and you can buy RTX 2080 for $699 today.

If anything you will probably be able to find RTX 2080 cheaper than Vega 7 for some time.
Click to expand...

Honestly this card is geared towards content creators as well. that 16GB HBM2 is damn good and for that price its a steal. Game and do other things that is the message here. Well worth the price. 16GB HBM2 or 8GB GDDR6? Choice is easy for them.
 
NKD said:
yea vega 64 trades blows with 1080 not sure why some people here keeping repeating this mis information.
Click to expand...
Yea, that is kinda weird that is still going, just going by [H], you can see Vega 64 is trading blows, even when it isn't, the performance isn't far behind.
 
Snowdog said:
That is a completely unsubstantiated opinion. Were AIB Vega Cards cheaper than the official AMD MSRP? They were not.

That and you can buy RTX 2080 for $699 today.

If anything you will probably be able to find RTX 2080 cheaper than Vega 7 for some time.
Click to expand...
That was at least the pattern for the NVIDIA cards. I haven’t been following the AIBs for AMD. My bad.
 
Wow this amazes me people already know exactly how fast VII is in games, shills are out, I mean even leather jacket was going off the deep-end with what he had to say about the VII. I mean he literally said we turn on these features that tank the fuck out of fps on our cards and AMD cards fps will tank too.

Even if the VII sucks balls shit like that shows just how much of a chip Nvidia has on it's shoulder, I won't be buying the Apple of graphics cards even if AMD is shit, I will go with AMD for the future.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
The card is DOA. The 2080 is not $800 anymore. Several models have been sub-$650 in recent weeks and even a brand new EVGA right now is $700 flat with a 2-game bundle.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487415

As for the DXR discussion, you can simply buy the 2080 and just never enable DXR and it's functionally the same as Vega 2. Except you also get DLSS. And I don't need to say that I have never been a proponent for either of these features. But if it's the difference between NOT having them and HAVING THEM for $0 price difference... Hello... Get the RTX.

And it's probably a silly comparison anyway since the 3 game charts they showed all favor AMD, particularly Far Cry 5 (BF5 to a lesser degree). It may end up being 5-10% SLOWER than the 2080 on average.

As for now this is a repeat of the Vega 1 launch except this time AMD has the RAM advantage so I have a pretty good idea what the next few weeks are going to sound like. AMD can launch an 8GB Vega 2 for a lot cheaper and maybe that card will be enticing.
Click to expand...

This card is a pipe cleaner. Basically you are getting full dies that failed some CU's and repackaged as gaming cards from a pro card. Priced at 699 with 16GB HBM2. Honestly for the price its a steal for people who are looking for content creation+gaming. I don't think we are going to see any other version of this card. In 6 Months I think you will see full lineup with Navi as Lisa already said there is much more coming mid-year.

But honestly I don't see how this is Vega 1 scenario that was dumpster fire. Atleast this time you are getting a better design and more ram buffer and faster performance. If it can trade blows with 2080 that's a decent win for them. I am actually surprised they have this already ready to go on 7nm. I think their Next gen is going to scream on 7nm. That is probably where they hit a home run on process and performance. Navi might be much more efficient version of GCN but not sure if AMD will make a bigger version of it. They might who knows they have enough time to do it and have 6 months.
 
Archaea said:
Wait,

25% faster than Vega 64 is 2080 levels?

Vega 64 is 1070 levels for sure.
2080 is 1080TI levels for sure.

25% faster than 1070 level is NOT 1080Ti level.


The hierarchy comparison seems off.
Click to expand...


wut?

Nvidia literally made the 1070ti to compete with the vega 56 since vega 56 > 1070

1080ti> 1080 ~ vega64> 1070ti>vega56>1070

is everyone on [H] on drugs now? It feels like everyone is taking crazy pills.
 
dvsman said:
I'm thinking about this for my next build and I honestly can't figure out what app I have or use that could run 16gb VRAM. It would have been better to do Radeon 7 with 8GB and cut the price. Or am I missing something?
Click to expand...

Not sure. Its because AMD is probably using the same PCB as they do it on their instinct cards and you are likely getting a die that failed all CUs and packaged as a gaming card. I am fairly certain these are going to be based on yield failuer of the full die. If the demand is higher you might see AMD ramp up and software cut the bigger die. But from what it looks like these are same die and same package just sold to gamers with little less shaders. Now if they have chips that require more cut down they might save them for another cut down version. But given that they only had to cut a few CUs looks like yields are pretty good on 7nm for MI60 card.
 
I been working with driver 18.2.3 and it seems to have some AI to it as to monitor your hardware and settings . then it may ask you if it can turn a lot different things on or make these adjustments as I know Radeon Chill was one thing it did turn on for me I remember and adjusted FreeSync as my Samsung 27" 1080p has G.Refresh Rate (Hz) 71.9104 according to display scan by driver ..

The short video is showing my RX 570 8Gb playing the highest setting that my 4Gb RX 570 can not play , as it sold me 100% that 8Gb is the new standard even in 1080p as I like a buffer myself , as for power that is the gpu pull shown as I see no more then 90 watts and it's right at 72 fps like my refresh rate as that's FreeSync working as well the temp .. It an all AMD system and I am very please once all there tech is used like Wolfenstein II shows as even record with Relive . I am only offer my view of there hardware and drivers as it better then most say .


 
Last edited:
I am looking forward to reading the reviews to see what kind of performance it really has. I am a bit disappointed in the price, but with 16GB HBM, there is no way it could be a cheap card. Still...I have like $500 in NewEgg gift cards I have been sitting on since forever, so I just might get one if it impresses me enough.
 
did Vega sneak up on the nvida 10 series in performance or am I just remembering wrong? I looked at some benches, and you guys are right - Vega 64 now trades blows with 1080.

The performance level wasn't like that a launch was it? I thought the Vega 56 was like a 1070 and the Vega 64 was pretty significantly slower than a 1080 at launch on most stuff and compared equitably on a few things? I'll admit I've not kept track of Vega since I sold mine three months after I bought my launch units. Either things have changed or my memory has failed me.
 
Archaea said:
did Vega sneak up on the nvida 10 series in performance or am I just remembering wrong? I looked at some benches, and you guys are right - Vega 64 now trades blows with 1080.

The performance level wasn't like that a launch was it? I thought the Vega 56 was like a 1070 and the Vega 64 was pretty significantly slower than a 1080 at launch on most stuff and compared equitably on a few things? I'll admit I've not kept track of Vega since I sold mine three months after I bought my launch units. Either things have changed or my memory has failed me.
Click to expand...
I believe certain games Vega 64 does tank, like Watchdog 2 or Fallout 4 where it does fall to 1070 level, but for the most part, it is on par with GTX 1080.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top