Radeon RX Vega Discussion Thread

CSI_PC said:
They really want to limit how much Nvidia and CUDA gains in an Apple environment.
Bloody stupid IMO as they must had lost a fair chunk of sales to Intel with Nvidia GPUs while they waited all this time to refresh their AMD GPUs.
Cheers
Click to expand...

It's not really bloody stupid. If Apple wants to support an open standard that's good. As an example thunderbolt. They are so tied to thunderbolt they can't change their CPUs even if they wanted to. I think Intel opened up thunderbolt recently so that might change if AMD wants to work on that down the road. If they allowed go all out for CUDA they are also limiting themselves to nvidia and being stuck with them. Options are good to have. I bet you apple could get heck of a lot better deal for AMD chips then Intel.
 
NKD said:
It's not really bloody stupid. If Apple wants to support an open standard that's good. As an example thunderbolt. They are so tied to thunderbolt they can't change their CPUs even if they wanted to. I think Intel opened up thunderbolt recently so that might change if AMD wants to work on that down the road. If they allowed go all out for CUDA they are also limiting themselves to nvidia and being stuck with them. Options are good to have. I bet you apple could get heck of a lot better deal for AMD chips then Intel.
Click to expand...


The reason why Apple is doing this is because it keeps their margins high ;), Ya know ever vendor that possibly has no other choice but to work with them gets raped when it comes down to money lol.
 
Last edited:
I really believe this is why we are seeing AMD hush hush about vega not launching it. I was totally not expecting Vega inside of an imac, especially a fully fledged one. Its 6 months away but I am betting they are filling an order for apple as we speak. They probably have a ballpark figure of how many units they expect to have on preorder. We know why gaming vega is pushed back to end of july. Looks like Apple will be getting alot of vega over next two months to integrate in to imacs and then we get vega.
 
NKD said:
I really believe this is why we are seeing AMD hush hush about vega not launching it. I was totally not expecting Vega inside of an imac, especially a fully fledged one. Its 6 months away but I am betting they are filling an order for apple as we speak. They probably have a ballpark figure of how many units they expect to have on preorder. We know why gaming vega is pushed back to end of july. Looks like Apple will be getting alot of vega over next two months to integrate in to imacs and then we get vega.
Click to expand...


No lol, macs are coming out till end of this year ;), just in time for the V card :)

lolfail9001 just beat me to it
 
lolfail9001 said:
These imacs are not out until December, you know. If anything it looks to me like AMD caused Apple to delay iMac refresh until the very end of the year.
Click to expand...

It couldn't possibly have anything to do with intel 18 core processors coming then right? lol.
 
Also these macs aren't high selling products, nor is Apple a major seller of OEM graphics cards ;) 100k per quarter is their GPU sales amounts for all their products.
 
razor1 said:
Also these macs aren't high selling products, nor is Apple a major seller of OEM graphics cards ;) 100k per quarter is their GPU sales amounts for all their products.
Click to expand...

Not the pro ones. But I am pretty sure the regular imac lines will sell quiet well. Apple hasn't upgraded them for a while.
 
NKD said:
Not the pro ones. But I am pretty sure the regular imac lines will sell quiet well. Apple hasn't upgraded them for a while.
Click to expand...


No not saying they don't sell well, what I'm saying is they don't sell because of the GPU's 100k GPU's per quarter is for ALL of their products :)
 
NKD said:
Common now. Intel won't have 18 core processors until late this year or early next for consumers. It is already news out there. Not too hard to figure out.
Click to expand...


They have had 18 core xeons for a few years now. This is a pro system, they will be using xeons. Not sure if they are using Skylake X or older ones, but either way they will be xeons.

I had a mac pro (the only mac I have ever bought) in 2007ish, it came with penryn xeons dual CPU's.
 
razor1 said:
No that is ALL of their products :)
Click to expand...
razor1 said:
They have had 18 core xeons for a few years now. This is a pro system, they will be using xeons. Not sure if they are using Skylake X or older ones, but either way they will be xeons.

I had a mac pro (the only mac I have ever bought) in 2007ish, it came with penryn xeons dual CPU's.
Click to expand...

yea you know what i mean. Ofcourse they are going to using latest. if it was older xeon there is no reason to wait until december to launch these. Heck Vega Fe is already launching this month on the 27th it wouldn't take them another 6 months to get few thousand units to apple.
 
NKD said:
I really believe this is why we are seeing AMD hush hush about vega not launching it. I was totally not expecting Vega inside of an imac, especially a fully fledged one. Its 6 months away but I am betting they are filling an order for apple as we speak. They probably have a ballpark figure of how many units they expect to have on preorder. We know why gaming vega is pushed back to end of july. Looks like Apple will be getting alot of vega over next two months to integrate in to imacs and then we get vega.
Click to expand...
Too far out.
 
NKD said:
yea you know what i mean. Ofcourse they are going to using latest. if it was older xeon there is no reason to wait until december to launch these. Heck Vega Fe is already launching this month on the 27th it wouldn't take them another 6 months to get few thousand units to apple.
Click to expand...


They might not use the latest man, when I got my Penryn system, Westmere was already out for 6 months or so. Its just what ever they can get cheaper and as long as it doesn't turn off potential consumers. Damn most apple consumers don't know the hardware they are purchasing is usually a gen or two behind, its really pathetic.
 
NKD said:
Common now. Intel won't have 18 core processors until late this year or early next for consumers. It is already news out there. Not too hard to figure out.
Click to expand...
Skylake Xeons, including 18 core SKUs were out for like half a year for big clients already.

So, no, it is not the reason you think it is. Now, Intel maybe taking it's sweet time creating an LGA2066 version of those. But will we know which one it is?
 
lolfail9001 said:
Skylake Xeons, including 18 core SKUs were out for like half a year for big clients already.

So, no, it is not the reason you think it is. Now, Intel maybe taking it's sweet time creating an LGA2066 version of those. But will we know which one it is?
Click to expand...

Probably Intel fucking up and making 18 core LGA2066 versions of it? Considering Apple got first dibs on the full 380X (if I remember correctly) and the fully unlocked P11 I'd say a Pro release of Vega at the end of June indicates that it's Intel holding this back if anything.
 
NKD said:
It's not really bloody stupid. If Apple wants to support an open standard that's good. As an example thunderbolt. They are so tied to thunderbolt they can't change their CPUs even if they wanted to. I think Intel opened up thunderbolt recently so that might change if AMD wants to work on that down the road. If they allowed go all out for CUDA they are also limiting themselves to nvidia and being stuck with them. Options are good to have. I bet you apple could get heck of a lot better deal for AMD chips then Intel.
Click to expand...

Oh come on.
You are talking about Apple that is one of the largest in the world to use proprietary solutions that wall the consumer into their various solutions :)
And yet you think they exclude Nvidia because Apple in this one instance wants to support open standards? :)
Sorry but it is a bit of a stretch when one considers Apple's strategy and the many proprietary solutions they use, and especially when Apple brings Metal to OS and still not Vulkan that is the open standard.

For Apple it is not about supporting an open standard (they created OpenCL in the 1st place before handing it to Kronos) but to stifle Nvidia with their CUDA and ecosystem (frameworks and library integrations).
And yes it is a bit stupid/stubborn because they have opened the doors in the professional segment they were strong in to other competitors that offered both Maxwell and then Pascal hardware.

Cheers
 
NKD said:
It's not really bloody stupid. If Apple wants to support an open standard that's good. As an example thunderbolt. They are so tied to thunderbolt they can't change their CPUs even if they wanted to. I think Intel opened up thunderbolt recently so that might change if AMD wants to work on that down the road. If they allowed go all out for CUDA they are also limiting themselves to nvidia and being stuck with them. Options are good to have. I bet you apple could get heck of a lot better deal for AMD chips then Intel.
Click to expand...

Apple is a member of the OpenCL consortium (IIRC they are one of the primary architects of it). Apple won't admit to CUDA being a 'better' environment (note, I am not making this claim, just the perception that certain people think so) because it would look like they originally backed the wrong horse. Apple is all about appearances. (I say this as someone who uses and loves working on my two Mac workstations and two Mac laptops at work and my wife and I have iPhones. So, not an Apple hater, but someone who realizes the reality of Apple's stance.)
 
Vega is like a term paper that's now a month late.

It is probably better to release Vega now in its current form.
 
_mockingbird said:
Really? Since when did anything AMD released is ever "finished" anyway?
Click to expand...

That answer doesn't make it okay to release a product if they believe it's not ready. Give me reason why they should release it if they don't have enough inventory? Or if they are still optimizing the drivers? Or anything. They don't have to release it if they don't want. You are not running the company. The day you do go ahead and make boneheaded moves like that. Until then let them do what they believe to be right.
 
Last edited:
noko said:
AMD and Nvidia - Partners
RTG and Nvidia - Competitors

AMD should do everything possible to make their CPU's/chipsets work great with NVidia products. That would drive sells for AMD cpu's and motherboards. Just like RTG needs to be partners with Intel making sure everything is as good as possible for their GPU's no matter the platform.

When AMD combined the graphics division and cpu division I thought that was a big mistake. At least AMD is acting somewhat smarter these days.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

Personally I would've loved it if there's a laptop with an overclockable 6/8 core Threadripper and a Pascal GPU or even a Volta GPU. It'll probably be at least $200-500 cheaper than a laptop with an overclockable i7 and the exact same remaining specs.

4 cores is just not enough these days, sigh...
 
Boil said:
That would be the R5 & R7 Ryzen CPUs; ThreadRipper is 10, 12, 14 & 16 core CPUs...?

And the size, thermals & power draw of ThreadRipper would really not be very laptop friendly...
Click to expand...
Asus is making one with the 1700, 8 cores.
 
trandoanhung1991 said:
Exactly.

Personally I would've loved it if there's a laptop with an overclockable 6/8 core Threadripper and a Pascal GPU or even a Volta GPU. It'll probably be at least $200-500 cheaper than a laptop with an overclockable i7 and the exact same remaining specs.

4 cores is just not enough these days, sigh...
Click to expand...
Ryzen does extremely well at lower clock speeds and voltages, it's efficiency sky rockets. I expect a lot of Ryzen laptops will come out in the future especially the APU ones. Except 4core/8threads APU's seems more the baseline or low end now. :D. Give me that 8 core Ryzen laptop with a GTX 1060m or higher!

I agree, get Ryzen efficiency with the core count combined with Pascal efficiency and that to me makes a winning combination. Not sure if Vega on the mobile end will touch or be close to Pascal or Volta if 6 months away. This has to be one of the best times for PCs/Mobile in a very long time!
 
Probably the first time, ever, that laptop performance is actually desktop performance of the same generation. It wasn't that long ago that Maxwell's chips hit the laptop markets and even they were still a bit short of the equivalent desktop versions.

No wonder gaming laptops are exploding in sales...
 
I think it's time to resurrect this thread since the RX Vega is out now.

Techspot's review has a comparison with the RX Vega 56 and GTX 1070 in 25 games:

GameComparison.png




The average performance between the cards looks close. It's nice to have a rough indicator whether a game is neutral or favors AMD or Nvidia. I used to use the GTX 1060 and RX 480 comparisons, to see if a game favors a higher Stream Processor count or GPU engine clock.

Average_1440p.png


https://www.techspot.com/review/1468-amd-radeon-rx-vega-56/

Looks like the RX Vega 56 will be good competition for the GTX 1070, if the prices are close.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top