Spitballing Vega GPU Performance

network hash rate is 26,000 gh/s (26000000mh's) the fastest cards will only do around 30mh/s (r9 290's and rx 480's) 26000000/30=866,000 and I rounded up because I garentee the majority of the network isnt running at 30mh/s (you have to have a 8gb or flashed overclocked card to do this)

edit: i also negligated nvidia cards because i HIGHLY dought they would make up any significant portion of this.

Did some mining a few times over the years with various coins and these numbers check out with my experience. This is why I posted last week, that steam surveys mean shit when you have factors like this to contend with, but most don't understand or mine, especially Nvidia crowd/fans/stock shills so they are oblivious to this. Depending on the cycle, architecture and efficiency, a large chunk of those cards can be top of the range AMD e.g. in past 7970, 290X etc. They are still popular cards (290 and up) and sought after.
This is why people are worried that Vega will kick ass and make everything in use currently, obsolete, leading to huge pressure on the retail market. Imagine half a million people trying to get hold of a 1080Ti on launch..
 
Did some mining a few times over the years with various coins and these numbers check out with my experience. This is why I posted last week, that steam surveys mean shit when you have factors like this to contend with, but most don't understand or mine, especially Nvidia crowd/fans/stock shills so they are oblivious to this. Depending on the cycle, architecture and efficiency, a large chunk of those cards can be top of the range AMD e.g. in past 7970, 290X etc. They are still popular cards (290 and up) and sought after.
This is why people are worried that Vega will kick ass and make everything in use currently, obsolete, leading to huge pressure on the retail market. Imagine half a million people trying to get hold of a 1080Ti on launch..

the rx 480's were fairly popular at lanch as they had the same preformance and used less then half the power of the 290. and they all had the faster mem originally. Amd did a decent job of keeping up with demand with those but vega would rely on hbm supply whitch is pretty concerning (that why i would be preordering afew asap) another thing to concider, if vega is decent and they can keep up with demand you will sea a massive flood of 290's and 480's on the used market i personally know i would sell 24 290's and a few 480's at around 100 each if vega was good enough. that would dystroy the market for everything but high end cards
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
No offense, but that's idiotic. If you "don't worry about things you don't get", how are you going to ever learn anything? Perhaps I was hoping for more dialogue on the reasons behind that decision.

But you don't want to learn anything.
 
But you don't want to learn anything.

If I didn't want to learn or discuss the topic, I wouldn't have posted. It sounds more like perhaps you don't really understand or want to discuss your own position on the topic.
 
the rx 480's were fairly popular at lanch as they had the same preformance and used less then half the power of the 290. and they all had the faster mem originally. Amd did a decent job of keeping up with demand with those but vega would rely on hbm supply whitch is pretty concerning (that why i would be preordering afew asap) another thing to concider, if vega is decent and they can keep up with demand you will sea a massive flood of 290's and 480's on the used market i personally know i would sell 24 290's and a few 480's at around 100 each if vega was good enough. that would dystroy the market for everything but high end cards


Where would you recommend trying to preorder these at? Is there a better place to preorder GPUs than amazon?
 
If I didn't want to learn or discuss the topic, I wouldn't have posted. It sounds more like perhaps you don't really understand or want to discuss your own position on the topic.

You are hypothesising that AMD will charge more like Nvidia if they were on top and using that as an excuse not to buy from them. In case you haven't noticed Nvidia IS charging alot more because they are on top yet people are still buying them in droves, even when AMD has equivalent or better performance in a segment (Rx480/1060). That'd fanboyism rather than choosing the best card for performance and will eventually lead to a monopoly in the gpu market.

If AMD cannot sell gaming gpu's I can see them just quitting altogether which is not going to be a good situation for the consumers. I don't like the current situation at all.
The successor for gtx 970 level cards is over £350 now but was £400 on launch which is far higher than the original 970 price of £240 on launch. The 1060 occupies that space now which is frankly pathetic. We are getting a lower tier card for the same price as the previous gen mid range card.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dgz
like this
You are hypothesising that AMD will charge more like Nvidia if they were on top and using that as an excuse not to buy from them. In case you haven't noticed Nvidia IS charging alot more because they are on top yet people are still buying them in droves, even when AMD has equivalent or better performance in a segment (Rx480/1060). That'd fanboyism rather than choosing the best card for performance and will eventually lead to a monopoly in the gpu market.

If AMD cannot sell gaming gpu's I can see them just quitting altogether which is not going to be a good situation for the consumers. I don't like the current situation at all.
The successor for gtx 970 level cards is over £350 now but was £400 on launch which is far higher than the original 970 price of £240 on launch. The 1060 occupies that space now which is frankly pathetic. We are getting a lower tier card for the same price as the previous gen mid range card.

No, you're assuming I said I wouldn't buy from them for that reason. I'll buy whoever had the top of the line card, regardless of brand. My point was to refute those who treat AMD like some poor, put-upon small business, and Nvidia as a giant, greedy conglomerate. They're BOTH greedy corporations.

I don't see AMD quitting the market, since they make a lot of money at the mid to lower tiers. The problem they have is really marketing. If Nvidia ALWAYS has the fastest cards available, that brand recognition extends even to the lower tiers. So given the choice between a 1060 and a 580, lots of people will lean towards the Nvidia card, simply because they're "known" as the high performance brand.
 
The problem they have is really marketing. If Nvidia ALWAYS has the fastest cards available, that brand recognition extends even to the lower tiers. So given the choice between a 1060 and a 580, lots of people will lean towards the Nvidia card, simply because they're "known" as the high performance brand.

This "consumer perception" even extends to used video cards (like Craigslist), where (when I was once more active on Craigslist) many a buyer will refuse to go AMD simply based on the idea that they have "horrible drivers", despite the improvements AMD has made there ( the RTG driver guys have been pretty good at being proactive about releases as of the last 1.5 years).

It'll take not only a good-to-great video card release from AMD (possibly Vega or Navi?), but continued successes for a few years, for Avg. Joe PC Master Race enthusiast to be convinced that AMD is viable at the mid-to-high-end -- the last time they seemed to have anything remotely approaching that level of confidence was during the 7970 release, and (for a short while, before mining) when the R9 290 was a great price/performance winner against the overpriced GTX 780 (I was an early adopter of the 780 and ended up regretting it).
 
Back
Top