Vega Rumors

oh they won't take marketshare away, Kaby Lake G uses more power than a moble gtx 1050 and gtx 1050ti but performance is close to them. The problem is these form factors higher power usage is going to cut into battery life.
 
Hmm, this won't replace a dGPU by most measures, and while I'm sure plenty of people remain disappointed at the unfulfilled dream of a APU fighting a dGPU+CPU combo, there are places for this product. It defeats a Intel iGPU and beats their own previous APUs, and if I remember correctly, the sub-$500 prebuilt market relies on using Intel graphics, if AMD can get OEMs to adopt for gaming oriented iGPU pre-builts (or any prebuilt, lets hope Ryzen and these Vega 11 chips are cheaper than full size Vega), I think theres a place for AMD to make some money there. (And definitely more than they were making before on their APUs in this segment)

Anandtech has a summary that paints a rosy picture of AMD's new APUs.

If there was any doubt that AMD holds the integrated graphics crown, when we compare the new Ryzen APUs against Intel's latest graphics solutions, there is a clear winner. For almost all the 1080p benchmarks, the Ryzen APUs are 2-3x better in every metric. We can conclude that ntel has effectively given over this integrated graphics space to AMD at this point, deciding to focus on its encode/decode engines rather than raw gaming and 3D performance. With AMD having DDR4-2933 as the supported memory frequency on the APUs, assuming memory can be found for a reasonable price, it gaming performance at this price is nicely impressive.

When we compare the Ryzen 5 2400G with any CPU paired with the NVIDIA GT 1030, both solutions are within a few percent of each other in all of our 1080p benchmarks. The NVIDIA GT 1030 is a $90 graphics card, which when paired with a CPU, gets you two options: either match the combined price with the Ryzen 5 2400G, which leaves $80 for a CPU, giving a Pentium that loses in anything multi-threaded to AMD; or just increases the cost fo the system to get a CPU that is equivalent in performance. Except for chipset IO, the Intel + GT 1030 route offers no benefits over the AMD solution: it costs more, for a budget-constrained market, and draws more power overall. There's also the fact that the AMD APUs come with a Wraith Stealth 65W cooler, which adds additional value to the package that Intel doesn't seem to want to match.
Click to expand...

I'm relying on Ian's words here, I left this market a long time ago, and frankly, the idea of dealing with sub-30fps games is mind-boggling to me. With that said, I did a search on Best Buy's website for prebuilts, everything below $500 uses a iGPU from Intel/AMD. The closest price point with a dGPU is at $520, a AMD A10-9700 and a RX 560 GPU. Dell's website, sub-$500 its all iGPU, HP, as far as I can tell cause their website is shit, $500 and below, its all iGPU. So, while we hoped for a dGPU competitor, I think the poor kid trying to play League of Legends on his sub-$500 desktop will be happy to take a 2400G/2200G over Intel's Integrated Graphics anyday.

razor1 said:
Still crappy IGP lol, this will never change, and now that gives a damn good idea that the Kaby g ultra portables are going to have a tough time against Max q 1050's and 1050ti's. And its not over yet, they will be going up against nV's next gen mobiles too. This is exactly what happened when the first APU was released by AMD, it looked ok for super low end stuff but a gen later.... it just died.
Click to expand...

razor, I think these products are intended for the sub-$500 computer market, especially prebuilts from OEMs. From what I can tell, Nvidia's products aren't involved at all below $500, only Intel's, and these APUs soundly beat Intel's iGPU.
 
Last edited:
yup 2x prior amd apu performance and 3x intel igp and yet some are still not happy...
 
Funny you mention LoL- because Intel's iGPU can rock that game at 1080p with the settings buried.

But the reality is that this 'Vegazen' as some TechReport posters are calling it will open up a bit better gaming at a bit lower price-point relative to current dGPU-less offerings.

Going forward, I hope that AMD focuses on two things: first, getting six- and eight-core Vegazen parts out, and second, on mitigating the performance bottleneck imposed by CPU memory controllers. Figuring out how to integrate an HBM stack into an AM4 socket part would be a pretty big market disruptor, and would likely push them into GTX1050 territory.


[I also don't buy Ian's assertion that Intel has decided to focus on media decoding and the like; while Intel doesn't have the GPU performance in their parts, they are most certainly paying attention to their drivers and regularly iterating iGPU performance while also upgrading fixed-function logic blocks to handle the latest media streaming, just like AMD is doing]
 
  • Like
Reactions: noko
like this
pendragon1 said:
Vegazen?! why not Ryzega?
edit: and what game?
Click to expand...

On the naming: dunno, but it sticks.

The game is League of Legends [LoL], probably the lightest popular MOBA. I've played the game on a 2000-series i7 with middling success, and current i620 GPUs have no problem at 1080p, even in ultrabooks (i7 7500U here, which is a dual-core part).
 
IdiotInCharge said:
Funny you mention LoL- because Intel's iGPU can rock that game at 1080p with the settings buried.
Click to expand...

Really? Good to know, I remember way back trying to play League of Legends on Intel and I got medium at 1080p for about 60 fps. I was checking the reviews, no one did League of Legends, everyone did Dota 2 through.
 
Yeah, it's interesting how far Intel's iGPUs have come. Still far from perfect, but Anandtech mentioned that the new Doom ran without crashing- that's pretty exemplary given Intel's driver history.

It's one of the reasons that I'm a bit 'meh' on Vegazen too, personally. I get the advantages, but my perspective is that their effective niche given that they'll be bottlenecked by their memory controllers is pretty narrow. Intel's iGPUs are effective if not fast, and their CPUs are faster- which means that if you're going to go discrete, you're likely better off skipping AMD.

But if you're not going to go discrete? Vegazen all the way!
 
SighTurtle said:
Hmm, this won't replace a dGPU by most measures, and while I'm sure plenty of people remain disappointed at the unfulfilled dream of a APU fighting a dGPU+CPU combo, there are places for this product. It defeats a Intel iGPU and beats their own previous APUs, and if I remember correctly, the sub-$500 prebuilt market relies on using Intel graphics, if AMD can get OEMs to adopt for gaming oriented iGPU pre-builts (or any prebuilt, lets hope Ryzen and these Vega 11 chips are cheaper than full size Vega), I think theres a place for AMD to make some money there. (And definitely more than they were making before on their APUs in this segment)

Anandtech has a summary that paints a rosy picture of AMD's new APUs.



I'm relying on Ian's words here, I left this market a long time ago, and frankly, the idea of dealing with sub-30fps games is mind-boggling to me. With that said, I did a search on Best Buy's website for prebuilts, everything below $500 uses a iGPU from Intel/AMD. The closest price point with a dGPU is at $520, a AMD A10-9700 and a RX 560 GPU. Dell's website, sub-$500 its all iGPU, HP, as far as I can tell cause their website is shit, $500 and below, its all iGPU. So, while we hoped for a dGPU competitor, I think the poor kid trying to play League of Legends on his sub-$500 desktop will be happy to take a 2400G/2200G over Intel's Integrated Graphics anyday.



razor, I think these products are intended for the sub-$500 computer market, especially prebuilts from OEMs. From what I can tell, Nvidia's products aren't involved at all below $500, only Intel's, and these APUs soundly beat Intel's iGPU.
Click to expand...


Oh I know it won't, just had to point out that I stated this a while back, Vega as an IGP, isn't going to give much to the pc world. Is it better than Intel IGP, yeah, but nothing spectacular, like the rumors of competing against a 1050. The sub 100 buck discrete market is very small, and personally I still won't use an IGP for low end systems for steaming movies, let alone games. Also Intel hasn't updated their IGP for oh 2 gens now? yeah, so factor that in, its not like the market has changed at all. The first APU from AMD also matched up well in the sub 100 buck range

https://www.anandtech.com/show/4476/amd-a83850-review/5

And it didn't change a thing lol.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
On the naming: dunno, but it sticks.

The game is League of Legends [LoL], probably the lightest popular MOBA. I've played the game on a 2000-series i7 with middling success, and current i620 GPUs have no problem at 1080p, even in ultrabooks (i7 7500U here, which is a dual-core part).
Click to expand...
ah my bad i read it as lol. i havent seen this chip on LOL yet but i have seen it on older i5 igp and it barely managed 720p/45.
 
razor1 said:
Oh I know it won't, just had to point out that I stated this a while back, Vega as an IGP, isn't going to give much to the pc world. Is it better than Intel IGP, yeah, but nothing spectacular, like the rumors of competing against a 1050. The sub 100 buck discrete market is very small, and personally I still won't use an IGP for low end systems for steaming movies, let alone games. Also Intel hasn't updated their IGP for oh 2 gens now? yeah, so factor that in, its not like the market has changed at all. The first APU from AMD also matched up well in the sub 100 buck range

https://www.anandtech.com/show/4476/amd-a83850-review/5

And it didn't change a thing lol.
Click to expand...

You make a good point, Intel not upgrading their iGPU for this long probably signals a stagnant low-end market. Did some searching, low-end discrete is not really growing and low-end desktops are not being replaced too often for similar low-end products. Still, AMD's APUs have been very hampered by CPU performance, so I think this at least places AMD on a equal footing in this market. Its not a growing market, or particularly hard-hitting, but it fills out AMD's product line, and AMD will make some money out of it.
 
I want to be excited about the 2400g, but my RX 560 2gb is 180% faster and its not exactly setting the world on fire.
 
SighTurtle said:
You make a good point, Intel not upgrading their iGPU for this long probably signals a stagnant low-end market. Did some searching, low-end discrete is not really growing and low-end desktops are not being replaced too often for similar low-end products. Still, AMD's APUs have been very hampered by CPU performance, so I think this at least places AMD on a equal footing in this market. Its not a growing market, or particularly hard-hitting, but it fills out AMD's product line, and AMD will make some money out of it.
Click to expand...


Well the problem with IGP's or APU's it takes time to get those into CPU's as well, if it takes 5 years to design a CPU, they can't just switch out APU's or IGP's without making other modifications to the CPU itself. As much as they are separate processors there is a quite a bit of interconnect logic between the two that must be validated just like any other changes. So Zen as and APU is going to be there even after AMD's next gen GPU comes out for at least a year. That means 2 years at least, Intel should be able to catch up on the IGP's now, bandwidth is the bottleneck for Vegazen. Memory speeds aren't going to change much for these CPU's either so APU's and IGP's are going to be stuck at what we see Vegazen is at right now.
 
Last edited:
League of Legends looks about as good as Arena of Valor, a near-identical MOBA game by Garena for smartphones.

So yeah, getting 60+ fps in that game is not a great achievement, especially when the aforementioned MOBA game runs at 60FPS on a Snapdragon 825.
 
There are many markets in the world where AMD new APU will help in. I see it doing well, especially the 2200G. I don't see it as a very big money maker but it should be rather decent for AMD in making money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top