![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
Vega Rumors
- Thread starter grtitan
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2009
- Messages
- 11,556
Then what does he needs to be successful? That's the unknown question because I feel even if they had 5 billion extra for R&D right now, they will continue to engineer features that doesn't have anything to do with gaming performance.
Maybe the need to take a page out of Nvidia's book. Remove all computing features such as double precision, machine learning etc. from AMD gaming cards. Strip/Cut it down.
I'm not a chip engineer or understand thermodynamics, but I would think less heat, less power usage coming from electric loads that don't matter for gaming, will result in more headroom for performance.
That is definitely the first step, I think that is what Navi's scalability is all about, its not about infinity fabric its about the ability to have the same tech across multiple markets but focused on the specific market target.
Where does anything say Navi won't use GCN architecture. MCM is just breaking the current design into more chips, which won't improve performance. MCM GCN won't beat NVidia any more than Crossfire GCN on a card has.
AMD needs a fundamental leap in it's base technology and it seems like they are out of ideas.
While it seems a little foolish to hop on the "wait and see" bandwagon, to be honest anything at 1080 performance and similar price is just fine for me. Heat and power are a whatever... As a hotrodder its cool to me that my Ls1 can drink the fuel, the performance makes up for it... are there more efficient platforms out there? sure! some of them can even make more power. My fx9370 and 290 combo did very well for me, it ate power and made heat....It also provided more than enough performance in the vast majority of gaming and medium workload tasks i asked of it. Bad comparo? Sure! Im a pro mechanic, not a tech guy. Too bad you cant toss a camshaft and port job into a silicon thinking bucket with billions of switchymabobs.
Would like to go 4k on the next build, and if vega gaming can run with 1080 i may stick on the amd side of things. If not, a 1080 is a monster of a card and will do just fine. I like amd, but am not a blind fanboy. I switched to ati/amd after 3dfx died during my highschool days--at the price i could afford, the ati gave a bit more horsepower vs the comparable nvidia on the shelves at the time. If they cant provide in the higher end 4k bracket...well, it will be cool to finally try a good nvidia.
Would like to go 4k on the next build, and if vega gaming can run with 1080 i may stick on the amd side of things. If not, a 1080 is a monster of a card and will do just fine. I like amd, but am not a blind fanboy. I switched to ati/amd after 3dfx died during my highschool days--at the price i could afford, the ati gave a bit more horsepower vs the comparable nvidia on the shelves at the time. If they cant provide in the higher end 4k bracket...well, it will be cool to finally try a good nvidia.
Well that is kinda what AMD has been doing for the past few gens, more is better, more horsepower it should beat out the competition, its not how that horsepower is being utilized efficiently.
From the looks of it, Vega will not scale better at 4k, there was a specific reason for Fury X to do this, it had more shader horsepower than the 980ti, so the bottleneck was shifting to that as res went up. Vega doesn't have that advantage against the 1080ti, nor is the gtx 1080 shader bound at 4k either at least with current games.
That's incredibly stupid from a project management POV. Predicting what features are needed 5 years ahead is incredible risk.
Nvidia learnt a lot from Fermi. They stagger their product development into timeframes closely fitting a product refresh, gradually introducing new features and allowing it to be adopted, while researching new ones.
Though to be honest I don't think much of the software Nvidia had developed the past 2 product cycles have been well received. At best it's been lukewarm. But it seems to force AMD to play catch up just to tick enough boxes, while reducing manpower for actual chip development.
The only ones worth mentioning are SMP, Tile-based rendering and color compression. The rest are pretty meh, to be honest. With VR dying down, I don't see a need for AMD to even attempt SMP. Just get playable latencies for the 1% that uses VR. Tile-based rendering is a pretty massive advantage that AMD needs to get even with, as well. They're also quite behind on color compression, kinda forcing them to use bigger busses/higher cost memory techs just to be even. And it looks like Vega is quite bandwidth starved.
AMD is lagging quite far behind, but panicking and rushing everything is the worst way to go.
Story of my life LOL
They are lagging very much behind, 1 year just by launch times of gens, but another generation based on perf/watt soon to be 2 generations because of the imminent Volta launch. Total almost a 3 generation lead for nV.
That's why when people say wait of the next best thing from AMD, they will compete, its pretty much a given they are still playing the catch up game, unless nV screws up its not in AMD's hands to dictate anything.
Kinda curious, but could we be seeing the biggest fail in video card history? There were some real turds in the past, like the FX 5800, but this seems worse. Over a year late, sucking 2x the power, but still slower. The only shoe left to drop is the price.
SighTurtle
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2016
- Messages
- 1,410
http://www.anandtech.com/show/11643/samsung-increases-8gb-hbm2-production-volume
Anandtech theorizes Samsung is producing the HBM2 for AMD Vega due to one, the timing of the announcement, two, Samsung being the only one able to produce 8 GB stacks of HBM2 (publicly).
Anandtech theorizes Samsung is producing the HBM2 for AMD Vega due to one, the timing of the announcement, two, Samsung being the only one able to produce 8 GB stacks of HBM2 (publicly).
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 9,100
Naw Nvidia's FX series and AMD's 2900 series to me still are the biggest failures.
Chris_B
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 29, 2001
- Messages
- 5,484
Yeah 2900xt was bad, it was hyped up to be the most amazing thing ever yet when it launched ati at the time had a big "value" campaign plastered all over it. It was 8800gts performance while sucking more power than the 8800gtx and was several months late irrc. Its a similar thing they done with polaris, it was meant to be much better performer but was hampered by clock speeds so amd started all this "disruptive product" bollocks like that's what it was intended to be from the start.
That is certainly true that Navi may still use GCN, it was just a guess on my part that Navi based on the rumor mill that Navi may use MCM.
I think the 2900XT was more of a flop than the FX5800. The FX5800 was salvaged somewhat with the 5950 and the performance while subpar, still gave you some decent increases over the GF4's. The really great thing about the 5800 was the fan, where the push pull part of the shroud was placed right next to each other, so it could recycle its own air.
The 2900XT was so bad that AMD took it off the shelves and tried to dump them into OEM's, which I think most told them to shove off. Remember how long it was? lol it had to have that extra fan that hung off the end of it, some of the OEM's had the one with the grip bar so you could install/uninstall it.
The 2900XT was so bad that AMD took it off the shelves and tried to dump them into OEM's, which I think most told them to shove off. Remember how long it was? lol it had to have that extra fan that hung off the end of it, some of the OEM's had the one with the grip bar so you could install/uninstall it.
Chris_B
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 29, 2001
- Messages
- 5,484
Presumably these, xtx iterations apparently.
The standard heatsink on the retail 2900 xt was ok for what it was, not sure why they went mental with that longer one for the "xtx". I mean the overall size minus the bracket doesn't look too dissimilar to the 2900xt.
Chris_B
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 29, 2001
- Messages
- 5,484
I had 2 in crossfire...that was an interesting experience to say the least. Still have one sitting around as a paperweight, which it excels at given how much copper the heatsink was made up of, which it badly needed.
Michaelius
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2003
- Messages
- 4,684
Sounds similar to Vega really.
On a side note I had 2900 pro 256 bit - after they cut obscene memory bus it wasn't that bad of card - bargain priced at 2/3 of 8800gt at that time and still much more powerfull than utter trash cards like 2600 ( I think that one was actually biggest failure ever - all the crap from 2900xt but without even an ounce of power 2900 had)
D
Deleted whining member 223597
Guest
I had an HD 2900 Pro 512-bit. Man, did that card run HOT 
Presumably these, xtx iterations apparently.
The standard heatsink on the retail 2900 xt was ok for what it was, not sure why they went mental with that longer one for the "xtx". I mean the overall size minus the bracket doesn't look too dissimilar to the 2900xt.
Man good old days. Them naked pipes! old cards just had something to them. I am sure I will say the same thing about todays cards in 10 years.
Cause there was no higher cost FE for the 1060, or the 1080 TI, it really got some bad press.
1060 didn't have FE but nvidia model was $50 more expensive then regular retail price. Very similar to FE. I don't believe they called it FE if I remember correctly. 1060 launch price was 249.99 for 6gb but nvidia edition has been 299.99 till this day. So sort of like founders edition.
Both Companies are guilty of doing this. There have been many cases from both sides of numbers been quoted been best case scenarios in very specific situations. The Nvidia wonder driver for Kepler as an example or are you forgetting the 970 fiasco?
Point is, that anyone with any IQ shouldn't believe marketing numbers from either side.
nV doesn't do things like poor Volta
. They also haven't compared to AMD products for quite some time well they did with the gtx 1060, but still, it did come out where they said it would. The ONLY time nV cherry picked was when they were down, the same thing AMD does ALL THE TIME. Its easy to read AMD though, if they aren't chest pumping, there are problem areas with their products.
nV doesn't do things like poor Volta
The ONLY time nV cherry picked was when they were down, the same thing AMD does ALL THE TIME. Its easy to read AMD though, if they aren't chest pumping, there are problem areas with their products.
Well, I did guess that you would reply to defend Nvidia, rather than accept my point that you shouldn't believe marketing number from any company. Good job.
There is a reason why one way its better than another. When nV stated the gtx 1080 was faster then the 980ti, and it came out true. The 1080ti was more than 20% over then gtx 1080 that is what it came out true.
Do you see AMD doing that?
Hell no
They do things like 2x polygon throughput or 2x the perf per watt without giving references. Shit they did it with Polaris too.
That is bad marketing, because it increases expectations to unrealistic points.
Good job for lumping AMD's crappy marketing to nV's excellent marketing, while fan boys say nV's marketing is so much better and that is the only reason nV sells more, you try to equalize and pander to the lowest common denominator.
AMD did what they thought was best, Fanboys took it to a whole new level, and this is what we get, Vega @ 300 watts, which the only people that will be interested in this card is people that have been waiting for a year and half and have free sync monitors.
The people that don't have a free sync monitor and have been waiting, will just go else where.
Do you know why they never told us Polaris figures were based on r270 and r280 till a few weeks before launch? Cause they knew how crappy Polaris really was!, so instead of giving any hard figures so people would figure out oh its a gtx 970 equivalent a year later.... they throw curve balls at us. While people assumed it was over the 390 series cards they hyped the shit out of Polaris.
Same shit with Vega man,
You never see nV doing this "fart" cloud. When they say x some performance, a specific metric and they tell you exactly what that metric is there is no room for wishy washy thinking.
If you start seeing nV act like AMD in marketing, start expecting a really bad product.
Did its surprise you Ryzen losing in games by the margin it did? For me no it didn't that is why they never compared Ryzen to Intel in gaming before launch at least not with actual frame rates, cause they knew they will lose.
Yes things like that nV will do, when they have an inferior product, which they don't right now and haven't had in many generations.
But the flip side of it, AMD showing benchmarks with Vega FE with pro capable drives, vs Geforces without any pro optimizations, do you see nV doing that? Why do you suppose AMD did that? Cause they knew they were going to get creamed in a straight up benchmark. No doubt about it. RX forget it, gaming drivers forget it. Anyone still thinking that, really should rethink how their brain works and this came straight from AMD marketing those reasons too lol. When was the last time we heard nV use the same excuses? FX, when they had a bad product. We heard AMD say the somethings in the past too with the r600.
It all stems from the crap product. Believe the marketing or not believe the marketing doesn't really matter. Marketing only works when the product is good this type of market. And its easy to see when marketing is lying to us, its never straight forward. When there are layers of BS after BS without anything concrete, its all crap man. nV hasn't do that in many years around 15 years.
AMD has a bad habit of doing it even when their products are decent, because their image they feel is inferior. Which is true their branding is weaker. They don't know how to brand their products. Epyc really, what did they get the same marketing guy from CryTek? Ryzen? Sorry but all these Y's don't change the name to be cool.
How many times has nV changed the name of their graphics cards? Or ordering of the name, 3 times in the past 15 years? How many times has AMD done this? Oh many more times than that more like almost every 2 generations. How are they going to retain branding and product recognition when they do things like that?
After the A64 success WTF did they change the name to phenom? They just killed their brand when they did that, cause now when people see Phenom, they will think its new, lets look up the benchmarks.
IF they stuck with A64, phenom would have been more of a success. Again branding, they screwed themselves over.
I can give so many examples where AMD marketing shot themselves in their own foot multiple times in one launch. No other company in tech is so incompetent at marketing. When marketing is that bad get rid of everyone ya got on both the CPU and GPU side, from the top down, cause if you don't get rid of the top, the lower level people start thinking with the same f'ed up ideals as the top.
Last edited:
970 was more product flaw than marketing. 970 still gives the best performance value at that price for most people and the 3.5gb not changing performance or comparison, until the news came out. Would putting a 3.5gb up front affect the sales? Unlikely.
Michaelius
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2003
- Messages
- 4,684
I don't believe any marketing by principle but in last few years when Nvidia presentation promised 20% increase then reviews after launch showed around 20% gains across the board while AMD showed stuff like 2x480 in Ashes...
970 I didn't really care since I buy for what I see in professional tests not specification itself plus I bought it after 3,5GB was known.
As much as I want RTG to succeed and compete. There is a clear difference in marketing and product delivery. Now it might fire up true fanboys for AMD but Nvidia just brings the card, drops it infront of you and tells you how fast it is and it is that fast. No bullshit what so ever. They don't have to bring babes to a show and go on a tour and shit. They just show you the card, and tell you how much it costs and how fast its gonna be and profit!
Chris_B
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 29, 2001
- Messages
- 5,484
Nvidia once had some kind of driver release that showed something like a 70% bump in performance in the slides for it, from what i remember it was basically enabling sli for a game that had no support for it and thats where they got the number from. So yes, they both talk complete and utter shite about performance, they cherry-pick scenarios that give them the best numbers and then ramble on about it like its the case for all instances in the title in question.
TheLAWNoob
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2016
- Messages
- 330
If a game didn't support SLI and nVidia rolled out a driver that enabled SLI, then what's wrong with showing the gains?
AMD advertise the best case gains for their drivers all the time.
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 9,100
I think both companies suck and lie about marketing. I mean come on people they lied about the 970 GTX, and got caught...they even had a lawsuit and a settlement where I got $60 back for false advertisement.
AMD to me no better at marketing and PR.
The last good marketing that AMD did, was the 5870 and when they released eyefinity. That shit had Nvidia dumbfounded when it got released, it was because of that marketing I bought 2 5870 and 3x 24inch dell monitor. O and Kyle and his reviews didn't help either LOL
AMD to me no better at marketing and PR.
The last good marketing that AMD did, was the 5870 and when they released eyefinity. That shit had Nvidia dumbfounded when it got released, it was because of that marketing I bought 2 5870 and 3x 24inch dell monitor. O and Kyle and his reviews didn't help either LOL
You should not buy a card from AMD or Nvidia based on their marketing. Wait until proper reviews come out. Anybody who buys a card based on Marketing slides from either company is an idiot.
You and I might not, can't say that about many other people, was on facebook the other day, and guy bought a FX series CPU thinking it was Ryzen.
See the the difference between us and others?
Marketing works on the weak, uneducated minds, and look at AMD's async marketing, still have so many people thinking that way. That is bad marketing, it uses peoples weakness because their products are crap, that is the only way they can sell their products right now, out right fooling people into believing BS.
Marketing is used to hide the fact the products are inferior. When a product is good, there is no need to market, just show that its better and in this market you are set.
There are no need for graphs that are skewed or cherry picked.
You can't say anything other then BS that's why you just made it personal, can't use facts in your statements shouldn't post man. Simple.
nV's marketing is way ahead of AMD because their products are that much better.
If you can't accept that, then go buy a Vega FE right now and save the trouble of waiting for RX. Oh who needs marketing? So far what AMD has shown seems to be real. 1080 gaming performance and better productivity performance than Titan X right? Its real there is nothing fake about it. Its good marketing. How many people are still saying "it's not a gaming card though!" That's AMD's marketing working for them. Its bad though, cause its going to back fire when RX is released and the reality is RX is the same as FE for the most part.
Marketing 101, you don't make promises you can't keep. AMD promised RX will be faster than FE in games, it will be, but not by much and being so little, its going to really cause major disappointment.
Marketing's JOB is to set expectations and to sell products. Not to bloat their own ego and create disappointment at the end.
How many fuckin times have we seen AMD do this? Count them for me I'll give you till midnight tonight. Then if you don't, I'll write them out for you. Just go through ever single launch they have ever done, you will see it started after A64 and never stopped, almost ever single one of their products came out the same way when it came to marketing. Lots of hot air and promises that never materialize.
Just go through ever single product lunch. If you want then go through nV's product launches, then go through Intel's. You will see a huge pattern with AMD, they do BS ever single launch doesn't matter if the product is good or bad. nV and Intel, only do that when they fuck up.
Last edited:
Man I can't wait for vega!