AMD vs. Nvidia 2017 graphics card line-up speculation

[GinjaFox]

I thought I'd post this spreadsheet of what I think this year's graphics card line-up is going. Yes, I know I've included last year's cards in this chart. And yes, I know this is pure speculation and is just me getting my hopes up. But hey, I made it and I might as well show someone.

[GinjaFox]

I just realized there is a typo. Under the 470's vram it should say 4 gb not 8 gb.

[TheNuzziNuzz]

I agree with this.

[Aereldor]

Amd's x60, x70, and x80 cards have never been their fastest ones. The R7 260, R7 260x, R9 270, R9 270x, R7 360, R7 370, RX 460, and RX 470. They will not compete with high-end cards like the GTX 1070 and 1080. When they do arrive, they will offer improvements over the existing GPUs.

 

R7 260/260x --> R7 360 --> RX 460. (RX 560?)

R9 270/270x ---> R7 370 --> RX 470. (RX 570?)

R9 280/280x --> R9 380 --> RX 480. (RX 580?)

 

Vega cards are not meant to succeeded the RX 460, 470, and 480 either, which are budget to mid-range cards. They are meant to replace AMD's current high-end lineup of the R9 Fury and the R9 Fury X.

 

What is this based on? Have you really been looking at AMD's previous GPU releases? Because it seems like you're quite new to all of this. Rather than create lists like this, I would recommend that you participate in discussions and post questions to find out more.

[manikyath]

uhm.. i think you know things about the 1080ti most of us dont yet

(and the same for vega on that part.)

[dizmo]

Why would they make a 480x2?

[manikyath]

2 minutes ago, dizmo said:

Why would they make a 480x2?

i know they have a dual GPU something with M.2 slots on the back for rendering stuff, but i seriously doubt that thing will be 400 buckaroo's, or even be a radeon card at that. (or anything else unreleased on that chart for that matter...)

[dizmo]

25 minutes ago, manikyath said:

i know they have a dual GPU something with M.2 slots on the back for rendering stuff, but i seriously doubt that thing will be 400 buckaroo's, or even be a radeon card at that. (or anything else unreleased on that chart for that matter...)

There's the Pro Duo as well, but that's based on the old architecture. Decent performance...but that price...and 3x8pin? Really?

A card with m.2 slots on it definitely wouldn't be for the average consumer.

I just don't see them putting out a 480x2 this late in the cycle with Vega on the horizon. I hope Vega does well though. I need a solid card for 2560x1080p

 

[GinjaFox]

7 hours ago, Aereldor said:

Amd's x60, x70, and x80 cards have never been their fastest ones. The R7 260, R7 260x, R9 270, R9 270x, R7 360, R7 370, RX 460, and RX 470. They will not compete with high-end cards like the GTX 1070 and 1080. When they do arrive, they will offer improvements over the existing GPUs.

 

R7 260/260x --> R7 360 --> RX 460. (RX 560?)

R9 270/270x ---> R7 370 --> RX 470. (RX 570?)

R9 280/280x --> R9 380 --> RX 480. (RX 580?)

 

Vega cards are not meant to succeeded the RX 460, 470, and 480 either, which are budget to mid-range cards. They are meant to replace AMD's current high-end lineup of the R9 Fury and the R9 Fury X.

 

What is this based on? Have you really been looking at AMD's previous GPU releases? Because it seems like you're quite new to all of this. Rather than create lists like this, I would recommend that you participate in discussions and post questions to find out more.

Except that a new architecture (which Vega IS) typically constitutes a rollover of the numbered series of cards. Polaris was simply as stop-gap until they were ready with vega, and so Nvidia didn't dominate the market completely. Also, yes its possible the HBM cards might be branded as "Fury" cards. However, given that the "Fury" brand is fairly new and didn't quite live up to people's expectaion of the card, it's doubtful that they will stick with that moniker. BTW, did you forget about the 290/290x and 390/390x in your comparison? Those were meant to compete with the 970 and 980 cards, where as Fury was meant to compete with the 980 Ti.  Also, branding aside, I do believe that the cards under the Vega 10 part of my chart is what we will see released next by AMD in terms of performance. And I do believe the Vega 11 will be one card, and probably released around September - November. 

[GinjaFox]

7 hours ago, manikyath said:

uhm.. i think you know things about the 1080ti most of us dont yet

(and the same for vega on that part.)

like I said, pure speculation. I'm just piecing together past tends I've seen and other speculative articles I've read, as well as what little information AMD has let slip, to try and get the whole picture.

[GinjaFox]

7 hours ago, dizmo said:

Why would they make a 480x2?

This one is more based on a rumor that has be floating around since about November of last year about dual-card that was spotted. A lot of people believed it to be the RX 490 and that is was a dual Polaris card. However given that dual cards are typically the gpu moniker and then x2 at the end, I do not believe we will see a 490 card. I do believe there is a dual gpu card that we have not seen yet (AMD LOVES their dual cards). But whether or not that card is Polaris or Vega based I'm unsure of. RX 480x2 makes a bit of sense if the price it a little lower than 2 480s. They kept pushing the marketing that 2 480s beat a 1080 at less cost. Making a dual card even though it doesn't make a whole lot of sense sounds a lot like AMD to me.

[manikyath]

39 minutes ago, GinjaFox said:

like I said, pure speculation. I'm just piecing together past tends I've seen and other speculative articles I've read, as well as what little information AMD has let slip, to try and get the whole picture.

the thing is, literally nothing on that list that isnt released, has even been confirmed in any way, all you're doing is making an excel sheet with GPU names, add prices, add an amount and type of vram, and add a tflop number.

 

literally anyone who can use excel can do what you did, there's no truths in this table other than that you seeminly sorely want AMD to come out on top.

[othertomperson]

 

Bearing in mind this guy is a massive AMD fanboy, it doesn't look good as far as gaming goes for Vega. On the other hand, the rumour on the Nvidia side is that they are just refreshing Pascal this year, with maybe better vram or something and slightly higher clocks but otherwise basically the same thing. So AMD won't be competing with GP 102 at all, but will have a full lineup of products from the Polaris RX 460 competing with the GTX 1050/2050, right through to the "RX 490" (?) competing with the 1080/2080. It won't be a good year in terms of leaps of gaming performance, but at least 2017 should be a cheaper year with more choices than 2016 was.

[GinjaFox]

10 minutes ago, manikyath said:

the thing is, literally nothing on that list that isnt released, has even been confirmed in any way, all you're doing is making an excel sheet with GPU names, add prices, add an amount and type of vram, and add a tflop number.

 

literally anyone who can use excel can do what you did, there's no truths in this table other than that you seeminly sorely want AMD to come out on top.

I know that, I originally made just for me (I like to organize my thoughts). I posted this to get other people's thoughts and opinions because I hadn't seen a topic similar to this on the forum. I'm not asking you to agree, in fact, I encourage you not to. I just wanted a post with discussion on upcoming gpu speculation on both sides. I'm obviously an AMD fan but that doesn't have to hamper the conversation.

Edited January 21, 2017 by GinjaFox
Gammar =P

[NTDaws]

I think I am gonna go return my gpu and cpu tomorrow. I want to test Ryzen. 

[GinjaFox]

10 minutes ago, othertomperson said:

 

Bearing in mind this guy is a massive AMD fanboy, it doesn't look good as far as gaming goes for Vega. On the other hand, the rumour on the Nvidia side is that they are just refreshing Pascal this year, with maybe better vram or something and slightly higher clocks but otherwise basically the same thing. So AMD won't be competing with GP 102 at all, but will have a full lineup of products from the Polaris RX 460 competing with the GTX 1050/2050, right through to the "RX 490" (?) competing with the 1080/2080. It won't be a good year in terms of leaps of gaming performance, but at least 2017 should be a cheaper year with more choices than 2016 was.

Thanks for adding to the discussion!! More posts like this =)

Edited January 21, 2017 by GinjaFox
Grammar

[GinjaFox]

2 minutes ago, Dawson Wehage said:

I think I am gonna go return my gpu and cpu tomorrow. I want to test Ryzen. 

Wait for the reviews, see if the price/performance is worth it (we'll most likely get more info by March 3rd).

[manikyath]

1 minute ago, GinjaFox said:

I know that, I originally made just for me (I like to organize my thoughts). I posted this to get other people's thoughts and opinions because I hadn't seen a topic similar to this on the forum. I'm no asking you to agree, in fact, I encourage you not to. I just wanted a post with discussion on upcoming gpu speculation on both side. I'm obviously an AMD fan but that doesn't have to hamper the conversation.

on that note, i'm gonna encourage you not to go down the road of speculation, because you and i may both understand the concept of speculation but someone else might not, and that's what gets us the retards who take that chart as a proven truth (it's a chart, it has to be true, right?) and starts to buy components now basing their build on nothing but the belief of whatever they have their eye set to getting released the moment rumors say it will, with the exact specs the rumors say it will.

 

point in case, the person that just said he's gonna return his cpu and gpu *tomorrow* to test a product that may easily be a month away from being on shelves, and as of yet hs no pricing details available.

 

if you want my honest to god opinion on this matter, i'm some of those folks hoping that nvidia is playing with all the rumor mills, and there wont be a 1080ti, because it would prove to the world that speculation and rumors usually dont have any base other than someone with a slight corner of common sense guessing what the details will be.

[GinjaFox]

4 minutes ago, manikyath said:

on that note, i'm gonna encourage you not to go down the road of speculation, because you and i may both understand the concept of speculation but someone else might not, and that's what gets us the retards who take that chart as a proven truth (it's a chart, it has to be true, right?) and starts to buy components now basing their build on nothing but the belief of whatever they have their eye set to getting released the moment rumors say it will, with the exact specs the rumors say it will.

 

point in case, the person that just said he's gonna return his cpu and gpu *tomorrow* to test a product that may easily be a month away from being on shelves, and as of yet hs no pricing details available.

 

if you want my honest to god opinion on this matter, i'm some of those folks hoping that nvidia is playing with all the rumor mills, and there wont be a 1080ti, because it would prove to the world that speculation and rumors usually dont have any base other than someone with a slight corner of common sense guessing what the details will be.

Fair point, but with that out of the way, I'm going to try to keep this thread going and hopefully be responding at least daily. If you're on this forum it's fairly safe to say that you watch LinusTechTips. I'd like to believe most people follow his advice and 'wait for the reveiws'.

[manikyath]

1 minute ago, GinjaFox said:

I'd like to believe most people follow his advice and 'wait for the reveiws'.

you must be new here, because thats a very saddening minority

[i_build_nanosuits]

Vega even in doom vulcan which favor AMD a whole bunch was not able to sustain a constant 60FPS at 4K Ultra where as using the same settings a GTX 1080 get around 75FPS average and 80FPS a lot of times...

 

I think it's gonna go like this:

Titan XP

GTX 1080ti

GTX 1080

RX 490X

GTX 1070

RX 490

[GinjaFox]

1 minute ago, manikyath said:

you must be new here, because thats a very saddening minority

By about one year. I've always loved computers, My Dad even works in the industry. But this month last year was when first started buying parts for my first computer build. I made a lot of mistakes early on that I wont be repaying in my next build now I am more knowledgeable.

[GinjaFox]

3 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

Vega even in doom vulcan which favor AMD a whole bunch was not able to sustain a constant 60FPS where as using the same settings a GTX 1080 get around 75FPS average and 80FPS a lot of times...

 

I forget who said it exactly, but one of the major tech YouTubers said that their AMD rep had told them that the driver optimization for the card at that point was virtually non-existent, that they were basically using a fiji driver.

[i_build_nanosuits]

10 minutes ago, GinjaFox said:

I forget who said it exactly, but one of the major tech YouTubers said that their AMD rep had told them that the driver optimization for the card at that point was virtually non-existent, that they were basically using a fiji driver.

yes of course there is a lot of headroom for driver improvements and in the long run it will match a GTX 1080 and will probably do better in AMD optimized titles.

[GinjaFox]

29 minutes ago, GinjaFox said:

I forget who said it exactly, but one of the major tech YouTubers said that their AMD rep had told them that the driver optimization for the card at that point was virtually non-existent, that they were basically using a fiji driver.

Found it. It was Kyle.