AMD Radeon RX VEGA to Launch at SIGGRAPH 2017

[handymanshandle]

End of July? Geez I might already have the money to buy something better than that 470 I bought last month.

But then again with the 470 there's not a huge rush until I get a proper monitor that would need more graphical horsepower.

[mr moose]

Just now, laminutederire said:

For cars, Bugatti is getting its ass handed off by Koenigsegg on similar price ranges. They have faster cars with better acceleration, consumption efficiency, maneuverability and so on.

 

In the tech industry, look at pre-built,  apple is the king of overpriced products.

 

Yes but AMD not being behind technologically speaking make them in a tighter competition than they ever were with Intel for a few years. Because they only are behind in stupid people's mind. Rational people see they're competing with nvidia and don't say you have to buy a 3GB 1060 because.. nvidia etc.

They're not far behind on everything,  that was the point

That's still not the same thing though.  The difference in the car industry (and the audio for that matter) is that they are choices made by these companies, they are not hamstrung by finances while their competition is so far ahead (financially and with R+D) that they can afford to slow down.   Bugatti are not struggling to produce a car of equal quality, they are just not producing a car that is selling.  That is the key difference here.  Same with the other example given, Bose arte not struggling to compete, they are producing exactly what they need to remain competitive.   AMD on the other hand are struggling, they are struggling to keep pace with Nvidia both financially and with their R+D. 

[Grinners]

On 2017-5-31 at 11:42 AM, laminutederire said:

Yes but AMD not being behind technologically speaking make them in a tighter competition than they ever were with Intel for a few years. Because they only are behind in stupid people's mind. Rational people see they're competing with nvidia and don't say you have to buy a 3GB 1060 because.. nvidia etc.

They're not far behind on everything,  that was the point

I just had a look on anandtech, typed in a popular game (gtav) at a popular high end resolution (1440p) and these were the top 6 results:

 

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti Founders Edition
100.2

 

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Founders Edition
77.2

 

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Founders Edition
63.1

 

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980Ti
58

 

AMD Radeon R9 Fury X
51

 

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Founders Edition
45.1

 

 

5 of the top 6 cards being nVidia.

 

With the best AMD card being half the performance of the best nVidia card. 

 

But "they only are behind in stupid people's mind"...?

 

That is some major cognitive dissonance.

Edited June 1, 2017 by TheRandomness
Fixed formatting

[zMeul]

1 hour ago, Cartoons Plural said:

i can't imagine it's THAT bad.

they needed two VEGAs 

[Taf the Ghost]

3 minutes ago, zMeul said:

they needed two VEGAs 

Sniper Elite 4 ran fine on one @ 4K at the Financial Analyst day. We don't know why they used Crossfire, beyond just showing it works (well, as much as any multi-GPU setup "works). 

 

@Grinners I'm not normally one to be this picky on a point, but "technologically speaking" was a fairly clear statement. Tossing "cognitive dissonance" at someone doesn't make you sound intelligent when you're intentionally misreading what someone wrote.  Technology != Products Currently for Sale. 

[SteveGrabowski0]

6 hours ago, nerdslayer1 said:

for the right price, that's not bad, the gtx 1070 is a power efferent 980ti. 

But isn't it a 500 mm^2 die with HBM2? How can AMD possibly sell this card for a price competitive with the 1070 and not lose their asses on it? I can't imagine a die that big couldn't at least be more in line with the 1080 than the 1070 though, but still, it's going to be way more expensive to produce than a 1080 with its 314 mm^2 die and much cheaper GDDR5X memory.

[Grinners]

4 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

 

@Grinners I'm not normally one to be this picky on a point, but "technologically speaking" was a fairly clear statement. Tossing "cognitive dissonance" at someone doesn't make you sound intelligent when you're intentionally misreading what someone wrote.  Technology != Products Currently for Sale. 

Because being behind in the "performance" of "technology products" isn't an indicator of being "technologically behind"?

 

What nonsense. Take your double speak elsewhere. 

[dip_991]

2 hours ago, Taf the Ghost said:

Volta probably not until next Spring.  So there's still a while for that.  Plus, we really don't know how Vega will perform, nor we do we know how it's going to scale. That's really where the recent Nvidia architectures have been extremely good.

you are right on that, but titan x pascal was launched in Aug 2016, there is a slight chance we might get its volta version somewhere in Q4 (probability)

[The Benjamins]

14 minutes ago, zMeul said:

they needed two VEGAs 

were and who said they needed two? they just demoed 2 in crossfire running a game with no FPS stated, I can't see how this is a indication it is bad or good. it basicly give no information but it should work in 2x crossfire.

[mr moose]

9 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

 

 

@Grinners I'm not normally one to be this picky on a point, but "technologically speaking" was a fairly clear statement. Tossing "cognitive dissonance" at someone doesn't make you sound intelligent when you're intentionally misreading what someone wrote.  Technology != Products Currently for Sale. 

 

But calling people stupid becasue they have a different opinion* does sound intelligent?

 

*opinions that are well founded I might add.

[outercry]

I hate to say, but I think what I take from this, is what I was afraid of, and what I have mentioned few times previously as well.

 

Yet more delays, I wasn't expecting consumer Vega cards to be announced as such anyway, but I had hoped that there was a bit more concrete information to go about. So I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens in August (end of July?), but still are the cards even going to be available then? Or is it still going to be more waiting? Thinking about the problems and, if the reports of low numbers of units available at launch (whether this means conusmer cards or the frontier ones?), are true, the wait might be even longer still. Are we realistically going to have to wait until September, maybe even October, to even think about getting one?

 

Secondly, the performance. I know the cards that AMD were using could be any of the Vega cards coming up, but surely they would have used the ones that are the best, when they put them up against the 1080 Ti? And I'm aware that drivers can make them perform better and the usual, but it is rather worrying that they had to use 2 cards though, and still not match the Ti. Can someone explain to me, why would they even do that, AMD that is, from marketing/PR point-of-view? Why show their 2 cards going against their competitors' one (which isn't even their top card) and not beating it? Isn't this completely the opposite of what you should show, and would this indicate that one card alone isn't enough to beat the GTX 1080?

 

And also, I have to say about Volta, and even Navi, again. Aren't both of those meant to come out in 2018? Well, that's what the general idea seems to be anyway, plus Navi, if I remember correctly has been in AMDs' own roadmap for 2018. If they (Volta and Navi, whether you think AMD can stick to it or not, is a different matter) are coming out next year, and if Vega isn't even fully available until the latter part of this year, are people just going to skip it altogether? I think there is real chance that might happen.

 

All in all, this doesn't bode well competition-wise. Yes, Vega might still turn out to be amazing and, maybe, just maybe worth the wait, but warning signs are there that this might not be the case. If Vega doesn't deliver, NVidia can just keep charging us whatever they feel like.

[JediFragger]

6 minutes ago, outercry said:

t Volta, and even Navi, again. Aren't both of those meant to come out in 2018?

 

Navi will slip to 2019, no doubt. How far into 2019, I'd bet AMD's infamous 'H1'.

[raphidy]

We need more fuel for the VEGA train. The last sprint is coming.

[VagabondWraith]

4 minutes ago, raphidy said:

We need more fuel for the VEGA train. The last sprint is coming.

At this point, it's running on fumes with 10 miles to go to get to the gas station.

[Misanthrope]

Well I guess that for non high end Freesync monitor owners we can stop saying "Wait for Vega" now.

 

Oddly enough we're back at an optimal system being AMD CPU and Nvidia GPU which was my preference through the 2000s and all of the last 7 years except for this intel based rig I have right now.

[outercry]

39 minutes ago, JediFragger said:

 

Navi will slip to 2019, no doubt. How far into 2019, I'd bet AMD's infamous 'H1'.

Aye, I'm not hopefully at all. Let's get Vega out first and hope it will be before 2018 I'm very sceptical about AMDs' roadmaps and promises at the moment. Yeah, technically they are keeping to their word about Vegas' release schedule, but it was a dick move, seeing as they knew full well, that people weren't waiting for the FE card for professionals, 95%?? of people waiting and wanting a Vega card want the "normal" cards, not the super expensive card meant for professional use.

 

I seriously just hope that we will get some sort of competition. But I'm doubtful.

[DocSwag]

I've been planning on getting vega for almost a year as an upgrade (would've got Pascal but monitor has freesync).

 

THANKS A LOT AMD FOR PUSHING IT UNTIL FRIGGIN AUGUST.

[Coaxialgamer]

2900 XT anyone? 

[laminutederire]

1 hour ago, Grinners said:

 

Have you read everything I wrote?

Mid range cards are perfectly on par for both companies. Amd lagged behind in top end, and we'll see with vega what happens. Remains that Volta doesn't seem particularly groundbreakingly better than Pascal, so Vega being late is not necessarily a bad thing when you look at it against Volta.

(Choose another game and results are possibly a bit different by the way. One game isn't enough to generalize)

1 hour ago, Grinners said:

Because being behind in the "performance" of "technology products" isn't an indicator of being "technologically behind"?

 

What nonsense. Take your double speak elsewhere. 

Since the moment where technologically AMD uses HBM on consumer card when nvidia doesn't,  where relive have surpassed a bit shadow play,  since HBC is something possibly game changing, since AMD cards age much better being a sign they thought of it ahead, since they push an open platform for gpu computing, since they pushed Vulkan more than nvidia did.

All of that doesn't necessarily translate to immediate performance, but those are superior technologies. Even free sync is superior in the sense it doesn't need the nvidia package. 

You can find places where nvidia is ahead like tile based rendering etc, but Amd is ahead elsewhere. The only place AMD lags behind right now is in gaming and pour efficiency, both of them due to a non optimal resource utilisation they said they were working on with Vega and Navi, proof they know what to do to fix it, and understand what to do, because they're not totally lost.

[leadeater]

2 hours ago, laminutederire said:

For cars, Bugatti is getting its ass handed off by Koenigsegg on similar price ranges. They have faster cars with better acceleration, consumption efficiency, maneuverability and so on.

Only issue there is someone wanting to buy a Bugatti isn't looking for or wants a Koenigsegg, completely different design purpose cars. It's a bit like Quadro vs Telsa, both extremely expensive and very fast at the tasks they do but you don't buy a Quadro to do the task of a Tesla (even though you can and people do).

 

Or the difference between speakers made for SPL used in competitions versus speakers made to play music you actually listen to, pure specification wise the SPL speakers are better but sound like garbage.

 

P.S. Not implying Koenigsegg have bad points to them, or bad interior etc and I'd personally have one over a Bugatti but needed examples.

[laminutederire]

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

Only issue there is someone wanting to buy a Bugatti isn't looking for or wants a Koenigsegg, completely different design purpose cars. It's a bit like Quadro vs Telsa, both extremely expensive and very fast at the tasks they do but you don't buy a Quadro to do the task of a Tesla (even though you can and people do).

 

Or the difference between speakers made for SPL used in competitions versus speakers made to play music you actually listen to, pure specification wise the SPL speakers are better but sound like garbage.

 

P.S. Not implying Koenigsegg have bad points to them, or bad interior etc and I'd personally have one over a Bugatti but needed examples.

Why would they have different uses?

(I must have missed something because to me both were showing off cars supposed to be very fast)

[The Benjamins]

3 minutes ago, laminutederire said:

Why would they have different uses?

(I must have missed something because to me both were showing off cars supposed to be very fast)

Bugatti is a luxury cruiser first, super car second, when a Koenigsegg is Super car first luxury second. Koenigsegg has far more innovation then the Bugatti IMO.

[leadeater]

11 minutes ago, laminutederire said:

-snip-

And historically AMD/ATI has competed against Nvidia with smaller dies and less transistors than the comparative performance/price card which can be shown to mean AMD is able to create more performance efficient designs than Nvidia has. But it's also rather likely that the extra silicon/transistors in the Nvidia designs are the reason their on paper performances translates better to game performance.

 

As most of us know there are more ways to measure technology than just pure performance.

[yian88]

AMD is just sad, if there were multiple companies in the cpu/gpu market amd would have been one of the most hated companies and would have been long bankrupt and dead.

Ryzen released in beta stage, 2 release cycles only polaris 10 rx 400/500 expensive weak gpu's, that are all out of stock, and vega delayed probably because of HBM memory again, they are faar behind release cycle no matter how good is vega and pricepoint people have already bought their 1070-1080-1080ti, no one will buy vega at this point, and because of unavailable stock 400/500 series they are losing sales/market share to 1050ti/1060.

 

I have to 200$ for new GPU and im siiick of waiting for AMD stock, and high prices, in romania rx 570 4gb alone is 200$+ hardly worth it, even 1060 3gb is better and has the same price range where i live, so AMD loss here, i really want an rx 570/580 but doesnt look like its possible, im running out of patience, i need it for UnrealEngine 4 that keeps crashing on me due to low VRAM gtx 460 760mb crap.

[normpearii]

1 hour ago, VagabondWraith said:

At this point, it's running on fumes with 10 miles to go to get to the gas station.

...and they've turned left instead of right, and still haven't found a place to make a u-turn yet.