"AMD Rx Vega - Apple debuts two Vega GPUs unveiling the specs for July's gaming cards"

[Tigermanic]

We could be getting Vega GPUs in late July, and if specs are to be believed, things are looking great for Team Red!

Quote

AMD have announced the Radeon Pro Vega, the GPU which is set to make Apple's new iMac Pro the fastest all-in-one machine that's ever spat out 1s and 0s. And if these aren't the specs for July's first two RX Vega cards I'll eat a Frontier Edition...

 

The iMac Pro is coming in December this year, but don't worry, you'll be able to jam a Vega GPU into your gaming rig before then. The AMD Radeon RX Vega cards will be arriving at the end of July with a launch around the SIGGRAPH event.

...

The numbers refer to the amount of next-gen compute units the different Vega cores will contain, which means the top end chip will house 4,096 cores and the lower end chip will have 3,584 cores. They will also utilise different levels of HBM2 memory too, coming in both 16GB and 8GB flavours.

It's probably not much of a stretch to think these will be the essential specs of the RX Vega chips which are due to be launched at SIGGRAPH next month. AMD habitually release their GPU cores in pairs so having a 64 CU and 56 CU version for us PC gamers at launch wouldn't be much of a surprise.

The post then goes on to talk about potential pricing schemes and comparing Vega to RX 500 and GTX 1080

 

 

Spoiler

Radeon Vega Frontier Edition	Radeon RX 580	GTX 1080 Ti
GPU	AMD Vega 10	AMD Polaris 20	Nvidia GP102
Architecture	GCN 4.0	GCN 4.0	Pascal
Lithography	14nm FinFET	14nm FinFET	16nm FinFET
Stream Processors	4,096	2,304	3,584
Texture units	256	144	224
Render output units	64	32	88
Memory Capacity	16GB HBM2	8GB GDDR5	11GB GDDR5X
Memory bus	2,048-bit	256-bit	352-bit
Performance	12.5 TFLOPs	5.8 TFLOPs	11.8 TFLOPs
TDP	< 300W	185W	250W

Edited June 7, 2017 by Tigermanic

[Energycore]

Please change your post to fit our Tech News Guidelines.

 

I have moved the thread to Graphics Cards, shoot me a mention @Energycore once you've met the guidelines and I'll move it back

[pyrojoe34]

24 minutes ago, Wikiforce said:

What apple has to do with amd gpus? Maybe they will put some in their macbook but that's mobile chip and not mainstream.

They've been using AMD dGPUs for a long time. I'm certain their new lineups (both iMac and higher end Macbooks) will use AMD as well. They will also likely use them in their eGPUs.

[Energycore]

30 minutes ago, Wikiforce said:

What apple has to do with amd gpus? Maybe they will put some in their macbook but that's mobile chip and not mainstream.

Their relationship with AMD is pretty strong actually; AMD reserved the full Polaris 11 chip for Apple before the RX 560 had launched.

[Humbug]

 

[Coaxialgamer]

1 hour ago, Wikiforce said:

What apple has to do with amd gpus? Maybe they will put some in their macbook but that's mobile chip and not mainstream.

Apple has already confirmed their new Imac pro will have a vega gpu .

[Doobeedoo]

Nothing I already didn't know though. I know AMD wants to sell Vega FE before RX variants though Apple and others maybe may request many so RX Vega release was set further.

[ApolloFury]

1 hour ago, Energycore said:

Their relationship with AMD is pretty strong actually; AMD reserved the full Polaris 11 chip for Apple before the RX 560 had launched.

Raja is from Apple.

[Energycore]

20 minutes ago, ApolloFury said:

Raja is from Apple.

Well he worked there. It's not like Apple is his parents

[PCGuy_5960]

1 minute ago, Energycore said:

Well he worked there. It's not like Apple is his parents

How do you know? 

[Prysin]

4 minutes ago, Energycore said:

Well he worked there. It's not like Apple is his parents

An apple a day keeps the doctor away. See if you can figure it out.

[Energycore]

Just now, Prysin said:

An apple a day keeps the doctor away. See if you can figure it out.

 Raja's a Ph.D?

[Prysin]

4 minutes ago, Energycore said:

 Raja's a Ph.D?

close, but not quite.

[Curufinwe_wins]

Only beating the 1080ti by 1 TFLOP is pretty bad news. Means it won't come close to 1080ti performance, and probably won't beat the 1080 by all that much.

 

480 sits at 5.8 TFLOPS, the 1060 is only 4.4 and they have the same performance (+/- 3%).

 

The 1080 is already north of 9 TFLOPS.

Using the same AMD to Nvidia TFLOP efficiency (4.4/5.8*12.5)="9.5 Nvidia TFLOPs Projected"

 

Now with that said... we obviously expect Vega to be more computationally efficient than Polaris, but it would be a nice boost to beat the 1080, the 1080ti is completely out of reach.

[cj09beira]

5 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Only beating the 1080ti by 1 TFLOP is pretty bad news. Means it won't come close to 1080ti performance, and probably won't beat the 1080 by all that much.

 

480 sits at 5.8 TFLOPS, the 1060 is only 3.8 and they have the same performance (+/- 3%).

 

The 1080 is already north of 9 TFLOPS.

Using the same AMD to Nvidia TFLOP efficiency (3.8/5.8*12.5)="8.2 Nvidia TFLOPs Projected"

 

Now with that said... we obviously expect Vega to be more computationally efficient than Polaris, but it would be a notable improvement even to be able to beat the 1080, the 1080ti is completely out of reach.

 

the problem is that your tflop rating for the 1060 is at base clock and we all know that in games its running way above that.

Vega is increasing the geometry, rasterizer perf/flop and other few things that make it perform better at the same tflops rating.

[Curufinwe_wins]

10 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

the problem with that is that one vega is increasing the geometry perf/flop and other few things that make it perform better at the same tflops rating.

and the main one which is that your tflop rating for the 1060 is at base clock and we all know that in games its running way above that

Fair enough, I mentioned that already. Either way, beating the 1080ti is literally unthinkable here, and nothing AMD has presented suggests they believe they can either (whereas the Fury was being suggested as a titan x value-killer, and the the 980ti just made it DOA.)

 

Which again means AMD is going to be a generation behind on the top end...

14 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

 

Now with that said... we obviously expect Vega to be more computationally efficient than Polaris, but it would be a notable improvement even to be able to beat the 1080, the 1080ti is completely out of reach.

 

Oh, my tflops were wrong anyways. It is 4.4, not 3.8. That puts it expected better than the reference 1080 "compute for gaming equivalent" (up to 5% + whatever generational improvements are seen).

 

Which is fine, but it won't be able to touch the 1080ti and that is pretty disappointing.

[VagabondWraith]

1 minute ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Fair enough, I mentioned that already. Either way, beating the 1080ti is literally unthinkable here, and nothing AMD has presented suggests they believe they can either (whereas the Fury was being suggested as a titan x value-killer, and the the 980ti just made it DOA.)

 

Which again means AMD is going to be a generation behind on the top end...

 

Oh, my tflops were wrong anyways. It is 4.4, not 3.8. That puts it expected better than the reference 1080 "compute for gaming equivalent" (up to 5% + whatever generational improvements are seen).

 

Which is fine, but it won't be able to touch the 1080ti and that is pretty disappointing.

Yeah, at this point, you're better off waiting for Volta which will crush Vega to bits and pieces. AMD is WAYYYYYY too late imo and there's no point in buying it unless you have FreeSync or are a hardcore red team fanboy.

[cj09beira]

1 minute ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Fair enough, I mentioned that already. Either way, beating the 1080ti is literally unthinkable here, and nothing AMD has presented suggests they believe they can either (whereas the Fury was being suggested as a titan x value-killer, and the the 980ti just made it DOA.)

 

Which again means AMD is going to be a generation behind on the top end...

 

Oh, my tflops were wrong anyways. It is 4.4, not 3.8. That puts it expected better than the reference 1080 "compute for gaming equivalent" (up to 5% + whatever generational improvements are seen).

 

Which is fine, but it won't be able to touch the 1080ti and that is pretty disappointing.

amd from what they said they doubled the geometry output per clock, and added tiled based rasterizer both represent possible great gains, especially on nvidea games that use tessellation to the extreme with the intent to undermine amd cards perf

[PCGuy_5960]

21 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Now with that said... we obviously expect Vega to be more computationally efficient than Polaris, but it would be a nice boost to beat the 1080, the 1080ti is completely out of reach.

I don't think this will happen at launch, because AMD's launch drivers suck. In 6 months, it will probably be 0-5% better than the 1080.

[cj09beira]

2 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

I don't think this will happen at launch, because AMD's launch drivers suck. In 6 months, it will probably be 0-5% better than the 1080.

vega will definitely be faster than a 1080 even at launch

[PCGuy_5960]

Just now, cj09beira said:

vega will definitely be faster than a 1080 even at launch

I am not 100% sure that this will be the case TBH

[79wjd]

17 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

vega will definitely be faster than a 1080 even at launch

I wouldn't be so sure of that. AMD's launch drivers have a history of being shit.

[Starelementpoke]

33 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Fair enough, I mentioned that already. Either way, beating the 1080ti is literally unthinkable here, and nothing AMD has presented suggests they believe they can either (whereas the Fury was being suggested as a titan x value-killer, and the the 980ti just made it DOA.)

 

Which again means AMD is going to be a generation behind on the top end...

 

Oh, my tflops were wrong anyways. It is 4.4, not 3.8. That puts it expected better than the reference 1080 "compute for gaming equivalent" (up to 5% + whatever generational improvements are seen).

 

Which is fine, but it won't be able to touch the 1080ti and that is pretty disappointing.

I mean, this is assuming VEGA is just Almost pretty much the exact same as Polaris. 

[Starelementpoke]

4 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

I wouldn't be so sure of that. AMD's launch drivers have a history of being shit.

Just watch, annndddd Nat. 20!

[leadeater]

4 hours ago, Tigermanic said:

GPU: AMD Vega 10

Architecture: GCN 4.0

GCN 4.0? I think their information is wrong on that one