Amd radeon VII

[Zando_]

5 minutes ago, SSJGodemis said:

Vega are in no way great overclocking unless you under volt the cards. Even then you are limited. In the same video even with an OC'd Vega 56 it was trading blows with an OCD RTX 2060 and drawing more heat and power.  It was Steve at his most biased I have ever seen. 

 

The RE2 Built in VRAM usage is inaccurate as shown by digital foundry. I am running a RTX 2080 Ti and shows I am using 13gb of Vram in game at 4k everything at high(8x) but in RTSS its really only at 7.5GB.   Thats why I am still pushing over 70fps most of the game. 

 

You will never use 16GB of VRAM at the performance level of the 7. The card will hit its limit before it can reach its VRAM limit. 

 

Finally, if you dont care about hybrid rendering(see Wolfenstein 2), ray tracing and DLSS you still get all of this for the same price as AMD cards.  The RTX 2060 is the same price as the Vega 56, performs very similar in normal 3d gaming but offers more features for the future. Same goes for the RTX 2070 vs Vega 64 and now the Radeon 7 vs RTX 2080. 

 

The only way AMD would be considered a good value is if the card was less money than its competition which its not.   

 

I can be handy for certain niches though, AMD GPUs work better with macOS if you're hackintoshing IIRC, and they've got native support in Linux. Will agree on the VRAM thing though, even at 4K Very High I've seen up to 9.5GB used in Rise of The Tomb Raider, and it uses 8.5GB at 1080p, it's pretty VRAM hungry. Even the 11GB on a 1080 Ti is probs fine for most games at 4K. 

 

As to the overclocking thing, you're missing the point. You can push a Vega card farther than a Polaris/Turing card. Whether or not it outperforms it is irrelevant. Just like I can push a 3Ghz Xeon to 4.5GHz or higher on X58. Sure it won't outperform an 8700K, but that's already got a stock turbo of 4.7GHz so comparatively it doesn't have as much OC headroom as the older Xeon. Also when it comes to pushing overclocks I don't think enthusiasts are worried about power draw and heat except for how it effects the temps and thus overclocking headroom. Once I move I plan to get my X58 rigs running again and dive into more overclocking, and 2 X5675s when OCed can pull over 500W, and heck even the single CPU boards have the capacity to feed 600W to the CPU, but I won't be on anything better than water so I doubt I'll ever pull that. But really when Steve is raving about how well the Vega 56 OCs, he's talking about how far you can push it above stock. If it fights a 2070 (which they did when they gave a V56 a 256% power target and such) then awesome, but the real win is that there's so much potential for tinkering. Same as how he's back and forth with Jay on the whole RIP Jay/RIP GN thing, they just enjoy pushing hardware to the absolute limit, and the harder they can push it the more happy they are. 

 

Keep in mind the Vega cards are monsters in a lot of compute tasks, able to beat GPUs that cost a lot more. You can snag a Vega 64 for $400 new, or a Vega FE for $400 or so used, and either will outperform a 1080 Ti in Blender and such. Wouldn't be surprised if prosumers go for the Radeon VII same as how they did for the Vega FE. IDK if they're doing signed drivers though, so they may have lost a selling point there. Vega FE has an advantage in that it supports signed drivers for apps that need it, and even at the $999 MSRP it's cheaper than a comparable Quadro. 

 

Although yeah, they haven't been killing it on the value side of the high end like they have with midrange cards, hopefully Navi can get AMD back into the properly high end market. I do hope to snag a Radeon VII anyways, since I really like AMD cards for reasons ranging from tweakability to the aforementioned supporting other OSes better (I love to tinker with all sorts of stuff from time to time) and the drivers/control panel being better. 

[Zeitec]

It'll probably perform like a 2080 at the same cost as a 2080 while consuming more power than a 2080 and having a less enticing featureset than a 2080. 16GB of RAM is nice I guess. 

[TahoeDust]

1 hour ago, Zeitec said:

It'll probably perform like a 2080 at the same cost as a 2080 while consuming more power than a 2080 and having a less enticing featureset than a 2080. 16GB of RAM is nice I guess. 

I think it will be closer to the 1080 than the 2080.

[THraShArD]

I have a feeling based on the smoke signals Gold & Silver will be going Parabolic soon.  Electronic prices will be going up along with it.

[Shogunluffy_1982]

long live the king  diamond only one will get it I think haha.