Radeon 7

[SpencerC]

49 minutes ago, EchoBlue said:

Can AMD GPUs do this too?

 

Lisa Su has already commented in a PCWorld interview done after the keynote that AMD is already looking into raytracing tech in their GPU's. However, at this point in time RTX and DLSS are nothing but gimmicks designed to sell cards. It's people like you that keep the GPU market where it's at. Let me explain:

 

1) People complain that AMD doesn't have a high end GPU

 

2) AMD releases a high end GPU

 

3) People go back to complaining that AMD doesn't have a high end GPU

 

4) People complain that AMD isn't pushing NVIDIA prices lower so that they can purchase cheaper NVIDIA cards, hence repeating the cycle again.

[Madgemade]

I don't think people will be 100% happy until AMD releases a GPU that hands down beats the top Nvidia card in every game and cost at least 10% less. People seem to expect so much more from AMD than from Nvidia. Especially when it's Nvidia who have pushed GPU prices to the highest level in many years, then expect AMD to be cheaper but that doesn't make business sense unless it would actually result in more profits.

The problem is that AMD don't have the architecture to make it happen right now, at least in gaming. For compute I'm hoping this is a RTX 2080 Ti / Titan killer. And if AMD's luxmark numbers are right then it will be and I may well buy it for that reason.

 

Until independent benchmarks are out we can't really know what this card can do. It might overclock great, or not at all. It's less than a month to wait...

[EchoBlue]

15 minutes ago, SpencerC said:

Lisa Su has already commented in a PCWorld interview done after the keynote that AMD is already looking into raytracing tech in their GPU's. However, at this point in time RTX and DLSS are nothing but gimmicks designed to sell cards. It's people like you that keep the GPU market where it's at. Let me explain:

 

1) People complain that AMD doesn't have a high end GPU

 

2) AMD releases a high end GPU

 

3) People go back to complaining that AMD doesn't have a high end GPU

 

4) People complain that AMD isn't pushing NVIDIA prices lower so that they can purchase cheaper NVIDIA cards, hence repeating the cycle again.

Woah there. 

I'm just trying to figure out which GPU to buy in my upcoming build. 

Obviously, I want what is best since I don't plan on upgrading for years to come. 

But I agree that the cycle you mentioned is true.

I just want to make sure what I am buying will all just simply work.

 

Why would you say that RTX and DLSS is nothing but gimmicks?

[Madgemade]

4 minutes ago, EchoBlue said:

Why would you say that RTX and DLSS is nothing but gimmicks?

If the games you play don't implement it then it is literally 100% worthless and will do nothing for you at all.

If you do play games that have implemented those features then you will be able to use them and get access to more realistic shadows / faster AA which are not currently available on AMD GPUs.

 

Google says that a gimmick is: a trick or device intended to attract attention, publicity, or trade.

So no they are not, they do actually function in games that you can buy and play, just not many, less than 10 I believe. How much that will go up in future it's hard to say. Remember what happened to PhysX? Could happen to this too be it's less likely as ray tracing is more useful in my opinion.

[EchoBlue]

39 minutes ago, Madgemade said:

If the games you play don't implement it then it is literally 100% worthless and will do nothing for you at all.

If you do play games that have implemented those features then you will be able to use them and get access to more realistic shadows / faster AA which are not currently available on AMD GPUs.

 

Google says that a gimmick is: a trick or device intended to attract attention, publicity, or trade.

So no they are not, they do actually function in games that you can buy and play, just not many, less than 10 I believe. How much that will go up in future it's hard to say. Remember what happened to PhysX? Could happen to this too be it's less likely as ray tracing is more useful in my opinion.

 

What happened to PhysX? 

Sorry I have not caught up in the tech world for years...

 

[Mattias Edeslatt]

2 hours ago, EchoBlue said:

Can AMD GPUs do this too?

 

No, and they have never stated that either.

 

What they have said is that they work on a ray tracing capable card that will release when the technology and adaption have matured from where it's at now.

[Nocte]

14 hours ago, EchoBlue said:

I guess in the end, for now, it is still not worth buying an AMD GPU?

What do you mean? In the midrange market AMD > NVIDIA right now.

The RX 580 8GBs are cheaper than 1060 6GBs both in NA and EU.

The RX 570s are cheaper than 1050 Ti's (and they perform like 1060 3GB's).

 

We cannot judge the Radeon 7 until we have benchmarks. All talk is just speculation at this point.

[AlTech]

5 hours ago, EchoBlue said:

Can AMD GPUs do this too?

 

Not right now, although that is more of a gimmick at the moment as only one game currently has Ray tracing RTX support. And I should note that to get that extra tiny bit better visuals you sacrifice so much frame rate. Current RTX cards really can't do RTX at a great frame rate.

 

It's definitely not a priority for game devs with most gamers not having Ray Tracing capable hardware.

[Mira Yurizaki]

If the definition of a "gimmick" is "not widely used", or the more extreme "not supported everywhere," then it's very likely your hardware has a gimmick somewhere in there.

 

So if you want to pull out the "gimmick" card, I suggest you take a long look at your setup and how it's used.

[ChaseDown]

On 1/10/2019 at 10:00 AM, i_build_nanosuits said:

no it's not, because it doesn't have ray tracing/DLSS no tensor cores no RT cores and it will pull a shit load more power than a 2080...

what it will compete with is last gen GTX 1080ti in terms of performance, features and power consumption it will be a lot more like a 1080ti which is still a very powerful card but for 700$ it's a rip of.

While your not wrong about the Ray tracing and dlss. I would say its almost a irrelevant point because very few games right now use it, I know there are many that"eventually" will, but at the moment a 2080 is just an expensive 1080 ti so a card that can perform like it or slightly better( minus ray tracing and dlss) at a similar price is fine.  I just think a vega 56 for USD 330 bucks or a vega 64 for usd 399 is still a better buy!

[dayfall]

On 1/10/2019 at 2:58 PM, EchoBlue said:

I am not getting it. 

AMD Radeon 7 competing with Nvidia RTX 2080?

the current thinking amd has is its supposed to be a game/production card with the 16gb of HB2 justifying production side ( also hbm2 added about $150 to the price), but in reality its  a 2080 level card that doesn't offer the same feature set as the 2080 like ray tracing and DLSS, which love or hate is a key selling point and is why they can charge $700usd+, we know navi is coming in some form but amd are ether still testing it OR don't think its worthy of a CES keynote, most reactions iv seen are the same as everyone's here, a mix of "umm ok,what?" to "what a joke",  the only thing i see pushing people to the radeon 7 it is if they want the free games, they don't care about the things you get with RTX like DLSS etc, and this is all with  the assumption it can go blow to blow with the 2080 in games, which if it can't its not worth $700, i have my own ideas on why they showed this card but there based on leaks and rumours and not fact.  

 

Spoiler

in one of adoredtv's videos he says he got a leakier telling him AMD ramped  up production  on vega 2 now vega 7 but stopped when they started to get the navi chips back, i reckon these radeon 7 cards are from that first vega 2 run and instead of cutting chips down to make lower end vega cards there using the best chips they had to put out a high end vega card, this way they can release navi later on ad mid to low end cards and keep vega 7 as the high end, and by the time vega 7 stocks run low they can pop out a new high end navi card as the replacement, this is based on leaks and no real facts but i have a feeling thats what we are seeing.   

 

[Jumper118]

9 hours ago, EchoBlue said:

Woah there. 

I'm just trying to figure out which GPU to buy in my upcoming build. 

Obviously, I want what is best since I don't plan on upgrading for years to come. 

But I agree that the cycle you mentioned is true.

I just want to make sure what I am buying will all just simply work.

 

Why would you say that RTX and DLSS is nothing but gimmicks?

If you want a card that lasts a long time get an amd one. The 7970 lasted for ever. The r9 290 lasted forever. They have more vram and drivers get improvements for older cards unlike nvidia. 

[i_build_nanosuits]

1 hour ago, Jumper118 said:

If you want a card that lasts a long time get an amd one. The 7970 lasted for ever. The r9 290 lasted forever. They have more vram and drivers get improvements for older cards unlike nvidia. 

Valid point...

But...4gb Fury X or 6gb 980ti?

Vega 64 or 11gb GTX 1080ti?

Now at least with Radeon 7 they have something to match a good old used 1080ti...but 700$ man i mean...

 

Also, if you're somebody who is upgrading a little more often an Nvidia card is much easier to re-sell and also they don't loose anywhere near as much value

 

Also... Check this out:

https://babeltechreviews.com/amds-fine-wine-revisited-the-fury-x-vs-the-gtx-980-ti/3/

Quote

 

The GTX 980 Ti is now even faster than the Fury X for the majority of our games.  Out of 105 individual benches, the Fury X only wins 26 and ties two.  Two years ago, AMD won 29 out of 108 benches, but in many cases its performance was much closer to the GTX 980 Ti’s.

It appears that AMD may no longer be longer prioritizing vRAM optimization for Fury X, and in a few cases, its performance has fallen off of a cliff at higher resolutions compared with its NVIDIA competitor.

 

 

[SpencerC]

3 hours ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

Valid point...

But...4gb Fury X or 6gb 980ti?

Vega 64 or 11gb GTX 1080ti?

Now at least with Radeon 7 they have something to match a good old used 1080ti...but 700$ man i mean...

 

Also, if you're somebody who is upgrading a little more often an Nvidia card is much easier to re-sell and also they don't loose anywhere near as much value

 

Also... Check this out:

https://babeltechreviews.com/amds-fine-wine-revisited-the-fury-x-vs-the-gtx-980-ti/3/

 

You do realize half of the Fury's problem was its lack of VRAM?

[i_build_nanosuits]

1 hour ago, SpencerC said:

You do realize half of the Fury's problem was its lack of VRAM?

yes and the other half is driver and game developer support, power consumption, noise and lack of overclocking capabilities...

[Madgemade]

7 hours ago, Jumper118 said:

If you want a card that lasts a long time get an amd one. The 7970 lasted for ever. The r9 290 lasted forever. They have more vram and drivers get improvements for older cards unlike nvidia. 

Yep I'm still on the R9 290 (non X) and with a custom cooler it runs at 10% OC and gets my 60FPS on BF1@4K with medium settings (no AA). And this isn't even the 8GB version. Compared to it's competitor at the the (GTX 780) it has now completely overtaken it in modern games.

The so called "Fine Wine" effect. Here is shows that the 780 is 15% slower than the 390(290 rebranded) in BF1. So yes AMD ages far better due to their more static architecture.

If it's true that the Radeon VII has the compute performance they claim then it's a 2080 Ti killer in the compute department.

If you look on GPU-DB the 2080 Ti has 13,448 GFLOPS of FP32 and 420 GFLOPS FP64 (gimped to ensure Quadro sales are not affected)

If you look at the Radeon 7 you can see that it has 13,824 GFLOPS of FP32 and 6,912 FP64 (not gimped as this really is a Pro card)

 

HBM is not that great for gaming though really, as has been said the Fury has not aged as well as GDDR AMD cards.

For compute I may well buy this card if the number are right, especially in FP32 and FP64 performance the only cards which beat it are RTX Quadro and Volta. 2080 Ti might be close but it's much more money.

[Jumper118]

11 hours ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

Valid point...

But...4gb Fury X or 6gb 980ti?

Vega 64 or 11gb GTX 1080ti?

Now at least with Radeon 7 they have something to match a good old used 1080ti...but 700$ man i mean...

 

Also, if you're somebody who is upgrading a little more often an Nvidia card is much easier to re-sell and also they don't loose anywhere near as much value

 

Also... Check this out:

https://babeltechreviews.com/amds-fine-wine-revisited-the-fury-x-vs-the-gtx-980-ti/3/

 

the fury x and vega were both lower vram. the vega 64 was also not against a 1080ti, it was against the 1080, which was also 8gb, so the vega will last the same as 1080. the readeon vii vs 2080 the amd card has 16gb vs 8gb. this will make it way better later on.  

[StarsMars]

Not to dig up a thread, but rather than making a new one

 

Why is AMD not doing partner cards on the VII?

Are they not doing partner cards on future cards?