AMD's Vega architecture previewed at ve.ga

[Mr.Meerkat]

Just now, Energycore said:

lol ow. Well if you're gonna push power limit you should also push voltage.

Locked...maybe it's time that I installed a BIOS with unlocked voltage  

[Belgarathian]

19 minutes ago, Energycore said:

That was an outlier lol

You can't draw that conclusion from one sample... Please post sauce for the remainder of your samples!

[Energycore]

1 minute ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

Locked...maybe it's time that I installed a BIOS with unlocked voltage  

Yes! Do eet!

 

Youtube Channel ActuallyHardcoreOverclocking has a bunch of livestreams overclocking an RX 480 GTR, the guy talks about an unlocked voltage BIOS for it. Maybe there are some for RX 470s as well.

[Energycore]

Just now, Belgarathian said:

You can't draw that conclusion from one sample... Please post sauce for the remainder of your samples!

tomshardware, techpowerup, gamersnexus, anandtech, who else did a review with power consumption numbers?

[Mr.Meerkat]

1 minute ago, Energycore said:

Yes! Do eet!

 

Youtube Channel ActuallyHardcoreOverclocking has a bunch of livestreams overclocking an RX 480 GTR, the guy talks about an unlocked voltage BIOS for it. Maybe there are some for RX 470s as well.

I just found out that I do have a little bit of voltage control in wattman...I just need to dial the voltages manually for the 8 different states...

[Energycore]

Just now, Mr.Meerkat said:

I just found out that I do have a little bit of voltage control in wattman...I just need to dial the voltages manually for the 8 different states...

I think there's an option to change all voltages to the same? Otherwise what a chore.

Don't OC with Wattman, use some other program

[Belgarathian]

1 minute ago, Energycore said:

tomshardware, techpowerup, gamersnexus, anandtech, who else did a review with power consumption numbers?

The XFX is a custom PCB so may have different power draw figures. You have to compare XFX to XFX otherwise there are too many variables.

[Energycore]

1 minute ago, Belgarathian said:

The XFX is a custom PCB so may have different power draw figures. You have to compare XFX to XFX otherwise there are too many variables.

Fine only because I'm in a good mood

 

http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/xfx_rx480_gtr/9.htm

[SteveGrabowski0]

5 hours ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

...except it didn't.

It's close, but Joker showed some benchmarks he did the other day where the 480 on average edged out the 1060 over 2016 AAA releases.

 

 

[SteveGrabowski0]

5 hours ago, App4that said:

The 480 vs 1060 is subjective. But I myself would pick a 480 purely because of Nvidias dick move to not include SLI.

I kind of like not having SLI in mid tier gpus like that. People think they can buy two 60s and have it be better than an 80 but it never seems to work out that way, especially now when multi gpu support has gone to hell the last year plus. I feel bad for anyone who blew money on dual 960s to SLI. 

 

And then AMD was so dishonest trying to show off how dual 480 could beat the 1080 (but just in Ashes). Multi gpu is for suckers unless you're running a really high end system.

[App4that]

1 minute ago, SteveGrabowski0 said:

I kind of like not having SLI in mid tier gpus like that. People think they can buy two 60s and have it be better than an 80 but it never seems to work out that way, especially now when multi gpu support has gone to hell the last year plus. I feel bad for anyone who blew money on dual 960s to SLI. 

I'm doing great with my two 980ti, all my games run better. I get a sizable increase in most. 

 

The hate on SLI and crossfire is mostly propaganda. 

[stealth80]

3 minutes ago, App4that said:

I'm doing great with my two 980ti, all my games run better. I get a sizable increase in most. 

 

The hate on SLI and crossfire is mostly propaganda. 

I massively agree with this having just switched from 2x 970's. Why did I switch? I went 1440P and the vram was showing limitations at high textures (not the 3.5/4gb bs)

 

Too many people that haven't tried SLI get on the hate train of "scaling is shit", "games stutter", "game support is terrible" - It's all bs, admittedly some people have had bad experiences, but that isn't down to the tech it's other issues.

 

I keep saying this - In over 15 months of SLI 970's only Just Cause 3 out of around 80 games + caused me issues with SLI support (and Quantum Break, but that was just broke period)

[SteveGrabowski0]

6 minutes ago, App4that said:

I'm doing great with my two 980ti, all my games run better. I get a sizable increase in most. 

 

The hate on SLI and crossfire is mostly propaganda. 

You're running an extremely highend setup with two top tier gpus man. You actually need the power that can't be had through one gpu (other than say Titan X Pascal, which wasn't out when you got your 980 Ti). And man multi-gpu support has gone way downhill since say 2013 or so. Maybe it has gotten better since I last checked this summer, but back then half the techpowerup testsuite showed scaling worse than like +35% with dual cards even at 4k, with a lot showing negative scaling. Is scaling no longer zero in DX12? (not counting shitty Ashes)

[App4that]

1 minute ago, SteveGrabowski0 said:

You're running an extremely highend setup with two top tier gpus man. You actually need the power that can't be had through one gpu (other than say Titan X Pascal). And man multi-gpu support has gone way downhill since say 2013 or so. Maybe it has gotten better since I last checked this summer, but back then half the techpowerup testsuite showed scaling worse than like +35% with dual cards even at 4k, with a lot showing negative scaling. Is scaling no longer zero in DX12? (not counting shitty Ashes)

None of my DX12 games need it, honestly. I'm not talking about DX11 to DX12 ports that run like a fat kid chasing a doughnut down a hill. Those I kick in the second card using the DX11 build. I'm talking full on 100% DX12. They all run great. 

 

That said I have two almost identical cards, when my second card was a Classy things were not so nice. 

[stealth80]

4 minutes ago, SteveGrabowski0 said:

You're running an extremely highend setup with two top tier gpus man. You actually need the power that can't be had through one gpu (other than say Titan X Pascal, which wasn't out when you got your 980 Ti). And man multi-gpu support has gone way downhill since say 2013 or so. Maybe it has gotten better since I last checked this summer, but back then half the techpowerup testsuite showed scaling worse than like +35% with dual cards even at 4k, with a lot showing negative scaling. Is scaling no longer zero in DX12? (not counting shitty Ashes)

see my above post, however:

 

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/nvidia-sli-faq,review-33182.html#p6

 

admittedly scaling varies per game

[Nena Trinity]

I just wonder what VEGA will cost... o3o

[kiwibacon]

4 hours ago, App4that said:

I'm doing great with my two 980ti, all my games run better. I get a sizable increase in most. 

 

The hate on SLI and crossfire is mostly propaganda. 

I also have 980ti sli and used to have 7970 crossfire for 5 years.

the hate on multigpu is astounding.

I never had a single issue.

Like today i posed stuttering in gta5 first thing people said was turn off sli. turned out not enough vram....

[MadyTehWolfie]

I think AMD lost a shit tone of market share for the high end cause they took too long to release something that competes in the high end. Even if it was better by 10-20fps very few people will sell their cards for what will realistically be meh improvement at best. Unless they actually make something to compete with the Titan XP for like 600 bucks. Other then that if you already have a 1070-1080 it will most likely not be worth selling your current card for. Then there's the fact that Volta will most likely release the 1170-1180 in the summer and Nvidia will be them to the high end market again making Vega meh. I'm not doubting AMD just that they take too damn long to release anything and lose too much of the market as a result. 

[MadyTehWolfie]

5 hours ago, App4that said:

I'm doing great with my two 980ti, all my games run better. I get a sizable increase in most. 

 

The hate on SLI and crossfire is mostly propaganda. 

Hate on SLI is mostly justified but it also depends on the games you play. At most your only going to get 50% increase and that's the best case scenario. Some games become unplayable with SLI....Cough cough dues ex mankind divided. In my experience most games see a Meh improvement with SLI and very few get the full 50% increase. It's always better to just buy a card from next gen then to double up. A trend with Nvidia is that their xx70 cards usually pack the same punch as last year's Titan model. Seen it with the 970 and with the 1070 and Volta will be more of the same if not slightly better.

[captain cactus]

-stuff that was in here is now in the OP-

Edited January 3, 2017 by lots of unexplainable lag

[RagnarokDel]

53 minutes ago, lots of unexplainable lag said:

A sneak preview "leaked" showing that Vega is indeed a whole new architecture and not a GCN iteration EDIT this is actually a Photoshopped image by a Reddit user just visualising what AMD has described in their patents. It's still a relevant slide.

 

From: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/5lqale/vega_vs_gcn_architecture_in_pictures/?

 

I highly recommend reading the thread there, especially Reddit user PhoBoChai's input on the whole thing. Very informative stuff.

 

hah! I was coming over to link the same thing

[FakezZ]

15 hours ago, Coaxialgamer said:

well; i usually use namespace std for practicality , but since that was only one line , i had to use std::cout 

NO! bad doggo hahaha

15 hours ago, Kumaresh said:

When I have to write simple 400 line codes, having to use "std::cin" and "std::cout" seem like such a pain. Much easier to use namespace std. Why is it considered so bad to use it anyway ?

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1452721/why-is-using-namespace-std-considered-bad-practice
Not bad for small programs but it is good to get used to it anyway

[captain cactus]

13 hours ago, Princess Cadence said:

I actually really agree with nVidia making SLI only on the 70's 80's because it has always been a not perfect technology with a lot of problems for both ends, the consumer and manufacturer, going with a single higher end GPU like buying a 1070/1080 for the price you'd pay by SLI'ing two 1060's seems to me like the smartest thing.

 

Also the 1060 6gb does have more raw power than the rx 480, the day nvidia fix the DX12 drivers which might happen after some of these many releases incoming the table here will turn completely and AMD will likely depend on this new product to keep its share on the market... if its just a very high end, high priced deal that still doesn't reach the 1080 they will see themselves in  trouble to find market space.

 

Now I have no reason not to want to see AMD succeeding on this for the competition will make nVidia better but lets be honest, especially with Ryzen AMD has been all about over-hyping it without any solid background so far.

 

@CostcoSamples I don't agree with you, I was using a GTX 560Ti until little ago and its performance in titles like CS:GO League of Legends and alike were all 100+ fps with all maxed out, and it did good enough in a lot of games being able to almost max even the latest 2013 titles, nVidia old cards are as solid as AMD old ones.

Two things. 1: the OP is a repost: 

And two: 1060 6GB having more raw power than an RX480? What? If by raw power you mean raw TFLOPs performance you're mistaken. Founder's edition 1060 6GB: 3.47 TFLOPs. RX480: 5.83 TFLOPs. The RX480 smokes the 1060 6GB, the reason they're on par in games is because game engines can't fully utilise the RX480's Stream Processors (something AMD is solving with their NCU cores in Vega) resulting in idling GPU components in the RX480, bringing down efficiency and raw horsepower.

[Citadelen]

Could this please make its way into the main post? @lots of unexplainable lag

 

Spoiler

This is spot on, as I was discussing this NCU design in the other thread. AMD is going to a new variable width SIMDs, and a beefed up Hardware Scheduler that will be able to best fit the workload to each SIMD to fully utilize it. 

The really good thing about the variable design is the different ratio SIMDs can combine to process an instruction or shader that requires 16-wide ALUs, so there is no situation in which this design is worse than the current 4x SIMD of 16 ALUs. But for gaming, there will be a huge efficiency win.

^

From a learned man on Reddit.

 

TD:LR, the efficency problems and underutilisation of FLOPS on AMD cards in the past is no longer a problem, but their cards remain very good at compute.

[captain cactus]

15 minutes ago, Citadelen said:

Could this please make its way into the main post? @lots of unexplainable lag

 

  Hide contents

This is spot on, as I was discussing this NCU design in the other thread. AMD is going to a new variable width SIMDs, and a beefed up Hardware Scheduler that will be able to best fit the workload to each SIMD to fully utilize it. 

The really good thing about the variable design is the different ratio SIMDs can combine to process an instruction or shader that requires 16-wide ALUs, so there is no situation in which this design is worse than the current 4x SIMD of 16 ALUs. But for gaming, there will be a huge efficiency win.

^

From a learned man on Reddit.

 

TD:LR, the efficency problems and underutilisation of FLOPS on AMD cards in the past is no longer a problem, but their cards remain very good at compute.

Actually posted this a few posts above you, but yeah, I'll put it in the OP.