Possible Vega TimeSpy benchmark result (from the amd subreddit)

[DeWun]

http://www.3dmark.com/spy/1544741

 

This doesn't look good. That same 1.2ghz from the earlier leaks/estimations. What do you think?

[shadowbyte]

this could be the new pro duo instead, with 1 core disabled

[Thiback]

Given that according to guru3d, the GTX 1070 is at 6059, having a Vega scoring 5950 only isn't good at all.
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/geforce-gtx-1080-ti-review,30.html

[rip]

Lowest score for GTX 1080 is 6054 so actually not really that bad

http://www.3dmark.com/spy/1618004

[19_blackie_73]

what about not speculating and see what amd delivers in a few weeks?

[Thiback]

Just now, shadowbyte said:

this could be the new pro duo instead, with 1 core disabled

This seems likely. The 5721 graphics score that the "Generic VGA" has according to that test is very close to that of the Fury X (5597).

[Thiback]

Just now, 19_blackie_73 said:

what about not speculating and see what amd delivers in a few weeks?

I know this is infuriating, but you are on the Linustechtips forums. Speculation based on almost nothing is a long tradition here. 

[ivan134]

Stop. Please stop.

[Mr.Cunt]

okay, ill just throw it out here: i bet that top vega card will have the same performance as new Titan X (not XP) on DX12 benchmarks 

[19_blackie_73]

6 minutes ago, Thiback said:

I know this is infuriating, but you are on the Linustechtips forums. Speculation based on almost nothing is a long tradition here. 

i know

but this benchmark can be anything. what if it is the duo card showing both chips as single vga. would add up nicely imo.

[Humbug]

17 minutes ago, 19_blackie_73 said:

what about not speculating and see what amd delivers in a few weeks?

What's the fun in that?

[Sakkura]

21 minutes ago, shadowbyte said:

this could be the new pro duo instead, with 1 core disabled

 

17 minutes ago, Thiback said:

This seems likely. The 5721 graphics score that the "Generic VGA" has according to that test is very close to that of the Fury X (5597).

It says 8GB VRAM though.

[Thiback]

20 minutes ago, 19_blackie_73 said:

what about not speculating and see what amd delivers in a few weeks?

Hey, i speculate because I am really interested into this VEGA thing.
Ending the search would be totally boring for me
Let alone the other GPU enthusiast on the lookout for competition in the high end market.
Please tell us if you get other info on it.

Meanwhile, how come the 1060 and the rx 480 have such similar scores, given AMD "has to be much better in DX12" ?
Enable us to get more info on upcoming GPUs ! MORE INFO !!

Regarding that speculation addiction we got going on here, read every first letter of each line of the two paragraphs above.

[Sakkura]

If you look at the detailed scores, the graphics score is 5721. A single GTX 1080 can do over 8000 in graphics score.

 

I think it's more likely this is a 580 or 480.

[DeWun]

That low memory clock would indicate HBM2 though, so I dont think this is a 580/480.

[LAwLz]

That's not good at all. Hopefully the leak is inaccurate but if it isn't then we're in for anther period of Nvidia dominance in the high end.

[Lord Nicoll]

Well, they are rumoured to be more than 1 vega card, a lower end one above an RX 580 on par with a GTX 1070 and a better one on par with a GTX1080 is very likely, with a dual GPU one to compete with the GTX1080Ti and to remind people why we don't really buy dual GPU cards anymore. 

[Sakkura]

4 minutes ago, DeWun said:

That low memory clock would indicate HBM2 though, so I dont think this is a 580/480.

Unless it's misidentified or deliberately obfuscated. I don't think it's realistic that Vega would be slower than Polaris.

[Valentyn]

It's fake, that's barely overclocked Fury X performance, while being clocked nearly 20% higher, and with faster HBM2, and other improvements.

 

NVIDIA is using slower 1,4Gbps HBM2, that's clocked at 715Mhz as well; the listed clock in that link is 700Mhz.

 

AMD is stated ti use HBM2 1.6 and 2.0Gbps.

If somehow accurate it would mean Vega has severely regressed in IPC compared to Fiji, which is doubtful.

[Lord Nicoll]

1 minute ago, Valentyn said:

It's fake, that's barely overclocked Fury X performance, while being clocked nearly 20% higher, and with faster HBM2, and other improvements.

If somehow accurate it would mean Vega has severely regressed in IPC compared to Fiji, which is doubtful.

or it could be a really early engineering sample, they have been known to have terrible drivers and poor clocks or other issues, 

[Valentyn]

Just now, Lord Nicoll said:

or it could be a really early engineering sample, they have been known to have terrible drivers and poor clocks or other issues, 

 

The HBM2 listed speed itself doesn't add up. NVIDIA's Tesla is using the slower 1.4Gbs version and that's clocked at 715Mhz.

https://www.microway.com/hpc-tech-tips/nvidia-tesla-p100-pci-e-16gb-gpu-accelerator-pascal-gp100-close/

It's listed at 700Mhz in the Futuremark link.

 

[xAcid9]

Maybe GoFlo strike again. 1200mhz...

[Lord Nicoll]

Just now, Valentyn said:

 

The HBM2 listed speed itself doesn't add up. NVIDIA's Tesla is using the slower 1.4Gbs version and that's clocked at 715Mhz.

https://www.microway.com/hpc-tech-tips/nvidia-tesla-p100-pci-e-16gb-gpu-accelerator-pascal-gp100-close/

It's listed at 700Mhz in the Futuremark link.

 

Yeah, the info really don't add up, I wouldn't be surprised if this was some red herring or some really hacked up card like Fiji or Polaris

[Valentyn]

1 minute ago, xAcid9 said:

Maybe GoFlo strike again. 1200mhz...

 

Clocked nearly 20% faster than Fury X, but only 6% faster? 
It's fake.

[TheRandomness]

18 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

 

It says 8GB VRAM though.

And a 700MHz memory clock.