Vega FE - Placebo Mode

[Dabombinable]

21 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

Remind me again how the 970 is literally the fourth most common (recent) GPU on Steam (only behind the 1060, 750Ti, and 960). 

 

A few people on tech forums cared about the .5gb of slower VRAM, but 99% of people didn't give a shit since performance was exactly what all reviews showed. 

And that slower portion of 512MB of vRAM doesn't make any difference (if it did, I'd be seeing it in Ark Survival as it constantly goes over 3.5GB of vRAM on high at 1080p).

[cj09beira]

6 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

AMD claims that, has any third party has been able to confirm those numbers? The answer is most likely no. Sorry but AMD can claim 2.75 times the output in controlled test under a tech demo but until you see that in games we could be looking at maybe a minor 5% bump with the promise of future optimization which is, basically business as usual for AMD at this point.

they claim 2.75 times geometry output per clock, the fury was many times limited by geometry output, which is the reason why fiji isnt too good at tessellation.

right now while gaming vega has exactly the same ipc as fiji, which means things aren't working. i wont continue this as there is no point, we will talk when rx vega releases to see who was right 

5 hours ago, Valentyn said:

Well by the time Navi arrives they'll be using IBM's 7nm process. Which IBM are claiming can give up to a 50% performance improvement over 10nm. Nevermind the current 14nm.

 

There's sadly a Vega 20 scheduled before then, so unless Raja and his team can find a way to fix the issues with Vega 10; we're looking a meh upgrade mid cycled. Kinda like the 580 was to the 480 

 

Polaris on 7nm would be very potent with Infinity Fabric though, especially since it Seems NVIDIA are going the same route in the future as well. 

vega 20, seems to be even more focused on gpgpu, as it has fp64 (will)

vega 20 will probably be a frequency boost, and testing the waters of 7nm, going from 14 to 7 might give some good frequency gains 

[alphaproject]

Is anyone really surprised?

[mr moose]

I hear a lot of people complain about Gsync being the result of nasty unethical behaviour from nvidia.  Like they are somehow controlling your minds and making you buy an overpriced feature.  The reality is, if you decided to go with a freesync monitor becasue it was cheaper, then I can only hope for your sake that the RX vega pulls an unpredictable almighty left hand swing from nowhere and actually performs better than a placebo, or you're about to find out why freesync was cheaper.  

[Dabombinable]

6 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I hear a lot of people complain about Gsync being the result of nasty unethical behaviour from nvidia.  Like they are somehow controlling your minds and making you buy an overpriced feature.  The reality is, if you decided to go with a freesync monitor becasue it was cheaper, then I can only hope for your sake that the RX vega pulls an unpredictable almighty left hand swing from nowhere and actually performs better than a placebo, or you're about to find out why freesync was cheaper.  

Maybe its cheaper because AMD doesn't have the market share for a solution like Nvidia's Gsync......

[mr moose]

15 minutes ago, Dabombinable said:

Maybe its cheaper because AMD doesn't have the market share for a solution like Nvidia's Gsync......

In my world why is moot.  Market share or not,  a cheaper product is nearly always inferior in some way.  In this case it is simply that AMD appear to be failing at providing a top end card to pair with freesync. 

[The Sloth]

4 minutes ago, mr moose said:

a cheaper product is nearly always inferior in some way

not always, example Beats 

[mr moose]

6 minutes ago, nerdslayer1 said:

not always, example Beats 

I did not say you couldn't pay too much for a product.  And I used the qualifier "nearly"

 

Also, some people think beats are the bomb diggity and that they are really well built.  You'll have to dig up some product return statistics to prove they are inferior. 

 

EDIT: maybe I should say this because I have had this discussion before.  Quality costs either time or money.  Therefore if you are paying for a product you will not find quality cheap. you might find an overpriced cheap product but you will rarely find a quality product cheap.

[DXMember]

Umm.... literally the 2nd page Ryan's review

https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Radeon-Vega-Frontier-Edition-16GB-Air-Cooled-Review/Answering-Questions-you-A

[DXMember]

37 minutes ago, mr moose said:

you might find an overpriced cheap product but you will rarely find a quality product cheap.

It costs Intel like $30 to manufacture their CPU's

[JoeCoke]

patiently and quietly waiting for rx vega benchmarks while pretty much everyone else is arguing

[mr moose]

10 minutes ago, DXMember said:

It costs Intel like $30 to manufacture their CPU's

Are you insinuating Intel are overpriced cheap products, or that there are no such thing, or that the concept of cheap products being charged at a premium is too common to have any meaning with regard to quality?  At any rate, the raw material cost of manufacturer is not the only cost in bringing a product to market.

[DXMember]

9 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Are you insinuating Intel are overpriced cheap products, or that there are no such thing, or that the concept of cheap products being charged at a premium is too common to have any meaning with regard to quality?  At any rate, the raw material cost of manufacturer is not the only cost in bringing a product to market.

in the quantities they are moving the chips, you're kidding?

$5k for a xeon? $2k for HEDT chips?

you're saying those prices are justified then?

 

All I'm saying is that the corporations will rip you to pieces if you give them a chance, they don't care about the quality, they will skimp on everything they can as long as they can make profit short term and long term, if the low quality hurts their business, sure yeah, they'll improve it but only as long as it brings in more sales

 

look at what gaming industry has become over the years?

even the magnificent Rockstart Games - they used to ship the best story driven games, now  all they care about is Shark Cards, because to them those bring in the same amount of money if not more at a lower effort, they literally have switched from developing Triple A games to pushing farmville content, because they finally got the taste of what cheap ass non-effort content can do

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, DXMember said:

in the quantities they are moving the chips, you're kidding?

$5k for a xeon? $2k for HEDT chips?

you're saying those prices are justified then?

 

All I'm saying is that the corporations will rip you to pieces if you give them a chance, they don't care about the quality, they will skimp on everything they can as long as they can make profit short term and long term, if the low quality hurts their business, sure yeah, they'll improve it but only as long as it brings in more sales

 

look at what gaming industry has become over the years?

even the magnificent Rockstart Games - they used to ship the best story driven games, now  all they care about is Shark Cards, because to them those bring in the same amount of money if not more at a lower effort.

Kidding about what? your telling the story about Intel here.  I don't know how much Intel invested in bring these devices to market or what the forecast sales are. Do you know what the required ROI is for these products to prevent profit loss?  All I know is the cheaper the product the lower the quality. Fact of life for any saleable product.  this includes things many people fail to account for and that is after sales service, patches and updates to maintain support long after the products revenue has run dry.

 

The rest of your post has no bearing on what I said.

[LooneyJuice]

5 minutes ago, DXMember said:

in the quantities they are moving the chips, you're kidding?

$5k for a xeon? $2k for HEDT chips?

you're saying those prices are justified then?

 

All I'm saying is that the corporations will rip you to pieces if you give them a chance, they don't care about the quality, they will skimp on everything they can as long as they can make profit short term and long term, if the low quality hurts their business, sure yeah, they'll improve it but only as long as it brings in more sales

 

look at what gaming industry has become over the years?

even the magnificent Rockstart Games - they used to ship the best story driven games, now  all they care about is Shark Cards, because to them those bring in the same amount of money if not more at a lower effort, they literally have switched from developing Triple A games to pushing farmville content, because they finally got the taste of what cheap ass non-effort content can do

This does appeal to the cynic within me, and I can't honestly say any of this is wrong. On the other hand, I can't help feeling that - especially regarding the latter - consumers just totally missed the plot when voting with their wallets. 

 

High profit margins is something every company aspires to, but the liberties they'll take only depend on what the market is obviously going to sustain.

[DXMember]

5 minutes ago, mr moose said:

All I know is the cheaper the product the lower the quality. Fact of life for any saleable product.

Then you'll obviously buy the one on the right, am I right?

[mr moose]

Just now, DXMember said:

Then you'll obviously buy the one on the right, am I right?

 

Righto, you clearly don't understand the scope of this discussion. 

 

 

[DXMember]

23 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 

Righto, you clearly don't understand the scope of this discussion. 

 

 

I hear what you're saying, and that's real hip, but allow me to propose something else:

Companies should differentiate on features, not quality or price

Why would I go and pay MSI 80€ more? Because they have a higher quality product? No, I don't think so, it's the same product. Because they have extended warranty? No, not it - they both have the same two years under EU consumer laws. Maybe it's because they have a red dragon on the box? - Oww... they don't even have a red dragon on the Fury X box... Sapphire has a red robot on the box though, I should totally go with Sapphire, they are 80€ for the same product, plus they have a Red robot on the box and I LOVE ROBOTS !!!

 

Also looking at the reviews!!! Having a more expensive product doesn't mean you put more effort into it, it just probably means you're more greedy than your competitor. Companies should strive to make better products cheaper, like ASUS - fully automating the PCB manufacturing with no humans soldering shit - you don't have to pay for shit salaries for shitty health jobs, you don't have to pay overpriced health insurances because of the unsafe work environment and you get a better quality product in the end.

 

Or look at Raja Koduri - having a goal of sub $1000 machine that is 4K gaming capable and having a dream of 8K per eye VR - that's what companies should strive to be like.

 

And as long as we keep this mentality that you proposed:

35 minutes ago, mr moose said:

All I know is the cheaper the product the lower the quality. Fact of life for any saleable product.

We will keep having bullshit prices for bullshit products, like 5 yearly Call of Duty releases with subsequential paid DLC releases and Horse Armor,

just stop buying shit, and all will be well

[mr moose]

19 minutes ago, DXMember said:

I hear what you're saying, and that's real hip, but allow me to propose something else:

Companies should differentiate on features, not quality or price

Why would I go and pay MSI 80€ more? Because they have a higher quality product? No, I don't think so, it's the same product. Because they have extended warranty? No, not it - they both have the same two years under EU consumer laws. Maybe it's because they have a red dragon on the box? - Oww... they don't even have a red dragon on the Fury X box... Sapphire has a red robot on the box though, I should totally go with Sapphire, they are 80€ for the same product, plus they have a Red robot on the box and I LOVE ROBOTS !!!

 

Also looking at the reviews!!! Having a more expensive product doesn't mean you put more effort into it, it just probably means you're more greedy than your competitor. Companies should strive to make better products cheaper, like ASUS - fully automating the PCB manufacturing with no humans soldering shit - you don't have to pay for shit salaries for shitty health jobs, you don't have to pay overpriced health insurances because of the unsafe work environment and you get a better quality product in the end.

 

Or look at Raja Koduri - having a goal of sub $1000 machine that is 4K gaming capable and having a dream of 8K per eye VR - that's what companies should strive to be like.

 

And as long as we keep this mentality that you proposed:

We will keep having bullshit prices for bullshit products, like 5 yearly Call of Duty releases with subsequential paid DLC releases and Horse Armor,

just stop buying shit, and all will be well

 

You've just missed the point entirely.

 

You have jumped from Intel xeon chips to clearly over hyped "gaming" products.  

[DXMember]

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

 

You've just missed the point entirely.

 

You have jumped from Intel xeon chips to clearly over hyped "gaming" products.  

all you're saying is that I'm wrong, sorry for  not being able to read your mind, can't really pick your brain crumbles over internet...

maybe if you want to  clear up what "the point" is by actually writing something? (:

[mr moose]

6 minutes ago, DXMember said:

all you're saying is that I'm wrong, sorry for  not being able to read your mind, can't really pick your brain crumbles over internet...

maybe if you want to  clear up what "the point" is by actually writing something? (:

Not that difficult to read. 

3 hours ago, mr moose said:

I did not say you couldn't pay too much for a product.  And I used the qualifier "nearly"

 

Also, some people think beats are the bomb diggity and that they are really well built.  You'll have to dig up some product return statistics to prove they are inferior. 

 

EDIT: maybe I should say this because I have had this discussion before.  Quality costs either time or money.  Therefore if you are paying for a product you will not find quality cheap. you might find an overpriced cheap product but you will rarely find a quality product cheap.

 

[DXMember]

5 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Not that difficult to read. 

 

ye... you say beats is overpriced

and then you say quality products should be overpriced

that's paradoxicalistic

I purpose cost doesn't have to do anything with quality

mind over matter

you see - time is irrelevant - whether you put on the condom before or after it's irrelevant - it's Einstein

[mr moose]

18 minutes ago, DXMember said:

ye... you say beats is overpriced

and then you say quality products should be overpriced

that's paradoxicalistic

I purpose cost doesn't have to do anything with quality

mind over matter

you see - time is irrelevant - whether you put on the condom before or after it's irrelevant - it's Einstein

I never said that any products should be overpriced.  Trying reading what I  said again.  

[DXMember]

Just now, mr moose said:

I never said that any products should be overpriced.  Trying reading what I  said again.  

k

[PCGuy_5960]

6 hours ago, DXMember said:

It costs Intel like $30 to manufacture their CPU's

No it doesn't, a fully working 7980XE die costs way more than $30. 

3 hours ago, DXMember said:

k

Potassium