Vega FE - Placebo Mode

[Doobeedoo]

I kinda guess this would be. As far as gaming tests, no drivers are out at all. With RX they will be so yeah. Though it just seems that in general drivers are not not enough.

[LAwLz]

7 hours ago, Jito463 said:

Actually, that's exactly how they work.  It's the reason why - on the professional side - there are optimized and certified drivers for different applications.  AutoCAD?  There's a specific driver for that.  Solidworks?  Same thing.  While the Vega FE drivers lack certifications, they can certainly be optimized for professional tasks.  It's the same reason why newer drivers can improve (or sometimes hamper) gaming performance over time.  It all comes down to optimization.

[Citation Needed]

I have never heard of specific GPU drivers for specific programs, and I doubt you have either (because they don't exist). 

 

There are different drivers for the workstation GPUs, but that has to do with verifications and certifications rather than performance optimisations. If AMD found a way to increase performance in a program then they just patch that into all drivers.

 

Feel free to post evidence that contradicts me if you think I am wrong. I will not accept speculation from some reddit thread as evidence though, and neither should you. 

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

2 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

[Citation Needed]

I have never heard of specific GPU drivers for specific programs, and I doubt you have either (because they don't exist). 

This also makes no sense at all. Drivers are on the software side, on the operating systems. In fact, that is all a driver is supposed to be, a set of car keys that connect the GPU with the OS. (side note: nobody has given me even a passable explanation yet as to how it is possible for drivers to alter physical power draw for the RX 480). The switch is on the hardware level, so the only thing it can change is firmware, which is the BIOS.

 

There is maybe a switch in the drivers that detect the BIOS state ID, but that would be a bit of a stretch given how the FE and RX are the same chips. It would also fall outside the definition of a driver, and become supporting software.

[Lays]

19 hours ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

So you believe everything that AMD says? lol

of course man!

 

don't ya know AMD can do no wrong??.... Or at least that's how this forum makes it seem. Pretty ridiculous at times how blindly people cheer on AMD.

[Misanthrope]

2 hours ago, cj09beira said:

i didn't meant to say you did it, my point was that people shouldn't.

amd has released the most important Vega features a long time ago, in them there is 2.75 times the geometry output per clock (probably a mix of double output and using other parts o f the gpu to help(0.75 part)) and the tiled based rasterizer, the rasterizer is confirmed not enabled by pcper, and the geometry output would be noticeable on the first firestrike graphics test, as that test is mostly geometry incentive.

amd didn't push the gaming side of Vega at all, they mostly focused on the pro side, probably because they don't have the man power to do both drivers at the same time, now they should have been upfront about it and said they would improve it latter, but this is amd we are talking about marketing isn't their forte.

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.

[RagnarokDel]

5 hours ago, Jito463 said:

I sincerely hope you simply forgot the /s.

Vega was the last architecture launched under the previous management.  Navi will be based on a similar (modular) approach as Ryzen.  If they do it right, they could catch up to Nvidia quite rapidly.  Only time will tell, though.

If Navi is done right, they could release a infinity fabric made of 4 rx 480 die sized chips and absolutely destroy Nvidia unless Nvidia has the same idea. a RX 480 downclocked at 750 mhz consumes about 60 watts on the chip. Put 4 of them on a pcb that's 240w + whatever is left for hbm and display output. that's a 9216 stream processor GPU under 300W.

[Jito463]

40 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

[Citation Needed]

I have never heard of specific GPU drivers for specific programs, and I doubt you have either (because they don't exist). 

 

There are different drivers for the workstation GPUs, but that has to do with verifications and certifications rather than performance optimisations. If AMD found a way to increase performance in a program then they just patch that into all drivers.

 

Feel free to post evidence that contradicts me if you think I am wrong. I will not accept speculation from some reddit thread as evidence though, and neither should you. 

http://www.nvidia.com/object/graphics-for-solidworks.html

 

http://www.nvidia.com/object/AutoCAD_PD_workstation.html

 

If you use the following link, it gives you the option to select which application you need the drivers for.

 

http://www.nvidia.com/object/quadro-certified-drivers.html

[Valentyn]

23 minutes ago, RagnarokDel said:

If Navi is done right, they could release a infinity fabric made of 4 rx 480 die sized chips and absolutely destroy Nvidia unless Nvidia has the same idea. a RX 480 downclocked at 750 mhz consumes about 60 watts on the chip. Put 4 of them on a pcb that's 240w + whatever is left for hbm and display output. that's a 9216 stream processor GPU under 300W.

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. 

[Maxxtraxx]

20 hours ago, tmcclelland455 said:

It's a brand new card so naturally the drivers aren't going to work as they should. Common sense, people.

Common sense... because it's AMD? Because that's not really a Nvidia thing...

[Sauron]

It's going to be down to drivers, not modes... 

[PCGuy_5960]

17 hours ago, raphidy said:

He's a Nvidia shill, he likes to have ready driver on day one.

So if you want your GPU to have good drivers from day one, you are a shill? lol, what?

[PCGuy_5960]

1 hour ago, Lays said:

Pretty ridiculous at times how blindly people cheer on AMD.

100% agree, if this was an Nvidia card at least 50% of the replies would be "This card is a failure"

[done12many2]

1 hour ago, Lays said:

Or at least that's how this forum makes it seem. Pretty ridiculous at times how blindly people cheer on AMD.

 

Rooting for the underdog is common.  It's easy for an underdog to look good in the eyes of followers as expectations are lower.  The top dog is the one with the hard part.  All an underdog has to do is get close and they are heroes.  If the top dog stays on top, it's no big deal.  

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, done12many2 said:

 

Rooting for the underdog is common.  It's easy for an underdog to look good in the eyes of followers as expectations are lower.  The top dog is the one with the hard part.  All an underdog has to do is get close and they are heroes.  If the top dog stays on top, it's no big deal.  

That, and generally, if Nvidia releases a card that's shit at launch, it remains shit because the hardware is shit. However, asides from thermal issues due to shit reference coolers that exists with every gfx card worth talking about at this point. I don't think Nvidia has really released an all around shitty card. Closest would be Titan X, Titan X, and Titan Xp, for most workstation tasks because compute on Maxwell/Pascal.

If AMD releases a card that's shit at launch, it doesn't always remain shit, because 9 times out of 10, it's a software/firmware issue that could have easily been resolved had AMD kept testing the card for a bit longer. RX480 power issues and hopefully Frontier Gaming performance being the only cases of this popping into mind.

 

That said, if Frontier is performing at my expectations and minimum requirement to buy into VEGA myself, and it's doing that with crippled drivers, it just excites me to see what a correctly functioning card will do.

[MoonSpot]

18 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

If AMD releases a card that's shit at launch, it doesn't always remain shit, because 9 times out of 10, it's a software/firmware issue that could have easily been resolved had AMD kept testing the card for a bit longer. RX480 power issues and hopefully Frontier Gaming performance being the only cases of this popping into mind.

 

That said, if Frontier is performing at my expectations and minimum requirement to buy into VEGA myself, and it's doing that with crippled drivers, it just excites me to see what a correctly functioning card will do.

Again, as always:

But having to wait 6 months for software to straighten its crap out is BS too.  So Vega isn't a 4k card, and will never be.  However RX Vega might be a good 1440 UW card that hits 60fps mins, which is all I'm personally hoping for.  Don't want none of nvidias locked in consoleized pewder angle they're pushing.

Wanna cry a bit seeing people bring up Navi when Vega isn't even really out yet.  I mean talk about heartbreaking, when after all this time and waiting people bring up waiting another x # of years again right away...

Either way something is clearly broken in a big way with Vega from what we've seen so far, its punching way under its specs.  I want to know what the frack the deal is first, officially, before writing vega off.

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, MoonSpot said:

So Vega isn't a 4k card, and will ever be.

That really depends on how you want to push it. A GTX 1080 can push 4K60 in a decent number of games just by scaling back graphics settings that are unnecessary at that point (anti-aliasing) or yield nearly no difference but require a good deal of extra GPU power (ultra settings). If it's punching between the 1070 and 1080 whilst crippled, than it should be a fairly capable arch once we've got acceptable gaming drivers, which land with RX VEGA. Even if they're not 100% polished, there should be improvement once tile rasterization is working correctly. Beyond that, FineWine(tm) can do whatever it wants.

 

5 minutes ago, MoonSpot said:

I mean talk about heartbreaking, when after all this time and waiting people bring up waiting another x # of years again right away...

It's how it always goes. Now, it's wait for ThreadRipper, Volta, and Navi. Doesn't matter than for most people, an RX470 and a 6700/7700/R5 are more than enough.

[ARikozuM]

Note to self: Buy AMD cards months after release to ensure that proper drivers have been created. 

[PCGuy_5960]

Just now, ARikozuM said:

Note to self: Buy AMD cards 6-12 months after release to ensure that proper drivers have been created. 

FIFY

[ARikozuM]

Just now, PCGuy_5960 said:

FIFY

That's awfully generous of you!

[MoonSpot]

30 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

That really depends on how you want to push it. A GTX 1080 can push 4K60 in a decent number of games just by scaling back graphics settings that are unnecessary ...

I hate that line of reasoning.  No one gives a shit about a decent number of games.  The only thing that matters in terms GPU/CPU horsepower is how they perform in AAA titles that everyone likes and actually plays.  FineWine^TM  is just "catch up" or "summer school" and is only worthwhile for old games. 

It's inadequate for 4k now, and will not push into a new performance tier latter when newer more advanced texture features start coming out in AAA games.  At the very least expecting it to is some serious faith based approach to gpus that I'm not keen on adopting.

 

30 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

It's how it always goes. Now, it's wait for ThreadRipper, Volta, and Navi. Doesn't matter than for most people, an RX470 and a 6700/7700/R5 are more than enough.

470 is not enough for most.  It is all most are willing to pay for, or able to afford.  Thats different.

[Drak3]

3 minutes ago, MoonSpot said:

No one gives a shit about a decent number of games.  The only thing that matters in terms GPU/CPU horsepower is how they perform in AAA titles that everyone likes and actually plays

My 'decent number of games' includes most AAA titles, which aren't what "everyone likes and plays."

 

5 minutes ago, MoonSpot said:

470 is not enough for most.  It is all most are willing to pay for, or able to afford.  Thats different.

Most people are happy with 1080p60, and the 470 is easily capable of that. For most people, yes, cards like the 470 are enough.

[Misanthrope]

18 minutes ago, MoonSpot said:

I hate that line of reasoning.  No one gives a shit about a decent number of games.  The only thing that matters in terms GPU/CPU horsepower is how they perform in AAA titles that everyone likes and actually plays.  FineWine^TM  is just "catch up" or "summer school" and is only worthwhile for old games. 

It's inadequate for 4k now, and will not push into a new performance tier latter when newer more advanced texture features start coming out in AAA games.  At the very least expecting it to is some serious faith based approach to gpus that I'm not keen on adopting.

 

470 is not enough for most.  It is all most are willing to pay for, or able to afford.  Thats different.

I agree but partially: the 1080 it's still inadequate for 4k games but not by that much: It can manage 30 or 40 FPS on even the titles you mention and scaling down some visual features gets you to 50-60 in many others. 

 

I still wouldn't recommend anything below the 1080ti for 4k games but the compromise of playing at Medium to High at 4k vs ultra at 1440p isn't that big of a deal, just kind of short sighted since you'll outgrow the 1080 in about a year, year and a half vs a solid 3 years with the 1080ti plus the compromises mentioned for future, heavier hitting titles.

[Agosto]

What's gonna feed my UHD freesync monitor in case there are no actual benefits from Vega architecture in games, as opposed as pro workload results?

-___________-

[LAwLz]

5 hours ago, Jito463 said:

http://www.nvidia.com/object/graphics-for-solidworks.html

 

http://www.nvidia.com/object/AutoCAD_PD_workstation.html

 

If you use the following link, it gives you the option to select which application you need the drivers for.

 

http://www.nvidia.com/object/quadro-certified-drivers.html

You might want to actually look into the things you link.

 

 

5 hours ago, Jito463 said:

http://www.nvidia.com/object/graphics-for-solidworks.html

That's just a link to difference graphics cards which will work well with Solidworks. Not specific drivers.

 

5 hours ago, Jito463 said:

http://www.nvidia.com/object/AutoCAD_PD_workstation.html

That is an outdated driver and is no longer used. The driver you linked is not only over 6 years old (and has not been updated since), but Autodesk employees at their forum says:

Quote

I think I can help you with your issue. AutoCAD 2012 no longer has a "NVidia Performance driver", you should get adequate performance with the 'Autodesk' driver being current. The reason there is no latest certified driver for the design suite is because the NVidia 4500 has not been certified with 3DsMax, Max only supports newer hardware that meets their minimum requirements.

For AutoCAD I would use the NVIDIA Driver Release 265.70 [8.17.12.6570] from this link.

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/cert/details?siteID=123112&catID=16303594&id=16391880&product=13&os=8192&card=46

Hope this helps,
Randall Young

Autodesk Lead Engineer

So not even Autodesk themselves says that there has not been any AUtoCAD "performance driver", and that was 6 years ago.

And if you think you will try and find a counterargument by following the link to the 'Autodesk' driver that employee refers to, then if you follow the link you will see that it's just the standard Nvidia Quadro drivers being recommended by their compatibility tool. drivers such as 375, and if you look at the testing you will see that it's not performance related.

 

 

5 hours ago, Jito463 said:

If you use the following link, it gives you the option to select which application you need the drivers for.

 

http://www.nvidia.com/object/quadro-certified-drivers.html

Again, that's just because not all drivers gets certified for every single program. If you actually looked at the drivers being recommended using those tools, you will see that it's just different versions of the standard Quadro driver.

If you for example go to the AutoCAD2018 page you will see that it lists the graphics cards supported, and which driver version. In this case, it's driver version 375.86 for all the supported cards and OSes.

What's so special about the Quadro drivers you might ask? Well good thing you ask, because Nvidia actually outlines that in their driver download page. Here is what it says:

Quote

Release 375 is from the 'Optimal Drivers for Enterprise' [ODE] branch. ODE branches are dedicated to relatively long term stability for ISV certification, OEMs, and Enterprise customers.

Release 375 U2 is the recommended version to use for software certification requirements.

Release R375 U2 adds support for the following Blade/Embedded products:

• NVIDIA Quadro M5000 SE
• NVIDIA Quadro M3000 SE

New features in this branch:

Video SDK 7.0

 

• Hardware video encoding and decoding via Video SDK 7.0
• APIs are now officially supported by FFMpeg and libav

If you would like to be notified of upcoming drivers for Windows, please subscribe here.

For Quadro Notebook:
This is a reference driver that can be installed on supported NVIDIA notebook GPUs. However, please note that your notebook original equipment manufacturer (OEM) provides certified drivers for your specific notebook on their website. NVIDIA recommends that you check with your notebook OEM about recommended software updates for your notebook. OEMs may not provide technical support for issues that arise from the use of this driver.

Before downloading this driver:
Please check to make sure that your notebook has a supported GPU (refer to theProducts Supportedtab below).

 

 

1. It is recommended that you backup your current system configuration.Click here for instructions.
2. If you own a Dell Inspiron 1420, Dell XPS M1330, Dell XPS M1530, or Dell Latitude D630/D630c it is highly recommended that you first install this Dell software update.

Notice how it does not say it includes performance optimizations? Notice how it only specifies stability and certifications? That's because that's all there is to it.

That's also why the current Quadro driver is on version R381 (if you want the ODE branch it's driver version R375).  Don't you think it's strange that the Quadro drivers follows the same numbering system as the GeForce Game Ready drivers (currently on version 384)? Gee, I wonder if that's because they are actually the same drivers, except the Quadro ones goes through more validation and therefore doesn't get updated as often...

I know it sounds crazy, but it's actually true.

 

 

By the way, you're linking Nvidia stuff here and not AMD.

[MoonSpot]

1 hour ago, Agost said:

What's gonna feed my UHD freesync monitor in case there are no actual benefits from Vega architecture in games, as opposed as pro workload results?

-___________-

 

We've got to hold on to what we've got
it doesn't make a difference if we make it or not
We've got each other and that's a lot for love
We'll give it a shot

We're half way there
Livin' on a prayer
Take my hand and we'll make it
I swear, livin' on a prayer - Jon Bon Jovi