Vega FE Hybrid Mod - Passing the 1080 but 400W+ Power Draw

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, 234285_1454181771 said:

It's not realistic to expect that it'll give 1080 TI + performance improvements. Vega is repeating the exact same release coverage the Fury got at launch, 

Yea personally I have no been expecting a card faster than the 1080Ti, not ever. Something between 1080 and 1080Ti would be a reasonable expectation.

[leadeater]

3 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Yeah AMD also hyped Bulldozer, they're about the least trust worthy around for an industry of common misrepresenters and outright liars.

But at least we proved that was bullshit on the actual product 

[Misanthrope]

Just now, leadeater said:

But at least we proved that was bullshit on the actual product 

Well to an extend but besides the geometry thing there's barely anything they can do to really improve on the gamer version and that's even more true of actually reducing this ridiculously high power draws.

[234285_1454181771]

2 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Last I looked everyone is saying the RX is going to be clocked higher too. And gain performance from rasterization and stuff.  Still doesn't make sense to assume it will be worse because it might be cheaper.

But we can already see the higher clocks with this Hybrid Mod.

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, 234285_1454181771 said:

But we can already see the higher clocks with this Hybrid Mod.

does that not exemplify my point?

[234285_1454181771]

3 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Yea personally I have no been expecting a card faster than the 1080Ti, not ever. Something between 1080 and 1080Ti would be a reasonable expectation.

That's bad. That means AMD is done in the long-run because their products are inferior. No offense but you aren't thinking strategically about this. Look at the market share AMD has lost in the last 2-3 years. They haven't had a better GPU than Nvidia since the ~780 Ti era. So AMD will just keep on losing market share until they cannot continue to go on any further. 

[234285_1454181771]

1 minute ago, mr moose said:

does that not exemplify my point?

What that RX Vega will give us performance of 1080 reference performance while using 100 extra watts? That's horrible. 

[mr moose]

Just now, 234285_1454181771 said:

What that RX Vega will give us performance of 1080 reference while using 100 extra watts? That's horrible. 

um, no, I never said that.  You'd better read my posts again.

[leadeater]

10 minutes ago, 234285_1454181771 said:

That's bad. That means AMD is done in the long-run because their products are inferior. No offense but you aren't thinking strategically about this. Look at the market share AMD has lost in the last 2-3 years. They haven't had a better GPU than Nvidia since the ~780 Ti era. So AMD will just keep on losing market share until they cannot continue to go on any further. 

In a situation where a company that is competing against another that makes more money in a single quarter than the other does in a year it is unreasonable to expect them to be able to have the highest performing product, it's possible but it's not an expectation you should have.

 

Also

[234285_1454181771]

6 minutes ago, leadeater said:

In a situation where a company that is competing against another than makes more money in a single quarter than the other does in a year it is unreasonable to expect them to be able to have the highest performing product, it's possible but it's not an expectation you should have.

 

Also

http://wccftech.com/nvidia-amd-discrete-gpu-market-share-q1-2017/

 

It looks like AMD had a rebound in 2016 but they are declining again in 2017. 

 

Also its worth pointing out that a more meaningful graph would be the revenue rather than marketshare. 

[leadeater]

6 minutes ago, 234285_1454181771 said:

http://wccftech.com/nvidia-amd-discrete-gpu-market-share-q1-2017/

 

It looks like AMD had a rebound in 2016 but they are declining again in 2017. 

 

Also its worth pointing out that a more meaningful graph would be the revenue rather than marketshare. 

As a precursor Nvidia dates are different so subtract 12 months to align with Intel/AMD quarterly report dates.

 

 

Nvidia

Q1 FY2018 Summary

GAAP
($ in millions except earnings per share)		Q1 FY18		Q4 FY17		Q1 FY17		Q/Q		Y/Y
Revenue		$1,937		$2,173		$1,305		down 11%		up 48%
Gross margin		59.4%		60.0%		57.5%		down 60 bps		up 190 bps
Operating expenses		$596		$570		$506		up 5%		up 18%
Operating income		$554		$733		$245		down 24%		up 126%
Net income		$507		$655		$208		down 23%		up 144%
Diluted earnings per share		$0.79		$0.99		$0.35		down 20%		up 126%

Non-GAAP
($ in millions except earnings per share)		Q1 FY18		Q4 FY17		Q1 FY17		Q/Q		Y/Y
Revenue		$1,937		$2,173		$1,305		down 11%		up 48%
Gross margin		59.6%		60.2%		58.6%		down 60 bps		up 100 bps
Operating expenses		$517		$498		$443		up 4%		up 17%
Operating income		$637		$809		$322		down 21%		up 98%
Net income		$533		$704		$263		down 24%		up 103%
Diluted earnings per share		$0.85		$1.13		$0.46		down 25%		up 85%

 

http://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/nvidia-announces-financial-results-for-first-quarter-fiscal-2018

 

AMD

GAAP Financial Results
		Q1-17		Q4-16		Q1-16
Revenue		$984M		$1.11B		$832M
Operating loss		$(29)M		$(3)M		$(68)M
Net loss		$(73)M		$(51)M		$(109)M
Loss per share		$(0.08)		$(0.06)		$(0.14)

Non-GAAP Financial Results(1)
		Q1-17		Q4-16		Q1-16
Revenue		$984M		$1.11B		$832M
Operating income (loss)		$(6)M		$26M		$(55)M
Net loss		$(38)M		$(8)M		$(96)M
Loss per share		$(0.04)		$(0.01)		$(0.12)

 

http://ir.amd.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=74093&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=2268417

 

Edit: Supplied sources, forgot to add them in.

[Drak3]

Needs more RGB.

[234285_1454181771]

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

snip

I just checked the 10k. AMD doesn't separate computing from graphics in their income statement so it's hard to gauge the GPU division compared to Nvidia. With that said, AMD is posting net loss so they are in a very bad financial position. 

[leadeater]

4 minutes ago, 234285_1454181771 said:

I just checked the 10k. AMD doesn't separate computing from graphics in their income statement so it's hard to gauge the GPU division compared to Nvidia. With that said, AMD is posting net loss so they are in a very bad financial position. 

True but it was about who has the capability to spend what on R&D so whole company is fine for that, AMD can push funds to a division of the company if they want so long as they have the money to do it.

 

Edit:

Also the net loss is from paying off debt, see EBITDA figures.

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, leadeater said:

True but it was about who has the capability to spend what on R&D so whole company is fine for that, AMD can push funds to a division of the company if they want so long as they have the money to do it.

or you could just look at their actual R+D budget, Neither company is stupid enough to overload their R+D to the detriment of the company (when they get to that stage it's already over).

 

Last I looked AMD was spending $266M while Nvidia was spending $411M.

 

 

[leadeater]

1 minute ago, mr moose said:

or you could just look at their actual R+D budget, Neither company is stupid enough to overload their R+D to the detriment of the company (when they get to that stage it's already over).

 

Last I looked AMD was spending $266M while Nvidia was spending $411M.

How much of that is on GPU though?

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

How much of that is on GPU though?

That's company wide.  Given nvidia seem to be developing less products and the difference is so big you really don't need an economics degree to know this is worrying. 

 

The other thing is AMD used to have an R+D budget of $510M in 2007 and it's slowly decreased since then while Nvidia has only ever grown (from $97M in 2005) .

[leadeater]

1 minute ago, mr moose said:

That's company wide.  Given nvidia seem to be developing less products and the difference is so big you really don't need an economics degree to know this is worrying. 

 

The other thing is AMD used to have an R+D budget of $510M in 2007 and it's slowly decreased since then while Nvidia has only ever grown (from $97M in 2005) .

And considering they have been developing both a new GPU arch and CPU arch (to a much bigger degree) that isn't a lot going in to R&D looking at what Nvidia is putting in. I would guess GPU is less than half of that figure.

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

And considering they have been developing both a new GPU arch and CPU arch (to a much bigger degree) that isn't a lot going in to R&D looking at what Nvidia is putting in. I would guess GPU is less than half of that figure.

Maybe, All I know is they both develop more than just what we see on the surface, however given the main cash cow is GPU for nvidia I can't see them investing more into tegra or VR than volta etc.   Same with AMD, they probably put more than half of theirs into the ryzen.  

[AnonymousGuy]

5 minutes ago, leadeater said:

And considering they have been developing both a new GPU arch and CPU arch (to a much bigger degree) that isn't a lot going in to R&D looking at what Nvidia is putting in. I would guess GPU is less than half of that figure.

Hey we're discussing financials!

 

Yeah, AMD is a hardcore underdog, not favored to win.  NV and Intel both individual outspend AMD and have higher revenue to show for it.  Intel's IOT group is about as good of a revenue generator, and that's a "minor" part of Intel's overall business.    

[leadeater]

1 minute ago, AnonymousGuy said:

Hey we're discussing financials!

 

Yeah, AMD is a hardcore underdog, not favored to win.  NV and Intel both individual outspend AMD and have higher revenue to show for it.  Intel's IOT group is about as good of a revenue generator, and that's a "minor" part of Intel's overall business.    

Yea I might have a preference towards AMD but at least I'm not delusional, or maybe I am? How could you tell if you are delusional? lol.

[MoonSpot]

37 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Yea I might have a preference towards AMD but at least I'm not delusional, or maybe I am? How could you tell if you are delusional? lol.

If you clung on to 2 290/290Xs when you could have traded them in for a 1080Ti plus mucho extra pocket monies, and didn't.... then you might be fanboying a bit too hard.

[leadeater]

14 minutes ago, MoonSpot said:

If you clung on to 2 290/290Xs when you could have traded them in for a 1080Ti plus mucho extra pocket monies, and didn't.... then you might be fanboying a bit too hard.

Too much effort since my system in hard line water cooled and the NZ market doesn't have a strong used scene for high end gaming parts. I mean that has more to do with laziness on my part .

 

290X's didn't break 400 NZD and a 1080Ti here is 1700 NZD, extra pocket change? 

 

Edit:

Also I don't just upgrade because I can.

[MoonSpot]

42 minutes ago, leadeater said:

a 1080Ti here is 1700 NZD, extra pocket change? 

https://s3.amazonaws.com/hark-audio/a66beebc-bfc9-4007-b284-d2227afa55aa.mp3

 

Dude.  Why haven't you started a PC parts smuggling ring for NZ?  Y'all are getting hosed and taken for a B.S ride.

 

(How do we insert an audio player into these forums?)

[Mr.Meerkat]

On 2017-7-14 at 7:25 AM, Drak3 said:

It just takes a 40A breaker, running off of 2 20A circuits, or 3 15A circuits. You'll need multiple PSUs though.

Well I mean you could just come to the UK instead where our 250V (used to be 250, now its only like 230 or 240) 13A circuits will handle it...ish