First look at AMD X INTEL, new INTEL NUC has AMD vega Graphics

[pyconaut]

Just noticed this a few minutes ago.

http://www.pcgamer.com/leaked-photos-show-an-intel-nuc-with-kaby-lake-cpu-and-vega-gpu/

 

I already guessed AMD x Intel was going to go after small form factor to combat MXM on Nvidia, but I did not think it would be so soon.

 

As Pc gamer Said,

Quote

Now a photo has emerged showing the MCM plopped into a NUC (Next Unit of Computing), reinforcing our belief that it won't be just laptops that benefit from Intel and AMD working together.

As I said in the post I was writing about VR a few minutes ago, this will help bring down the cost of VR significantly in the long run as small form factor designs lower the cost of VR backpacks.  I also think this will cause Nviidia to double down on MXM form factor cards, which will make laptops and small form factor desktops much cheaper to upgrade (currently upgrading my Sager SLI laptop from dual GTX 765M's to GTX 980M's would cost $1000 dollars at the very least (dual 1080's draw to much power as LTT has shown (I am not carrying another 3 pound power brick))).  Also based on the NUC specs, it should be able to drive current gen VR.

 

This has become the age of mini computers, but none have nearly enough RGB.  

 

@LinusTech Have Luke build a new VR backpack with one of these NUC's, and RGB!

[just_dave]

Its most likely Polaris

[ImNotThere]

6 minutes ago, dave_k said:

Its most likely Polaris

why so?

[FloRolf]

18 minutes ago, dave_k said:

Its most likely Polaris

Imho vega also doesn't make much sense since it just eats all the power and then heats that little nuc up till it explodes. 

[WereCat]

Just now, FloRolf said:

Imho vega also doesn't make much sense since it just eats all the power and then heats that little nuc up till it explodes. 

Vega is very power efficient, idk what you're talking about. You can't compare this to the Vega 56/64...

[ImNotThere]

5 minutes ago, VegetableStu said:

at least that's what the rumors say:

 

i assumed that polaris wouldnt have a memory controller for hbm2 i guess

[suicidalfranco]

But can it even stand against mx150

[FloRolf]

4 minutes ago, WereCat said:

Vega is very power efficient, idk what you're talking about. You can't compare this to the Vega 56/64...

Fun fact: the only vega cards we know are the 56 and 64 and they eat like what, 80-150w more than the Nvidia counterpart? 

[WereCat]

4 minutes ago, FloRolf said:

Fun fact: the only vega cards we know are the 56 and 64 and they eat like what, 80-150w more than the Nvidia counterpart? 

But if you paid attention to some reviews and testing, you would know how much overblown the stock voltage on these cards is which in addition to the underwhelming cooler contributes also to a big power leakage.

Undervolting greatly reduces power consumption and even helps in improving performance.

You can get Vega 56 to outperform GTX1070 while it will consume only marginaly more power.

Vega power consumption scales very well with low voltages.

[cj09beira]

 

8 minutes ago, FloRolf said:

Fun fact: the only vega cards we know are the 56 and 64 and they eat like what, 80-150w more than the Nvidia counterpart? 

 

11 minutes ago, ImNotThere said:

i assumed that polaris wouldnt have a memory controller for hbm2 i guess

not only that but at this smaller gpu sizes gcn's scaling problems go away, (more rops and tmus per Compute unit)(gcn is limited to 64 rops, and 4 pipelines right now)

[AbeTrve]

Just now, FloRolf said:

Fun fact: the only vega cards we know are the 56 and 64 and they eat like what, 80-150w more than the Nvidia counterpart? 

Vega's poor scaling happens past 1GHz, and you're talking about desktop add-in cards which released with ridiculous stock voltages.

[just_dave]

30 minutes ago, ImNotThere said:

why so?

geekbench GPU code points to Polaris

15 minutes ago, suicidalfranco said:

But can it even stand against mx150

With 24 polaris compute units probably yes

[TrigrH]

would of killed you to put the image in the post?

[TheRandomness]

Holy shit, that looks like an STX Motherboard. I think I’m going to have some upgrades to the Breadbox soon. 

[TidaLWaveZ]

 

A nice single waterblock for CPU & GPU would do this nicely.

[mrchow19910319]

Hopefully the future gen's macbook pro is gonna get this

 

[ScratchCat]

1 hour ago, WereCat said:

But if you paid attention to some reviews and testing, you would know how much overblown the stock voltage on these cards is which in addition to the underwhelming cooler contributes also to a big power leakage.

Undervolting greatly reduces power consumption and even helps in improving performance.

You can get Vega 56 to outperform GTX1070 while it will consume only marginaly more power.

Vega power consumption scales very well with low voltages.

Was it not a 1080? The 56 normally beat the 1070 at stock. If AMD had not attempted to push the architecture so hard they would have had a card which people would have been pleased to buy. Just like the R9 290/X stock card where a decrease in frequency of ~7 % actually gives you a performance boost overall, the card would otherwise be slamming into its thermal limit and throttling down to 500 MHz.

 

 

[AlTech]

2 hours ago, FloRolf said:

Imho vega also doesn't make much sense since it just eats all the power and then heats that little nuc up till it explodes. 

 

Overclocked VEGA consumes a ton of power such as in RX VEGA 56 and RX VEGA 64.

 

Normally clocked VEGA is rather efficient such as in the Ryzen 5 and 7 2500U/2700U SOCs.

[Bcat00]

2 hours ago, AbeTrve said:

Vega's poor scaling happens past 1GHz, and you're talking about desktop add-in cards which released with ridiculous stock voltages.

Scale well or not, the fact they can't pump enough of those out for the consumers already excludes it from being a candidate.

And the costs, dang, i be surprised if AMD can make enough to justify pumping out the least amount as they can right now without getting backlashed.

[Okjoek]

I bet it'd make for a good PC mounted to the back of a monitor.

[cj09beira]

51 minutes ago, Bcat00 said:

Scale well or not, the fact they can't pump enough of those out for the consumers already excludes it from being a candidate.

And the costs, dang, i be surprised if AMD can make enough to justify pumping out the least amount as they can right now without getting backlashed.

they probably are focusing the supply more to the ssg's and other enterprise versions, that use the same pcb and sell for a lot more

[RagnarokDel]

4 hours ago, FloRolf said:

Fun fact: the only vega cards we know are the 56 and 64 and they eat like what, 80-150w more than the Nvidia counterpart? 

They're overclocked out of the box. drop the clock speed and they become insanely efficient.

[tsk]

This is not a NUC but a Zotac Zbox, also polaris not vega. #knowyourshitLTTforum

[Sniperfox47]

17 hours ago, FloRolf said:

Fun fact: the only vega cards we know are the 56 and 64 and they eat like what, 80-150w more than the Nvidia counterpart? 

Umm except this isn't a Vegas card... If it's Vega, it would be a discrete Vega10 connected via EMIB just like Raven's Ridge has Vega10 connected via InfinityFabric.

[Humbug]

16 hours ago, ScratchCat said:

Was it not a 1080? The 56 normally beat the 1070 at stock. If AMD had not attempted to push the architecture so hard they would have had a card which people would have been pleased to buy.

 

They pushed the vega64 so hard because they were so ridiculously late to market. They thought after all that time if we they don't at least match the gtx 1080 at stock it would be embarrassing.

 

If I was them I would have released only 1 vega discrete GPU for the gaming market. Fully unlocked (like the vega64) but at vega56 clocks. So then at stock power consumption would have been reasonable like vega56. And price it like 1070ti. If people want to overclock it and make it very power hungry to be a bit faster just leave it to them... 

 

Vega64 load power consumption is almost 100 watts higher than vega56. Which clearly shows that they have allowed the clocks to stray far outside the peak efficiency zone..