Where the funk is Vega? (Why they re-release Polaris, that's already outdated)

FTFY


"Post must be at least 8 characters"
Dumbest. Rule. Ever.

I don't understand some people that think if GPU or CPU is 1 year old it's already out of date. What is wrong with you? If you are able to do your regular task with the pc component, whatever it may be, it is definitely not out of date. I have the R9 290 Sapphire edition which is now about 2.5 years old now and still capable of playing all my games at maximum settings. So I will keep using it for the next 5 years perhaps.

The people who buy computer component every time a new version comes out are just wasting their money. 18 month time period is really not long enough for Companies to create something that is breath-taking or several times more powerful then the previous version. Be it functionality of performance the improvements are very small.

Furthermore very frequent releases of electronics are bad for the environment because companies have to dig out more rare earth metals that cause pollution. Gaps of 3 to 4 years between individual releases would be much more sensible. And actually it would make people more exited about the product in question. I could see people were talking a lot about the Ryzen chip before its release whereas nobody was hype about new Kaby Lake processor from Intel.

1 Like

This is why continuing to update Polaris makes sense.

Like Ryzen, I'm fine with AMD taking as much time as they need to be sure that VEGA is a winner.

Yeah I figured polaris may appear in APU, it be nice if they got a 580 into a CPU core, that would be a game changer and probably net them allot of devices sales (notebooks etc)

1 Like

An excerpt from an AMA hosted by Tom's Hardware with an AMD desktop cpu marketing manager named Don.

"Vega performance compared to the Geforce GTX 1080 Ti and the Titan Xp looks really nice." It's pretty vague, but interesting none the less.

Source: RedGamingTech video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrD6NukTzRE&t=274s

AMD also posted on Facebook that Vega would released this quarter. (Q2 2017). Source is the above linked video.

Better clocks. Had to push out the 400 series too early and wanted to finish the job.

I didn't know that was a question, I kept seeing people jacking of with JO crystals about the 980ti, still do.

And the 1060 is a 980 ti, whats your point lol. Its a refresh, this is nothing new.

Clocks, power phases, a reason to have more APU's, power efficiency that they didn't quite reach, money. Their stocks are skyrocketing right now its great.

uhhhh

What? They are mid to low tier. Theres no reason to compare them to the 1080 and 1070 thats not their goal at all right now.

I mean, NV was riding the fire hazard for years after they changed the core of the company.

The FX goal was to kick sandy bridge's ass, and they did.

Your who spiel here is kind of stupid.

Oh also HBM2 was supposed to be on Vega, and mid last year at 500 launch it wasn't done yet. It was supposed to be like 8+ GB on a card or some shit?

Seriously, just fuck off with your bullshit mate XD

This might be Vega:


Source

When going into comparisons, the Driver Name is: 687F:C1 that is the same as in the ATOS leak last year. Looks very disappointing if it is Vega. Crossfire Hawaii get like 8k in Timespy. Ofc it could be something else, somebody might just be trolling, etc.

Pretty much the only thing that differs from an overclocked Fury X is Memory 8192 MB and Memory Bus Clock 700 MHz.

Edit: Guru3d has a newspost:

They noticed that the Dev ID also matches to that Doom Vulkan demo AMD had a while ago. So it is probably the real thing. And soo very disappointing :frowning:

Edit2: Remember to take this rumor with a truckload of salt as per usual.

Note, 1200mhz.
Note, Engineering sample.
Also note, not final drivers.

VEGA being slower clock for clock than Fiji wouldn't make any sense, hence you can't really ballpark real world performance even implying those scores are real.

It would be terrible if they are real. If it isn't the "small" Vega or something.

Could be small Vega, but I don't think they would go with HBM for small vega.
It's probably just an engineering sample Vega 10, running botched drivers along with lower clocks on the core and lower clocks on the HBM.

Might be a really early die like the one we saw running DOOM, and that was easily in the 1080 league.
Without proper drivers you wont get good performance regardless of how good your hardware is

Yikes, that doesn't even remotely compete with 1070.

@Castellorizon

Vega is due this 2nd Quarter, I doubt they can make sweeping architectural improvements in that span of time, maybe if that was last year you'd have a point.

Yah, could be the same engineering sample they've used for demos. Would explain the same id showing up. Score is terrible though, and hopefully has nothing to do with final product. One can only hope.

Vega is never coming.

Raja will keep all the Vega GPUs for himself. He will fill bathtubs with them and tweet pictures of himself bathing in Vega GPUs.

Honestly Vega probably won't even launch until Nvidia launches Volta.

It is very much a possibility. Except that AMD has said H2 2017 and recently confirmed that Vega will launch this quarter, Q2. So their investors could possibly be upset by them not launching Vega in Q2. Also a possibility that Volta gets a launch date soon-ish and that AMD adjusts the launch of Vega accordingly.

VEGA is due early summer, late may or june, not delayed.

To figure out if they made any architectural improvements you can start by looking at how large Fiji is compared to the transistor count, then compare it to polaris and it's transistor count.

Fiji = 596mm^2 with 8.9b transistors. 15m per mm^2
Polaris = 232 with 5.7b transistors. 24.5m per mm^2
VEGA 10 has been estimated to be around 500mm^2 from images,
Assuming about the same density per mm^2 as polaris VEGA will have something akin to 12 billion transistors, (it will probably have more due to HBM controllers, pci-e controllers and so on not taking up as much space % wise on the die)

Assuming that VEGA doesn't have any architectural improvements is pretty silly seeing how it has 4096 shaders just like Fiji has, but way more transistors.

Just as silly as assuming a core 2 quad at the same frequency as a skylake part is just as fast because they have the same numbers of cores, but the latter has way more transistors.

Here is a screenshot of Fiji at 1400mhz, just as fast as a GTX 1080 in firestrike extreme.
We know for a FACT that Vega is going to run more than 1500mhz at launch, assuming it has the same throughput clock for clock as Fiji which is extremely pessimistic it will still be way faster than a 1080.

Edit, comparing the 1400mhz Fiji to a 1080 with the graphics score you can see that Fiji is 10% faster, oy.

2 Likes

What is speaking against this being small Vega is that compubench post: https://compubench.com/device.jsp?benchmark=compu20d&os=Windows&api=cl&D=AMD+687F%3AC1&testgroup=info

Same ID shows up again and says 64 compute units. So probably the same engineering sample doing the rounds. Score is similarly unimpressive.

A lot of those scores are more impressive, especially the ones that don't usually require a lot of specific optimization.
If you look at Ocean Surface Simulation for VEGA 10 1200mhz you see it's as fast as the average score of GTX 1080ti.

They confirmed this quarter like 3 days ago.

Volta won't be coming until the end of this year although more likely 2018 Imo