AMD Vega GPU

Discussion in 'Video Cards & Monitors' started by Agg, Jan 6, 2017.

  1. hvalac

    hvalac Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2005
    Messages:
    2,231
    Location:
    Parmelia, W.A, 6167
    https://www.kitguru.net/components/graphic-cards/matthew-wilson/new-leak-points-to-three-rx-vega-cards-vega-xtx-xt-and-xl/
     
  2. hosh0

    hosh0 Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    8,971
    Location:
    Sydney N.S.W

    Because they all use the same architecture now :).
     
  3. bart5986

    bart5986 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2006
    Messages:
    4,850
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Thats not relevant as the playstation does not run roomscale VR or a similar type of VR, it does not use drivers or have anything to do with most of what PC's have to do with.

    It doesn't even run most VR games because the PS4 is too slow...
     
  4. SKITZ0_000

    SKITZ0_000 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2003
    Messages:
    1,414
    Location:
    Tas
    It's still the same, particularly through HDMI on a TV (though I'm on 1.4) the colours are washed out and the display is over sharp. All the tinkering in the world cannot get the picture quality of my GTX 1080 even close to my RX 480 out of the box.

    The GTX 1080 through DVI otherwise seems fine though. This is one of the reason's I've been watching Vega, for a more capable GPU for my media pc (which I use for feet up controller games like currently Nier Automata) as soon I'm sure the RX 480 just won't quite cut it with spoilt ultra settings at 1080P.
     
  5. hosh0

    hosh0 Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    8,971
    Location:
    Sydney N.S.W
    So now VR isn't VR unless it's room-scale? You can twist it how you like, but most people who own VR gear run it from AMD hardware.
     
  6. Unframed

    Unframed Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010
    Messages:
    9,158
    Location:
    Hella south west
    Actually, yes. I'm a firm advocate of (F)OSS. Can you imagine how much more competitive the market would be if neither company was using proprietary technologies to get an edge and instead were just improving visuals and optimization?

    10/10 shitpost. I have the same near 0 impact using plays.tv as shadowplay. Honestly turning off plays.tv has no noticeable effect at all except maybe increase FPS readout by 1 or 2.

    And plenty of people do. I never hear issues aside from one off driver issues on both camps. It's all anecdotal.

    As for crossfire, there's been little faith in multi-GPU solutions for years. If memory serves hasn't Nvidia reduced its support too by reducing the amount of cards able to be used in SLI.


    I'm not defending AMD so much as pointing out that you're talking out your arse. As for value, this is a Vega thread, aside from the FE do you have any prices or performance to judge value at all?

    I don't remember saying that at all. Are you just making stuff up now to further your bad argument?

    Thanks man, it's a great panel. I want the 200hz AOC 35" UW but need about $800 for that upgrade.
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2017
  7. mesaoz

    mesaoz Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2015
    Messages:
    7,821
    Location:
    South East QLD
    read the rules for this thread
     
  8. ipv6ready

    ipv6ready Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2014
    Messages:
    2,765
    Location:
    North Sydney
    As a consumer, why does it matter who has the fastest card at the moment AMD or Nvidia.

    Isnt it the best bang for the buck card, that is available at the moment the best card for the buyer. And that mean AMD pulling out their head from their arse and making a decent card.

    Even in this forum, how many people buy 1080ti (dont think it is thousands?)

    Wouldn't the best scenario be

    New Vega RX beating 1080ti in 50% of old games and new games, and they price the card 10 per cent cheaper and Nvidia not wanting to lose market share lower their card 10% below that in a price war etc.

    To me, AMD seems to have conceded to Nvidia this round, because if it is even close, AMD could do the same marketing and pricing as Ryzen, ie blowing the competition out of the water.

    What AMD has done to CPU market is brilliant and my next cpu will be AMD, but for GPU sadly AMD seems few generations behind without a bright future.

    ie If vega is good, Nvidia will just release the new gaming Volta and vega will get swatted. Volta super computers are already in the market.
     
  9. bart5986

    bart5986 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2006
    Messages:
    4,850
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Well if you put it that way maybe not.

    How many people own phones? Samsung + others are VR compatible.

    But again, this is useless information.


    This is just silly.

    What you are suggesting will simply result in both companies never making any technology. Say goodbye to Freesync and Gsync and many other great technologies.

    All I have said was that if Vega costs the same as the 1080, which is what was claimed, it was overpriced due to lack of AMD driver/tech.

    I already listed the tech, if you want to look at drivers, just compare patch notes for both.

    Based on the assumption of identical 1080 performance with extra benefits in DX12 it should be around $100 less.
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2017
  10. Unframed

    Unframed Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010
    Messages:
    9,158
    Location:
    Hella south west
    And yet that is the exact opposite of what happens with OSS. :thumbup:

    Again basing this on crap. I don't care if hobo scrotums don't have realistic physics in Bum Fights VR. PhysX is realistically the only decent tech Nvidia has on AMD that isn't VR related and I can easily live without it.

    As for drivers, go to either camp. You'll hear all sorts of crap about drivers. I think earlier in this thread I mentioned my brand new ROG laptop was hard crashing due to Nvidia drivers (explicitly Experience but it was all bundled at the time). I've had issues with both camps drivers and more recently its been Nvidia causing me grief. As for patch notes, you should go from one group of devs workload to the next then compare the patch notes they produce. I work for a software company and constantly ask why things weren't mentioned in patch notes that were obviously changed. Devs are shit for adding irrelevant crap or leaving out important changes.

    If it is the same performance but also better in DX12 why does it HAVE to be $100 less? Is it to gain your trust or some baseless crap like that? If it performs better (even if it's only marginal) why is being the same price bad?
     
  11. bart5986

    bart5986 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2006
    Messages:
    4,850
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Which is a shame. If there was any potential for something like that to happen AMD would be doing a lot more then they are now.

    Goes to show you have no idea what the nvidia tech is, based on what you are saying. Might be worth researching first.

    I never spoke about reliablity.

    I mentioned compatibility and performance.

    I suggest you research it.

    Because right now if you exclude dodgy DX12 implementations and DX12 implementations that barely boost performance on an AMD card then you aren't left with very much.

    You don't buy a video card based on performance that may or may not exist in the future. You buy it on todays performance.
     
  12. power

    power Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2002
    Messages:
    66,185
    Location:
    brisbane
    You buy based on budget and requirements - if an AMD card checks those boxes you buy it if the competing product doesn't do it for you - if both check the boxes you probably stick with what you know. I don't understand the "support" AMD arguments, they are a business if their product isn't good enough what are you a fucking charity??? Nvidia develop new tech for their own products, why does everyone thing they should be just giving this away to their only competitor in the market??? WHY!?
     
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2017
  13. Unframed

    Unframed Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010
    Messages:
    9,158
    Location:
    Hella south west
    It would be much better for both companies.


    http://www.dictionary.com/browse/hyperbole

    Neither did I. I spoke about driver issues which you initially mentioned.

    And if todays performance is the same with a boost in a handful of DX12 titles why isn't it worth the same price? Even if it's 1 title, how does that not justify equal value?
     
  14. Unframed

    Unframed Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010
    Messages:
    9,158
    Location:
    Hella south west
    Probably so the market is more about genuine competition not trying to create some tech that *AAA title* will use by default crippling the competitors performance.

    If they all shared the same tech then it would be up to the pure power of the GPUs to decide what is best and then they can also fight on the value front too with clearer results as for performance.
     
  15. power

    power Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2002
    Messages:
    66,185
    Location:
    brisbane
    creating innovation does create genuine competition - a one where one side loses.

    "share their innovations" hilarious what's next let's all hold hands and sing kumbaya??
     
  16. Dragonfly

    Dragonfly Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Messages:
    4,400
    Location:
    Brisbane
    I'm hoping for a day you can get a monitor which supports both G-Sync and Freesync. Like how you can get motherboards that support both SLI and Crossfire.

    Once you buy a monitor which has one of those techs, you are locked in really. Freesync is more widely available since it doesn't need a chip on the monitor to enable it.
     
  17. rickoles

    rickoles Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    206
    Location:
    Perth 6017
    Pushing their 'tech' on game devs is toxic to the game community as a whole and usually makes games run worse for both NV and AMD. They should focus on implementing things at the hardware and driver level - game engines shouldn't contain proprietary 'tech' because its anti-competitive and anti-consumer.
     
  18. power

    power Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2002
    Messages:
    66,185
    Location:
    brisbane
    that's up to monitor manufactuers just as it was up to board partners. We all want choice.

    what pushing? Nvidia develop things that make games look and run better on nvidia hardware, AMD are free to do this as well. Nvidia aren't in the business of making everything free for AMD to benefit.
     
  19. dzajroo

    dzajroo Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2010
    Messages:
    1,053
    nvidia has G-sync covered and will sell just fine as long as they keep the top stop in the high end market. People buying these panels are going for the best out there regardless of price, which means 1080ti or Titan.

    Obviously G-sync would be in trouble if AMD would come up with 1080Ti/Titan killer card and keep on top for few years. Until then there is no reason for nvidia to do anything with G-sync. If it sells well, no reason to change anything.
     
  20. Unframed

    Unframed Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010
    Messages:
    9,158
    Location:
    Hella south west
    "Lets create tech that we can use with our architecture that would rape hardware not optimized for it and get game devs on board to make use of it" - healthy competition according to power
     

Share This Page

Advertisement: