Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by bit-tech, 11 Aug 2017.
12mths too late and £50-£100 overpriced on the 56 & 64 cards.
By the time you can actually buy a semi decent AIB card (Sep/Oct) Volta will be around the corner and will trounce these cards.
It's a shame but these aren't going to do for AMD's GPU division what Ryzen did for the CPU.
"...is a sign that it is now on a catchup trajectory."
That's the whole point, I think. And for that, I'm truly, honestly happy and excited for the future - something I haven't felt in the GPU industry for years.
But in the meantime, I'm still holding on to my GTX 970 and 1080 monitor.....
Ultimately doesn't matter for us - AMD were forced to compete on price only (efficiency went well out the window to meet performance), and that means they will join the RX580's in mining rigs the world over.
Which is fine, because anyone with half a brain cell will just buy a GTX 1070/80, overclock it to get better performance than Vega, and save themselves a nice little chunk on their annual electricity bill.
Pointless release is pointless. Might as well saved themselves some money and sold them without video outputs directly to the miners!
I got lucky and caught scan's launch offer and nabbed a 64 for £450
Volta will be Q1 2018 in sync with TSMC 12nm with GDDR6
Got a GTX 1080 for £400 in march..... happy days, the price needs to be cheaper on these Vega cards to make them a real option.
Raja Koduri confirmed the die size as 484mm2 at the beginning of July.
Dam! That's a dam good bargain considering they're £600 minimum on scan now already and Overclockers has them at 550. I hope prices don't escalate too badly as aib cards will add a premium on those prices no doubt.
Can't wait to see what these will do on water also.
Yup, and that would be all that a vast number of gamers would ever need. I know that it's tough for a company like AMD to fight a war on multiple fronts, and that they've got a lot going on right now, but the delay in getting these APUs out is annoying as that's one area where they could cement a really strong position.
And of course, because AMD are doing a lot of stuff, it makes it harder for everything they do to be a success. The CPU side of things is doing nicely, and that's great, but the GPU side is disappointing and the APU side non-existent.
I'd argue that their obsession with apu's is what has cost them in the discreet Cpu and gpu market.
Mass market notebooks and thin clients don't need the graphical grunt of an apu, workstations that need it need more than an apu can give. On mass market consoles are the only place they make 'real' sense, but considering how small a package you can get a fully fledged rig in (E.g. Corsair one), just how long will that remain? Consoles offer hope to amd not through apu sales or 'awareness', but through games being developed for platforms using their architecture which might in the long long run give them a performance advantage in the mainstream pc market.
AMDs finances been what they are, they need wins today to a certain extent not 5 years down the line.
The PS4 pro is not setting sales records and niether will the Xbox x. Ps5 on Ryzen seems more likely than a new ps4.
Console developers are hitting the point where the hardware costs are going through the roof. According to devs the biggest issue with both is the cpu.
Project cars 2 is about as life like as a racing game will surely get, without spending weeks per car.
Only thing missing is how overpriced the card Vega64 is in the U.K.. £600 on scan and Overclockers they having a laugh.
You can buy a 1080ti on daily deals for near that. 1080 it's competing against is sub £450, you would have to be a crazy AMD fan to consider it a good deal at current uk pricing.
Next-gen consoles around ~2019 will have Zen+ cores on 7nm. You could imagine they'll go for a 6c/12t but they'll probably go for 8 again because it's as much promotion of numbers as it is raw spec and cost. This will alleviate the CPU performance because they're still running Puma's which were a clock bump of Jaguar that was designed in ~2009/10. This **** is basically Intel Atom territory. If they're clever they'll use the adaptive clocking text for 3GHz+ on 1/2/4 cores to really push the CPU performance beyond anything a previous console has had.
Whatever is after Vega might be better, who knows, but both Sony and MS have no other high performance GPU option and AMD is the only HPC SoC company apart from Intel. Neither of them will go for Nvidia because that bridge is burnt and earth salted. ARM has pretty much dropped its HPC ambitions in favour of IoT.
The other potential you might see is an AI core being added. Tensor-flow cores for real AI calcs for devs to do crazy-**** with bots, NPCs or camera/microhpone, or, an always-on microphone for cloud-connected assistants - especially Cortana + Microsoft - this will be attractive for them. Sony doesn't have that tech but they might be tempted to team up with Amazon or even Alibaba/Tencent to get better access to the Chinese market. That would certainly be a win for Sony on the sales-front. Even a separate chip will be tiny + cost effective.
Sony's long-term goal, though, is to migrate people to its streaming service and focus fully on games. Getting people away from physical Playstations means it can charge a premium monthly service fee and people simply play through Smart (Sony) TVs. Average TV upgrades are around the same timescale as consoles, and they yield much more profit.
or a cryptominer... which is where they all seem to be going [and why the price has gone even more mental]
As far as I can see these aren't much good for mining. The hash rates vs power usage doesn't add up. You're still significantly better off with something like a 1070. That said there's a new type of coin out every day so it'll probably work really well for one of them.
how odd, i replied to the post directly...
Well I have been talking to the guys who actually bought these. Of course I went in with the attitude of "Man you guys are crazy" but tried to be polite and tone it down a bit. Any way, whilst some of them have spent more on a Vega 64 Liquid than I spent on a Titan XP their logic seems sound to me.. Freesync.
Some of these guys have spent £700 on a 34" WS Freesync monitor. What do they do? ditch the monitor, lose a heap of cash (because you do, I have been there trying to out a 4k G-sync) and then spend £1000 on the same monitor for GS and £650 on a Ti? it doesn't make sense.
Adored has just done a rather biased review of the 64 Liquid but he does make a good point. In non Turbo mode you lose about 3 FPS and save 100w. At which point if you are coming from a 290 then at £450 it's not so bad. Yes, it's slower than a 1080 but you retain your adaptive sync.
The problem is AMD. They are being really greedy. Apparently the £450 was a starter price for X cards. After which they bundle in two games and stuff the price up £100. This is not store gouging it is AMD's decision. And it's pretty, erm, well Cword ish. Talk about rewarding your loyal supporters (yes, that is sarcasm). Unforgivable IMO. Talk bollocks about this Freesync thing, get people on it and then make them pay to keep it.
I don't understand how this is the same company who gave us Ryzen. With no gouging, amazing availability and incredible bang per £.
Couldn't find the launch offer on Scan, but managed to grab one from Overclockers @ £450.
Initial reports suggest performance on Linux bests a 1080ti, so very happy with my choice. Been kicking myself for selling my RX480 (due to issues with the proprietary drivers, not realizing that the open-source ones were better)...
Building a kernel with Vega support as we speak.
Separate names with a comma.