Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789
Results 241 to 255 of 255
  1. #241
    Spur-taaaa TDMVPDPOY's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    38,632
    So AMD did an event promoting Vega in Budapest where they had people play Battlefield 1 on an RX Vega + FreeSync combo and a GTX 1080 + GSync combo to see if anyone could tell them apart. Sad news that a 484 mm^2 gpu with HBM2 looks to only be on par with a 314 mm^2 GTX 1080 more than a year later. Especially after MSI let it slip that RX Vega will be a 300W card while the GTX 1080 is only 180W.
    if ur already spending a lot on a high end setup, who cares what gpu or cpu suck how many watts...electricity bills should be ur last concern or no concern at all...

  2. #242
    Veteran baseline bum's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    65,270
    if ur already spending a lot on a high end setup, who cares what gpu or cpu suck how many watts...electricity bills should be ur last concern or no concern at all...
    The big concern is that AMD can't scale Vega up to anything better. When Nvidia launched the GTX 1080 with such strong performance at 180W you knew they'd have something amazing coming at 250W later on, eg the Titan X Pascal, GTX 1080 Ti, and Titan Xp. AMD has nowhere to go with Vega. The die is already huge and the power consumption is through the roof.

  3. #243
    Spur-taaaa TDMVPDPOY's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    38,632
    latest benchmarks out, its faster then a stock 1080, 5% within or better then those overclock 1080 cards...now if it comes in at 100-150bucks cheaper then those oc 1080cards....?

  4. #244
    Veteran baseline bum's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    65,270
    latest benchmarks out, its faster then a stock 1080, 5% within or better then those overclock 1080 cards...now if it comes in at 100-150bucks cheaper then those oc 1080cards....?
    Those latest benchmarks look like they were done at the kind of clockspeeds that were making Vega FE use 400W. Not impressive at all on a 484mm^2 die.

  5. #245
    Veteran baseline bum's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    65,270
    RX Vega looks to be such a piece of shit they're not even going to livestream the launch of it.


  6. #246
    Spur-taaaa TDMVPDPOY's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    38,632
    why r3 vs r5 oc at same speeds

    the oc r3 cant handle a 1070+ .. seems like 1050ti is max it can handle b4 it bottlenecks the gpu...
    but the r5 can handle 1080ti no problems

    r3 looks like a cheap good sub 500bucks build for those entry or low budget builds, but aren't u better off going for the intel g4560 cpu if u can still grab ur hands on one

  7. #247
    Spur-taaaa TDMVPDPOY's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    38,632
    rx vega benchmarks are out on yt fellas...

  8. #248
    Veteran baseline bum's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    65,270
    rx vega benchmarks are out on yt fellas...
    I told you the card was shit, that is wasn't going to be much different from the disappointing Vega FE



    $500 to get beat out by a $500 reference GTX 1080 15 months later at about 65% higher power consumption.

    What a piece of shit. Get in here DJR210 and dance on AMD's grave.

  9. #249
    Spur-taaaa TDMVPDPOY's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    38,632
    I'm not concern with the gpu wattage, if ur investing in a high end system dunno why u complaining about power bills, that should be ur less concern...

    but anyway dunno some clowns on yt are benchtesting with reference cards, when they should be using the overclocked 3rd party cards at current price point, u be stupid to be buying a reference card...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AL5oNxkQRHA this guy did testing with 3rd party 1070 card which is overclocked vs vega56 and 56oc...
    hardwareunbox also did some testing, he did with reference cards with 25 games at difference resolutions like 1080/1440/4k ... once again dunno why he used a 1070 reference card when its slower then a overclocked 1070 3rd party card...

    still vega is running on optimized drivers which isn't even matured yet, give it 1-2months and see if they can increase the gap in performance...

    check out this clowns video, overclocked and tweaked bios...19% gain over stock
    Last edited by TDMVPDPOY; 08-14-2017 at 11:11 AM.

  10. #250
    Club Rookie of The Year DJR210's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    14,996
    AMD should pony up the cash and steal Nvidia's engineers.. Only way they're gonna ever take the lead

  11. #251
    Veteran DMC's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    60,032
    I told you the card was shit, that is wasn't going to be much different from the disappointing Vega FE



    $500 to get beat out by a $500 reference GTX 1080 15 months later at about 65% higher power consumption.

    What a piece of shit. Get in here DJR210 and dance on AMD's grave.
    Fuck, no matter what I buy, my tech ends up on the bottom. If it's the worst, it will be on the bottom. If it's the best, it will be on the bottom. I cannot win.

  12. #252
    Spur-taaaa TDMVPDPOY's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    38,632
    dafck amd just increase the prices by $100...

    either they are trying to make it expensive for miners, yet they are pissing off the gamers....

  13. #253
    Veteran baseline bum's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    65,270
    I'm not concern with the gpu wattage, if ur investing in a high end system dunno why u complaining about power bills, that should be ur less concern...

    but anyway dunno some clowns on yt are benchtesting with reference cards, when they should be using the overclocked 3rd party cards at current price point, u be stupid to be buying a reference card...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AL5oNxkQRHA this guy did testing with 3rd party 1070 card which is overclocked vs vega56 and 56oc...
    hardwareunbox also did some testing, he did with reference cards with 25 games at difference resolutions like 1080/1440/4k ... once again dunno why he used a 1070 reference card when its slower then a overclocked 1070 3rd party card...

    still vega is running on optimized drivers which isn't even matured yet, give it 1-2months and see if they can increase the gap in performance...

    check out this clowns video, overclocked and tweaked bios...19% gain over stock
    I'm concerned with gpu power consumption. Not because I give a shit if my power bill is 50 cents higher per month if I go AMD over Nvidia. My concern with power consumption is that AMD can't get it in line, which means they're not a threat whatsoever to Nvidia. There is nowhere AMD can go with Vega. It's completely maxed out with Vega 64 and it's still not enough to touch a decent 1080. While Nvidia was able to scale up their midsize die GTX 1080 (314 mm^2, 180W) into the GTX 1080 Ti (471 mm^2, 250W) for huge gains in performance, AMD cannot go that route. What, they're going to build a chip with a 700 mm^2 die and 400W power consumption to compete with 1080 Ti? Of course AMD can't do that, the card would cost $1500 at least.

    The Radeon Technology Group is in such a horrible spot. I would be very surprised if Vega 56 doesn't cost more to manufacture than GTX 1080 Ti considering Vega 56 has much more expensive HBM2 memory and has a larger die size produced from an inferior fab (Global Foundries sucks compared to TSMC), so I doubt Vega 56 has as good of yields as GTX 1080 Ti. And then if we talk the full fat cards, there is no way AMD is producing Vega 64 more cheaply than Nvidia is Titan Xp. Vega is a total disaster. It's so bad that even though Nvidia has Volta ready to go (they're already making 700mm^2 Volta V100 chips) they're going to sit on it until some time in 2018 for the consumer market. There is no competition so they don't have to release Volta until it's cheaper for them to produce than Pascal and they have sold all the Pascal chips they produced. And when Volta comes out it will probably release with a price increase since it's going to absolutely crush Vega.

    This isn't like the Hawaii launch (R9 290x). Those cards used 290W also, but they significantly outperformed Nvidia's king of the hill GTX 780 (a 250W card) at a smaller die size. So they were similar in power consumption and probably cheaper to manufacture than GTX 780s were. Even the 780 Ti Nvidia responded with wasn't a huge bump over the R9 290x, especially for $150 more. When I bought my 970 I always figured I'd upgrade it in three years. But I'm not going to pay $400 for Vega 56 / GTX 1070 level performance when the GTX 1070 is coming up on a year and a half old, and there is nothing lower that is anything more than a sidegrade from my 970. If RX Vega was good enough to scare Nvidia at all we'd probably see Volta GeForce cards by October at Pascal prices. Instead we will see them in probably March or maybe even May at higher than Pascal prices (which were already quite a bit higher than Maxwell prices). So yeah, fuck Vega since it's so bad I can only look to Nvidia for a decent gpu upgrade now in 2018 instead of the 2017 that would be more reasonable based on past release history.
    Last edited by baseline bum; 08-17-2017 at 08:09 AM.

  14. #254
    Spur-taaaa TDMVPDPOY's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    38,632
    lol amd vega is fail on so many levels, 3rd party aib cards don't come out till November due to supply side of amd, seems like there is not much gains for 3rd party aib makers...should just drop it altogether

    as for NVidia releasing a 1070ti to fight off the vega56, what a waste of resources and extending that product line life...why not just decrease the current stock 1070 and 1080 retail price by 50bucks each give and take, kill off the competition...

  15. #255
    Veteran baseline bum's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Post Count
    65,270
    Wow Intel is coming out hard at AMD with Coffee Lake. This 3.6 GHz i3-8100 with four cores looks to be an incredible value for a gaming cpu at $117. It's essentially getting an i5-7500 for 40% off, and the i5-7500 is a great gaming cpu.


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •