17 Replies Latest reply on Jan 11, 2019 3:42 PM by qwixt

    AMD Announces Vega II for February 7th: $699, ~30% performance improvement vs Vega 64

    black_zion

      https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-7nm-cpu-radeon,38399.html

       

      So it's going to cost 100% more than the RX 2060, yet only perform about 30% better, or over 75% more than Vega, yet deliver 30% more performance...So much for getting somewhat excited about Vega II making its way to light. Wonder how thick a coating of dust these will collect in the warehouses, as there is -no- reason to purchase them, since at $700 you're higher than the RTX 2070, and if you're a content creator you should just go with Vega. Worse yet, no pressure on nVidia, so prices will remain sky high.

       

        • Re: AMD Announces Vega II for February 7th: $699, ~30% performance improvement vs Vega 64
          blackmaninc

          Meh, kind of disappointing with this one. I was hoping its performance would be beyond the 2080TI but it matches it 2080. I'll wait for the new Navi GPU's thats supposedly going to be announced later this year first before I spend my money. I'm not all that excited for the Ryzen 3000 either. I'd rather have a 7nm 16 core 32 thread CPU, if not higher.

            • Re: AMD Announces Vega II for February 7th: $699, ~30% performance improvement vs Vega 64
              black_zion

              Well supposedly Ryzen 3000 matches the Intel 9900K in terms of single threaded IPC, that's a full 32% faster than the first generation Ryzen (1000 series) and 23% faster than Ryzen Plus (2000 series), that is a good reason to be excited IF it holds true, which, given it was demoed live at CES by AMD with task manager shots, holds much credence. Ryzen 3000 will also be chiplet in nature (CPU die + I/O die) like EPYC, so programs which depend on memory access should also perform much better, so as someone with a 1800X, I am definitely interested.

            • Re: AMD Announces Vega II for February 7th: $699, ~30% performance improvement vs Vega 64
              qwixt

              I wonder if this is just reference GPUs or if there will be custom ones available too.

              • Re: AMD Announces Vega II for February 7th: $699, ~30% performance improvement vs Vega 64
                leyvin

                As a Content Creator / Developer... the Radeon VII is exceptional value, as 16GB HBM2 for $700, however as a Gamer; I'd rather an 8GB Variant that cost $500 and suddenly it becomes an attractive Enthusiast / Performance Gaming Card.

                 

                With this said, if the rumours are true that only 20,000 will be available for launch with a further 40,000 (for the full production run) as AMD decided to switch to a "Full Ramp" on Navi due to Engineering Samples coming back above expectations, with likely the original plan to release and segment Vega 20 for the Enthusiast / Performance / Prosumer Market (so we likely would've also seen an 8GB Variant replacing the current Vega 64 and possibly a cut-down version replacing the Vega 56; at the $500 and $400 Price Points respectively) … still as it stands what we'll ultimately see is Navi as the Mainstream.

                 

                Now they've essentially denoted "Mid-2019" as the release of Ryzen., and Lisa Su also mentioned Navi 7nm as part of said "Future Announcements closer to Launch" … which we know May is their 50th Anniversary., so I think while I did originally suggest they'd keep with the Late-March / Early-April launch (inline with previous years); what we'll likely see is a massive announcement at GDC (in March) that covers the entire Ryzen and Radeon (Navi) 3000-Series; with a May Launch of essentially all of their Catalogue (keep in mind May-June is when they've historically launched their APU; with Ryzen with Graphics being no different).

                 

                The rumours for said products also are very close to my original predictions, in both price-points and estimated performance; plus we know that the 500-Series Chipset (X570) Boards are going to be shipping in Feb / Mar... which will actually be good to be able to get the Motherboards and see some BIOS Revisions prior to the CPU / APU launches.

                 

                 

                It of course is very frustrating not to see the Radeon 3070 and 3080 at least announced, even if nothing was revealed beyond the MSRP and suggested performance.

                As if my predictions and the rumours (of which there are 3 that align very closely) are true; then we should be looking at the Radeon 3080 being $250 MSRP with RX Vega 56 / GTX 1070Ti / RTX 2060 Performance except those Cards are $350 MSRP.

                 

                Now here's the thing, the GTX 1070Ti … at least in terms of Performance within the GTX 10-Series Product Stack, is Fantastic Value (for an Enthusiast GPU and Relatively speaking)., I mean you're getting "Close" to GTX 1080 Performance ($500) for about $100-150 less.

                Yet as a Mainstream (GeForce xx60) … well as such, it's suddenly $50 - 100 overpriced with a weird performance spot, where it's very close to the Next-Tier in terms of Traditional Gaming Pipelines; and single digit performance difference in RTX Gaming Pipeline to it's bigger brother the RTX 2070.

                 

                So., it's in this weird area; where in the RTX 20-Series Product Stack it's Good Value but in terms of Generational and Market Segment it's supposed to be for, it's actually quite bad due to being overpriced.

                 

                As such IF (as the rumours suggest) the above is true for the Radeon 3080., then it's mere announcement would mean NVIDIA would have to drop the RTX 2060 to match; which would mean either taking the hit in terms of selling at a loss or alternatively need to try to do PR Damage Limitation; as their main selling point (which focused on it's being "Good Performance Value"), would instantly disappear.

                 

                Keep in mind that the Turing Architecture are BIG (and Expensive) Processors to produce, with less than ideal Yields and Quality.

                This means they're going to be expensive... NVIDIA already knew they'd be selling in a small margin as opposed to their big margins they have been enjoying; especially with the GTX 10-Series.

                 

                 

                What AMD really need to do, is well what they're doing to Intel right now with Ryzen... basically forcing NVIDIA into a position where they just look considerably worse value (from a Consumer Perspective) while also doubling down on GPU Open for Developers with an "Open Source" Catalogue that matches Gameworks in "Plug-and-Play" integration, that provides AMD Optimisation.

                Force NVIDIA into their Margins... into their Ecosystems... and most important CONTROL that Ecosystem.

                 

                People are mentioning this in regards to the G-Sync Compliant certification., where AMD essentially won out on the Adaptive Sync Standard; but at the same time their refusal to focus on Branding and Quality Control with say a "FreeSync Basics" and "FreeSync Premium" … well it's giving NVIDIA an "In" to pull a Microsoft of "Embrace, Expand, Exterminate" (and that's EXACTLY what NVIDIA will do., via charging for said G-Sync Certification; something that will be given to only the Premium Adaptive Sync Displays, which are already more expensive; so what's an extra $50-100 per Certification and Branding License., while at the same time they have THEIR branding all over the Premium Products).

                 

                 

                Now the last thing I will note., is the Forza Horizon 4 demonstration of Ryzen 3000 + Radeon VII … was actually quite telling in regards to the performance.

                Sure, AMD themselves are denoting RTX 2080 Performance; but note how their Demonstration was 86 - 120 FPS at 4K HDR, which is RTX 2080Ti (86 - 100 FPS) performance territory in said game and quite handily beating the RTX 2080 (73 - 84 FPS)

                +35% over Vega 64 in Battlefield V (DX12) … actually places it at ~72FPS (2160p) / ~168 FPS (1080p) Avg. Vs. the RTX 2080(Ti) ~67 (84) FPS (2160p) / ~148 (182) FPS (1080p)

                 

                And if as noted above, the rumour is true they deliberately did a Limited Run to switch to a Navi Full-Ramp... this would strongly suggest that Navi is likely to be even more impressive.

                I'm somewhat excited to see the Reviews from Gamers' Nexus and alike in the near future., because while what AMD showed off was fairly "Out-of-Context" Benchmarks with obviously very little Apple-to-Apple Comparisons; at the same time, the projections based on their slide claims does suggest that they might actually be underplaying how good it could be for gaming.

                3 of 3 people found this helpful
                  • Re: AMD Announces Vega II for February 7th: $699, ~30% performance improvement vs Vega 64
                    ajlueke

                    It seems unlikely that a 8Gb variant was ever in the works.  Vega VII actually has less stream processors and compute units than Vega 64 and Fury X, but achieves a 30% increase partially due to higher clocks but also to the vastly improved pixel pushing power of the ROP/memory bandwidth.  Vega VII has twice the number of ROPs and memory channels over Vega 64.  Cut that to 8Gb, and you lose two memory channels, leaving you with a slightly upclocked Vega 60.

                     

                    Vega VII became viable when NVidia left the price/performance of their upper GPUs unchanged with the Turing launch.  The RTX 2070 replaced the over 2 year old GTX 1080 with similar price/performance, while the RTX 2080 replaced the GTX 1080 Ti, again at a similar price/performance.  The 2080 Ti was introduced at an entirely new price/performance level.  Vega VII can then drop in at the RTX 2080 level for a similar price, while Vega 64 and 56 continue to be priced between the RTX 2070 and RTX 2060.

                     

                    The very fact that the Vega VII and RX 590 exist at all is a good indication that Navi is still a ways away.  It seems unlikely that AMD would bother rounding out the product stack around the Vega 64/56 only to disrupt that a quarter later with a RTX 2070 level GPU priced at $250.

                     

                    All that being said, I wouldn't expect too much from Navi.  It is, at the end of the day still a GCN product.  AMD has likely milked all the performance out of GCN that they can during their time on the 28nm process node.  The HD 7970 and R9 Fury X were all on the same process node, and all GCN products.  Vega 64, was essentially IPC identical to Fury X, with a similarly clocked Vega 64 performing the same as the Fury X.  We got a 30% improvement from the die shrink and improved power delivery for higher clock speeds.  Now again, we have another die shrink, with slightly higher clocks, but vastly increased ROPs and memory bandwidth at the expense of compute units and stream processors.  The net gain?  Again about 30%.  So I really don't think we'll see really significant IPC improvements and compute stream processor gains until Arcturus.   

                    1 of 1 people found this helpful
                      • Re: AMD Announces Vega II for February 7th: $699, ~30% performance improvement vs Vega 64
                        colesdav

                        Hi

                         

                        I think the Radeon VII is good for Compute and Content Creator and good to see an RX Vega 64 7nm refresh at last. I like the triple fan cooler and I hope the GPU is ~ 2 slot 40mm wide so I can fit a number of them in PC case.

                         

                        I think it is dead in the water as a high end gaming GPU versus Nvidia RTX 2080 GPU.

                         

                        I think 4 banks of HBM2 with 2GB capacity would be fine on Radeon VII for memory bandwidth and performance and HBCC should address any need for > 8GB VRAM.


                        HBM2 is only available in 4GB modules as far as I know but it they were made in 2GB modules with 2 1GB stack high instead of 4 1GB stack high then they should also be able to be clocked  faster giving a higher performing memory.

                         

                        The Fury X would perform faster these days if HBM overclocking wasn't disabled...time that was fixed now.

                         

                        I own both R9 Fury X and RX Vega 64 Liquid and they perform ~ the same if i set the RX Vega 64 Liquid to run at same GPU and CPU clocks.
                        Any performance increase I see with RX Vega 64 Liquid is due to higher GPU CLK and MEM CLK  Frequency in most applications.

                         

                        In some cases like Forza Horizon 4 DX12 I am convinced AMD don't bother to optimise theR9 Fury X/Fury/Nano Drivers at all, which is why RX580 4GB is now faster than a Liquid Cooled R9 Fury X on that title. Memory capacity is not the issue.

                         

                        Seems to me the base and boost clocks of the Radeon VII are similar to RX Vega 64 Liquid.
                        I am hoping AMD will allow DX11 Crossfire between RX Vega 64 Liquid and Radeon VII.

                        Sure I would end up with effective 8GB Vram but who really needs 16GB for gaming?

                         

                        I hope at least AMD make sure the RX Vega 64 Liquid GPU and Radeon VII can run together in DX12 MultiGPU.

                         

                        I own both RX Vega 64 Liquid and RTX 2080 OC cards now. They cost me ~ same price taking into account BFV game deal with the RTX 2080 OC.

                        I bought the RTX 2080 OC reluctantly but the RX Vega 64 Liquid is disappointing versus the RTX2080 OC.

                        The RTX 2080 OC I own is a 2 slot wide 40mm GPU, with a basic 2 fan cooler.
                        It beats the overclocked/undervolted  RX Vega 64 Liquid hands down on everything I have tested so far with Adrenalin 18.12.1 driver without even overclocking the Nvidia GPU.
                        It is about 30% faster than RX Vega 64 Liquid in DX12. 
                        I am glad to see I will be getting a FreeSync enabled driver for the RTX2080 OC soon, so I will still be able to use FreeSync on my monitor if I need to use it.

                         

                        AMD Adrenalin Driver 2018 - 2019 stability is really bad for me and features like Radeon Chill and Automatic Overclocking need serious attention.

                         

                        I am convinced that some work on Radeon Chill could really improve gaming power consumption and keep gaming performance reasonable as well.

                         

                        Automatic Overclocking results in an instant PC System hang and Black Screen and Audio Buzz with the RX Vega 64 Liquid, starting from default power mode settings.
                        The RTX 2080 OC has an automatic overclocking feature as well. It works fine on the same PC, does not crash, and give me another 3-5% performance depending on the options I set.

                         

                        Bye.

                    • Re: AMD Announces Vega II for February 7th: $699, ~30% performance improvement vs Vega 64
                      black_zion

                      AMD claims Vega II will match or beat the RTX 2080, though it's going to draw near 300w to do it...Still, $700 is way too much, especially with the high power draw and lack of ray tracing.

                       

                      https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-radeon-vii-specs-pricing,38414.html

                      amd_radeon_vii_press_deck_-_final_Página_16

                      1 of 1 people found this helpful
                        • Re: AMD Announces Vega II for February 7th: $699, ~30% performance improvement vs Vega 64
                          qwixt

                          I don't see the missing ray tracing as a loss, since it's not really usable feature in the 2080 anyway. In the 2080 ti, it might be somewhat usable.

                           

                          Aren't those 3 games really friendly for AMD GPUs?

                            • Re: AMD Announces Vega II for February 7th: $699, ~30% performance improvement vs Vega 64
                              black_zion

                              It's more for people who buy a card for the long term, this is the high end realm, not the $200 mainstream realm, so something which may be commonplace in a year (you know how deep nVidia is involved in nearly every game studio) factors in considerably to the decision, especially with a card which demonstrates 60 and 75fps capability at 4K with full details, so there's even less of the "Well I'll buy it now and game at reduced quality until the next card is released" factor. Even if it's a minor part, the power consumption figures are also another factor, especially in warm climates and high electrical rates, especially when this card costs exactly the same as the RTX 2080 so there's no value pro to add to the list. If nVidia decides to axe $50 or $100 off the 2080 to appease the people who only see raw FPS numbers, AMD really won't be able to counter that since Vega II is tied to very expensive 16GB HBM2, which is the main reason Vega 64 and 56 continue to sell at such prices.

                              1 of 1 people found this helpful
                                • Re: AMD Announces Vega II for February 7th: $699, ~30% performance improvement vs Vega 64
                                  qwixt

                                  Those are all very good points. NVidia just removed one of the biggest reasons to get an AMD GPU when they announced that they will support Freesync in some fashion. When I browse and read reddit/forums/whatever, the only reason given to buy Amd is due to freesync, and because nvidia sucks. I see this as a significant blow.

                                  1 of 1 people found this helpful
                                    • Re: AMD Announces Vega II for February 7th: $699, ~30% performance improvement vs Vega 64
                                      black_zion

                                      After AMD made the comeback with the HD 4000 series until last year AMD was trading blows with nVidia pretty much so the choice for most people was usually the less expensive model of the two, which was usually AMD. Then the cryptocurrency boom hit and blew up prices at the same time Raja stonewalled on Navi and pushed out an inferior Vega, and Lisa Su reorganized RTG to devote 75% of resources to the semicustom market, leaving nVidia virtually untouched at the mid and high end with solid perks of the 1070/Ti/1080 over Vega, such as lower power consumption and a lower price for either a higher performing or -very- slightly lower performing model. The RX 580 and GTX 1060 is the only matchup which allows them to trade blows, but they're finding themselves more and more less able to sustain 60fps as detail levels increase.

                                       

                                      The only GOOD side is that Lisa Su is being really smart with Navi and not rushing it, with next generation XBOX and PS5 depending on CHEAP, efficient GPUs which can deliver a steady 60fps at 4K they can't afford to give them a reason to potentially switch to an AMD/nVidia combination, not after having a lock all these years, though it also helps that both Intel and nVidia have a history of slacking off performance and innovation without the presence of a competitor. Still, let's hope she is going...

                                       

                                      See the source image

                                       

                                      and not...

                                       

                                      See the source image

                                       

                                      And AMD can go out and buy themselves a new headquarters since the former CEO sold it on a leaseback agreement.

                                      • Re: AMD Announces Vega II for February 7th: $699, ~30% performance improvement vs Vega 64
                                        colesdav

                                        Hi,
                                        I will be testing the Nvidia FreeSync Driver as soon as it is released on an RTX2080 OC. I will let you know if it works.
                                        Bye.

                                          • Re: AMD Announces Vega II for February 7th: $699, ~30% performance improvement vs Vega 64
                                            elstaci

                                            I just purchased an LG 4k monitor with Freesync because the Acer Monitor my wife had failed and actually caused Windows to not boot up. Gave my newer (3 y/o) Acer monitor to my wife which is is still good even though a part of the IPS panel is starting to go bad.

                                             

                                            The LG has AMD Freesync which I thought I wouldn't be able to use since I have a Nvidia GTX 1070. Now you are saying that Nvidia is coming out with a GPU driver that will be able to use Freesync?

                                             

                                            That would be great. I will be able to use my Freesync Monitor and see how it works.

                                             

                                            Thanks for the update.

                                             

                                            EDIT: I just "enable" Freesync on my monitor Menu and I get video from my Nvidia GPU Card connected via Display Port. but I lose my desktop and just see the background image and working taskbars no desktop icons or gadgets. I believe that this isn't normal. Maybe when the Freesync Nvidia driver comes out in January 15, Freesync will work correctly when "enabled" on my Monitor Menu.

                                        • Re: AMD Announces Vega II for February 7th: $699, ~30% performance improvement vs Vega 64
                                          ajlueke

                                          It is worth pointing out, that it isn't as though AMD cards are missing ray-tracing.  Ray tracing is done via Microsoft DXR, and extension of DX12, which uses the already existing DX12 graphics and compute engines.  NVidia simply added the RTX extensions to drive DXR over their tensor cores.  AMD could in driver, enable DXR ray tracing over the standard compute engine.  Any DX12 capable GPU is capable of running DXR.