Will AMD release any high performance GPU's in Q2 or Q3?

[Gaidax]

just feels too little too late, whatever the outcome. oh amd

i got tired of waiting and picked up a cheap 1070 to replace my 290.. but the temperature in my room is already 10 degrees cooler, so that's nice. (oh also the nighthold gardens are nicer to raid in now)

Well, amount of people who want upgrade does not really change in any given moment.

I personally too got tired of this AMD bullshit hypetrain with all their childish "bettered" and "poor volta" crap, while having nothing concrete and with this disaster of Polaris and picked up 1080Ti instead of 290X, but it does not really matter in the long run, as amount of people desiring upgrade does not diminish.

That said Nvidia surely milked high end hard for a year, simply because AMD has nothing there.

- - - Updated - - -

I do believe that Vega will be a fine card, but I am also afraid it may be too exquisite and in too low supply with all this HBM2 crap and if it will be fighting 1080Ti, IMO it will be a loss for AMD, because Nvidia can churn 1080s and Ti in frikkin' tons and crash the prices if they have to, while Vega so far seems like Fury 2.0 - not making a dent in the things overall.

[Lathais]

just feels too little too late, whatever the outcome. oh amd

i got tired of waiting and picked up a cheap 1070 to replace my 290.. but the temperature in my room is already 10 degrees cooler, so that's nice. (oh also the nighthold gardens are nicer to raid in now)

When we really have no idea of the performance, how can you even begin to say it's too little? Depending on price it may compete with 1170's not just 1080/1080tis, so it may not be too late either. Really, without knowing ANYTHING at all about the cards other than they are coming, how can it feel like anything at all?

- - - Updated - - -

Well, amount of people who want upgrade does not really change in any given moment.

I personally too got tired of this AMD bullshit hypetrain with all their childish "bettered" and "poor volta" crap, while having nothing concrete and with this disaster of Polaris and picked up 1080Ti instead of 290X, but it does not really matter in the long run, as amount of people desiring upgrade does not diminish.

That said Nvidia surely milked high end hard for a year, simply because AMD has nothing there.

- - - Updated - - -

I do believe that Vega will be a fine card, but I am also afraid it may be too exquisite and in too low supply with all this HBM2 crap and if it will be fighting 1080Ti, IMO it will be a loss for AMD, because Nvidia can churn 1080s and Ti in frikkin' tons and crash the prices if they have to, while Vega so far seems like Fury 2.0 - not making a dent in the things overall.

Well, how can it dent anything if it's not even out yet. We know nothing about it really other than it's coming. Yeah, it could end up being a huge flop. It could also end up being the strongest GPU on the market. It could end up anywhere in between. Who knows. So far, the only thing it seems like is a mystery.


It's almost as though people already have something against them just because it's AMD. Wait until we see some benchmarks and stuff, or at least have some info on them, before we go talking about what it feels like and what it seems like.

[cuafpr]

I'm just waiting on vega to come out as regardless of its performance i suspect 1070's and higher to drop in price 50 - 100 $USD.

[Darkstrike]

there are 2-3 AMD Vega cards coming out before the end of June . Full VEGA 10 and cut down versions , according to rumors.

[Vash The Stampede]

Well, amount of people who want upgrade does not really change in any given moment.

I personally too got tired of this AMD bullshit hypetrain with all their childish "bettered" and "poor volta" crap, while having nothing concrete and with this disaster of Polaris and picked up 1080Ti instead of 290X, but it does not really matter in the long run, as amount of people desiring upgrade does not diminish.

Not following you here. The polaris cards are for mainstream products where the 1080Ti is not. That's like saying you didn't like the Toyota Camry so instead you went with a Porsche. Not really in the same market.

That said Nvidia surely milked high end hard for a year, simply because AMD has nothing there.

Nvidia has been milking it for far longer. It's been a very long time since AMD had a high end card that was actually competitive. The Fury cards weren't, though they certainly weren't bad cards, and then you have the Radeon Pro Duo which was a joke.

I do believe that Vega will be a fine card, but I am also afraid it may be too exquisite and in too low supply with all this HBM2 crap and if it will be fighting 1080Ti, IMO it will be a loss for AMD, because Nvidia can churn 1080s and Ti in frikkin' tons and crash the prices if they have to, while Vega so far seems like Fury 2.0 - not making a dent in the things overall.

AMD's problem is pricing. The RX 480 is a great card, but for whatever reason they stuck with $240 for the 8GB. The 4GB is slower but only because the memory is clocked lower. Meanwhile the 1060 6GB is $250 but beats the 480 in nearly every DX11 game. Yes the 480 is faster in DX12/Vulkan titles but those games are far and few between. The 8GB 480 should be much cheaper.

The Fury cards suffered from a similar situation when a 980 Ti was faster overall than a Fury X, but the prices didn't change much. Whatever the Vega is, it has to be priced significantly cheaper than a GTX 1070. Because AMD has a problem getting people to accept them as an alternative to Nvidia.

[Lathais]

It's been a very long time since AMD had a high end card that was actually competitive.

Except that after the Crimson Drivers they were very competitive, especially at 1440p and 2160p resolutions. They lagged behind a bit at 1080p, but still produced FPS most monitors are not capable of displaying the difference between in most games.

[Maruka]

Just lmao at the thought of high performance amd gpus.

[Fascinate]

Just lmao at the thought of high performance amd gpus.

Eh, you werent around for 7970 i take it? It launched to take on the gtx 580 and it actually competed with the 680, you could still be using one of these today for 1080p 60 fps gaming.

I dont disagree its been a while since they had a hit like that, and probably wont happen again. You just gotta remember how much more money nvidia has, more money gets you smarter people and smarter people gets you a better product.

[Life-Binder]

Except that after the Crimson Drivers they were very competitive, especially at 1440p and 2160p resolutions.

yeah with a stock 980Ti at most (the Fury X)

vs:
- Overclocked custom 980Tis
- Titan XM
- (custom) 1070s
- 1080s
- Titan XP
- Titan Xp
- 1080 Ti

they had and still have nothing




as for Vega - literally nothing official is known atm, but rumors and signs point towards a paper launch in end of May/June .. actual availability may be late June or even July

why ? because if they were to be made actually fully available worldwide (hard launch) within 1 month from today - mass production of finished retail cards and possibly even early shipping would already be happening now .. as well as leaks, leaked benchmarks etc. from those who get the earliest cards on their hands - that was the case with Polaris

since there is nothing about Vega - there can only be a paper launch within 1 month, with availability later

[Evildeffy]

yeah with a stock 980Ti at most (the Fury X)

vs:
- Overclocked custom 980Tis
- Titan XM
- (custom) 1070s
- 1080s
- Titan XP
- Titan Xp
- 1080 Ti

they had and still have nothing




as for Vega - literally nothing official is known atm, but rumors and signs point towards a paper launch in end of May/June .. actual availability may be late June or even July

why ? because if they were to be made actually fully available worldwide (hard launch) within 1 month from today - mass production of finished retail cards and possibly even early shipping would already be happening now .. as well as leaks, leaked benchmarks etc. from those who get the earliest cards on their hands - that was the case with Polaris

since there is nothing about Vega - there can only be a paper launch within 1 month, with availability later

Can't use the Fury (X) as a comparison vs. the 10 series, also the Titan X(M) was slower than a 980Ti.

As for Vega, they did the same with Ryzen and they didn't paper launch the Polaris cards either.
So I would withhold judgement on "PAPAR LAUNCH NAU!!!!11onerone" statement.

You wouldn't have "leaks from people receiving early" 1 month prior, patience is a key factor.
Pre-judging things is stupid.

[Life-Binder]

Can't use the Fury (X) as a comparison vs. the 10 series

sure I can if they have nothing else since then

lso the Titan X(M) was slower than a 980Ti.

only against OCed 980Tis

it has more cores (& more VRAM), so clock for clock its always faster and under water Titan XMs go to 1500+ MHz as well

they didn't paper launch the Polaris cards either.

exactly and ~27 days before Polaris release we did have more info & leaks about it then we have now about Vega

You wouldn't have "leaks from people receiving early" 1 month prior

it always happens and it did with Polaris too

so yeah, if they officially launch Vega at end of May - thats gonna be a paper launch, guaranteed you can quote me later

not surprising given limited HBM2 availability


alternatively they may not even launch at end of May (only preview/tease) and drag it out till some time in June (E3 or later) to avoid/lessen the paper launch

[Evildeffy]

sure I can if they have nothing else since then

No you cannot as the comparison was specifically made between the 980Ti and Fury X and their competitive nature, not follow-ups.
The subject was a comparison between former flagships, not current.

only against OCed 980Tis

it has more cores (& more VRAM), so clock for clock its always faster and under water Titan XMs go to 1500+ MHz as well

Had this discussion before, it includes stock Ti's because of higher clocks, 3rd party models made it worse.
Ti's also can be watercooled and pushed further, if they are at identical clocks yes they are faster, the fact is that they are not.
A Ti will always be higher clocked and have better stock performance than a Titan X unless Titan X is equal or higher clocked base.

With Pascal the lines are blurred more than before yes but this was far less the case

exactly and ~27 days before Polaris release we did have more info & leaks about it then we have now about Vega

Yes and? Just because it's happened 27 days before 1 time doesn't mean you'll always have it 27 days before next time.
Non-Disclosure Agreements are there for a reason, can't have it all the time your way and leaking.

it always happens and it did with Polaris too

so yeah, if they officially launch Vega at end of May - thats gonna be a paper launch, guaranteed you can quote me later

not surprising given limited HBM2 availability

alternatively they may not even launch at end of May (only preview/tease) and drag it out till some time in June (E3 or later)

No it does not "ALWAYS" happen... did you know about the Titan Xp launch as well? Did the tech press? (just the most recent example)

If they state on the 30th of May during Computex (or whenever during the 3 days they hold the AMD event) "It will be available June 15th in stores!" .. would you count that as a paper launch? By definition of terms it's not but you may personally define it different from what the actual facts are.

All I'm saying is that you do not possess a crystal sphere that tells you the future, and even if they drag it out till June 15th (last day of E3) to launch it..
Still within Q2 release and still not a paper launch.

However in the interests of OPINIONS, if you believe they will paper launch it then state it as a clear assumption on your part and not as fact.

Note:
Paper launch is tech press getting review samples, saying it's available now and not having any meaningful stock for months after that.
That is the definition of a paper launch, as such announcing a card on the 30th of May and proclaiming it to be available 15th of June (random dates) is not a paper launch as the launch date is 15th of June.

[Life-Binder]

and even if they drag it out till June 15th (last day of E3) to launch it..
Still within Q2 release and still not a paper launch.

thats true, technically they wont be late



they can even drag it out to June 29-th and thats still Q2 xD
AMD GPU division is so good at dragging after all


nvm that with their Prey promos, ppl expected the card to be out with Prey launch (May 5-th)


but I suppose ppl waited for this card for a year so whats a few weeks or a month here or there

[Evildeffy]

thats true, technically they wont be late



they can even drag it out to June 29-th and thats still Q2 xD
AMD GPU division is so good at dragging after all

nvm that with their Prey promos, ppl expected the card to be out with Prey launch (May 5-th)

but I suppose ppl waited for this card for a year so whats a few weeks or a month here or there

Why is it you people create hyper unrealistic scenarios and bitch at brand A or B continuously.
It's like Polaris launch all over again, even though AMD themselves stated mainstream people go like "ZOMG THIS IS AMD'S HIGH-END?! TAFAK SHIT BRAND!".

Learn to see things objectively damn it.

[Life-Binder]

^ May 5-th would be ~11 months after 1080 came out

thats hyper unrealistic huh

[Evildeffy]

^ May 5-th would be ~11 months after 1080 came out

thats hyper unrealistic huh

Did they EVER state they would release the High-End last year?
No they did not, therefore your expectation is indeed hyper unrealistic.

Also Pascal is an evolution of Maxwell, Vega is an entirely new architecture.
Not comparable in any sense or way.

Keeping up with realistic expectations is them delivering on the promised date with the promised performance.
Not "ZOMG! BRAND X RELEASED Y AT THIS TIME, WHY HAS Z NOT DONE SO EITHER?! SHIT BRAND!".

They did exactly that with Polaris, it was users who hyped up performance levels, not AMD.
Vega may flop, Vega may succeed but until you have conclusive evidence as to either you do not assume anything.

[Life-Binder]

obviously my expectation is based on market reality, not on whatever AMD says/promises, thats pretty much hot air

Also Pascal is an evolution of Maxwell, Vega is an entirely new architecture.
Not comparable in any sense or way.

"entirely new" = another evolution of GCN .. calling it NCU doesnt make it entirely new

either way thats irrelevant, only the end result (aka gaming performance/fps) matters, not with what arch it was achieved

[Evildeffy]

obviously my expectation is based on market reality, not on whatever AMD says/promises, thats pretty much hot air

The market does not dictate releases, the companies producing them are.
If that were the case you should have had consumer 6C CPUs a long time ago from Intel.
You either get what they promise you or you don't when they tell you it'll be available, not when you WANT it to.

"entirely new" = another evolution of GCN .. calling it NCU doesnt make it entirely new

either way thats irrelevant, only the end result (aka gaming performance/fps) matters, not with what arch it was achieved

It is an actual newly designed from the ground up architecture with GCN properties present, that is what Vega is.
Pascal = Maxwell just improved, there's a considerable cost and time difference involved.
It is new.

And yes the end result matters but you're already assuming that and assuming it'll not be available and be a paper launch and that it will be pointless.
Kind of weird for you to say that and the statement of end result when you won't even give it a chance and have unrealistic expectations.

Just wait and see, stop being judgemental.

[Remilia]

Well, in terms of NCU, it is a decent departure from GCN though not a complete revamp like we see with Ryzen. Nonetheless the additional stuff are interesting depending on your point of view.
Increase in IPC and high clockrate, which is extrapolated to 1550MHz from the MI25 cards, something that is not really achievable with GCN.
Improved Load Balancing, something that is very much a thing already found in the PS4 Pro. This also alleviates it from being stuck with 4 shader engines.
Geometry engine improved going from 4 polygons per clock with 4 geometry engines to 11 polygons per clock with 4 engines. Along with it there is the addition of primitive shader, which allows better use and discard of primitives. Though this one is on the hands of developers to use.

Then there's draw stream binning rasterization (tiled base rasterization) which should greatly improve performance/efficiency.
ROPs has also changed in how it interacts with the L2 cache and memory controller (or lack thereof now).

More interesting thing though imo is HBCC / High Bandwidth Cache Controller. In a sense it takes the idea of Fiji/Fury's driver based system RAM/VRAM memory control and places it on the hardware side making it more fine grained and better use of VRAM. Memory management would be a lot more CPU like.
So we don't have this

[MrPaladinGuy]

To the GTX 1080 or the GTX 1080 Ti?

It's expected to be comparable to a 1080. The 1080 Ti came out so soon/fast it should have been something Nvidia released after AMD released Vega (assuming it replaced a 1080) and they needed to be king again or at least compete.