My RX 570 MSI cards have fans that go to 3500RPM. I used to stick them at 2700 minimum, to keep things cool. Haven't needed to, since AMD changed Wattman around recently, and now they max at 75C at defaults, rather than 90C.Honestly I wouldn't even pay $10 for anything that needed +3,000rpm fans.
I’m guessing that yields were a bit better than expected, so AMD decided to ship the Radeon VII.
I dunno man, look at where Vega56 is today and tell me that it was as much a failure as people said it was when it launched. The main failure of Vega56 was finding one for sale at MSRP. Just a few tweaks and Vega56 is a respectable card for the money (though not a 2080Ti by any means).
Interesting; I thought the opposite. Since these are cut down dies and can't make it as MI50/60, AMD had to do something with them. If yields were strong, there may not have been enough left over to justify creating any kind of Vega gaming card.
Wouldn't the power draw have run somewhat out of control if they'd done that?
RTG and Vega isn't AMD and Zen: their RTG products will only improve with the full weight of AMD behind them. Keep in mind Vega still lacks features, still needs modern & functional power management.In regards to competition, the underdog usually needs the competitor to basically screw up so it can catch up. I don't think the graphics side of AMD is clearcut as it was with their CPU side. Nvidia typically executed their plans better than Intel.
GPU: Undervolting values of ~0.95-1.0V (with increase max power 20-50%) and a frequency increase ~80Mhz (3-5%)
Without taking your (or anyone else's) words or posts out of context, Vega 56 is exactly where it was at launch as it is today in relation to it's performance vs. it's main competition.
I'm saying don't get too hyped by Navi.
Interesting; I thought the opposite. Since these are cut down dies and can't make it as MI50/60, AMD had to do something with them. If yields were strong, there may not have been enough left over to justify creating any kind of Vega gaming card.
That seems incredibly likely to me too. They can afford the publicity because they'll sell the cards so why not?
I don't expect Navi to be terrible - there's a fair bit more leeway for mid range cards to cope with 'excess' power draw & more development funding with the console money etc etc. The real win for AMD would be if they can somehow get it efficient enough to challenge in notebooks, but that would take a huge leap.
The core config is the same as the MI50, last I checked. Well, plus a clock bump.
That's stock. The whole point of getting Vega56 today is not to run it at stock. Try again.
Well, because of yield concerns, AMD limited Vega 20 to about 330 mm^2. A 500 mm^2 chip, with reduced clocks, would been significantly faster - and would have like been limited to Pro GPUs only (due to the high costs of TSMC 7nm wafers with less dice per wafer). So the gen to gen performance for normalized die size would have better than 25%.So 7nm offers 2x the density and 25% performance improvement over the 14nm process. Making it roughly equivalent to the transition between 28nm and 14nm. The 25% performance gain is again an ideal number that works in parts that are not running at top clocks. For a GPU, 1.6-1.8GHz is probably close to this looking at efforts from Nvidia needed to get Pascal to get such clocks.
Looking at amd roadmap it seems navi is still gcn based?
I'm not familiar with Vega 56 overclocking being amazing - especially after Maxwell. Can you provide some links by reputable sources? And please don't include sources that flash or mod cards; that's neither pervasive nor anymore practical than custom liquid cooling, which is a very nice practice as well.
Massive powahhhhh consumption too.Aww you don't like the V64 BIOS mods? That's what all the cool kids are doing. Anyway :
All they did was change some powerplay table settings. That's it. Massive powahhhhhhh
Massive powahhhhh consumption too.