• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

AMD Vega (FE and RX) Benchmarks [Updated Aug 10 - RX Vega 64 Unboxing]

Page 65 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Tweak155 said:
At the end of the day, it still boils down to cost. Not being able to tell the difference, the smart bargain shopper will save the money and buy whichever is cheaper. Not even a week to go until we have the full story... hopefully.
Click to expand...
I don't think intelligence enters into it, really. Very few people would buy both GPUs and run multiple benchmarks to compare them side-by-side. Sometimes, people buy the more expensive unit just because the higher cost evokes confidence in the product.
 
Malogeek said:
I find it amusing that lots of folks (including here) were saying how their Ryzen system felt much smoother but couldn't explain it with actual numbers. Guess that's just not a valid thing with a GPU 🙂

Not defending the marketing, just pointing out the double standard.
Click to expand...

My 6c/12t Ryzen system feels smoother compared to my previous 4c/4t Ivy Bridge system and I cannot explain why (well, I also don't care, I upgraded just for the sake of it, finding benefits has been a nice bonus 😀 ).

I have a freesync monitor (bought last xmas) and I have no plan to buy a new one anytime soon. I guess Vega at its price point will give me smoother gaming that anything I can buy at the same price point 🙂
 
nathanddrews said:
I don't think intelligence enters into it, really. Very few people would buy both GPUs and run multiple benchmarks to compare them side-by-side. Sometimes, people buy the more expensive unit just because the higher cost evokes confidence in the product.
Click to expand...

How is $500+ on a gpu a "bargain"? You're saying it's not smart to spend less money when you don't gain any physically tangible value?

Sure, you might gain some emotional value, but that doesn't make it logical. Either way, the point remains.
 
Veradun said:
I have a freesync monitor (bought last xmas) and I have no plan to buy a new one anytime soon. I guess Vega at its price point will give me smoother gaming that anything I can buy at the same price point
Click to expand...
With both Ryzen and Vega you'll hit MegaSmooth!

You're right though, I doubt anything at the same price point for that combination will compare.
 
Vega is not that bad.
According to this demo that runs very well on GCN hardware. Vega is here 72% faster than fiji.

German version:
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Vega-...ase-AMD-Radeon-Frontier-Edition-1232684/3/#a5

Translated to English.
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Vega-Codename-265481/Tests/Benchmark-Preis-Release-AMD-Radeon-Frontier-Edition-1232684/3/#a5&edit-text=


Before and after the cooler conversion of the Radeon Vega Frontier Edition, we carried out various other benchmarks with the map in order to explore their strengths and weaknesses. And even if at present overall appears rather a performance picture in the coarse region of the GeForce GTX 1080, there are also glimmering lights. We would like to present one of them here. All further insights, including the radiator conversion, are presented in PCGH 09/2017.

It is a scene demo, which was voted the winner of the 4k demos at the Tokyo Demo Fest 2016. We have already reported about this and also that Radeon cards seem to be particularly good at the calculations required by the demo ( see test ). With the Radeon Vega Frontier Edition, we re-launched the demo and obtained an amazing performance: with the exception of a few synthetic polygons, we have seldom seen the theoretical increase in the computing performance compared to the Radeon R9 Fury X of +52.4% - of architectural improvements not to mention. Many new, especially gaming performance-acceptable functions, it is nebulous in the Internet, are not yet integrated into the driver. With the 2nd Stage Boss demo, we have apparently found an application where Vega can play its strengths. +72 percent increase in performance compared to the Fury X are already an announcement - and locate the Vega Frontier Edition, where many AMD fans have eagerly awaited them.

Whether this performance is an (absolute) outlier or an indication of the expected future performance can not be said with certainty so far - one thing is certain: potential has Vega.
Click to expand...


edit:
The video of the demo (in general, not vega )can be seen here :
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Grafi...PC-4K-Demo-Radeon-Geforce-Future-GPU-1187323/

2nd_stage_boss.1920x1080.20160221-_8_-pcgh_b2article_artwork.jpg
 
Malogeek said:
I guess you've missed the past few weeks of discussion regarding Vega FE and Fiji. Vega FE has a 70% higher clock speed than Fiji, so yes it's 70% faster.
Click to expand...

🙁

After comparing the clockspeeds, yep your right. So busy trying to translating the text myself, i overlooked that the clock speed was different.
Well, then it is hoping again that vega runs in legacy mode only and that hopefully the driver bugs for the new features are all worked out within a month or two.
 
William Gaatjes said:
After comparing the clockspeeds, yep your right. So busy trying to translating the text myself, i overlooked that the clock speed was different.
Well, then it is hoping again that vega runs in legacy mode only and that hopefully the driver bugs for the new features are all worked out within a month or two.
Click to expand...
Yep you basically summarized the last few weeks of insanity regarding Vega FE, and don't bother going back and reading all the crazy speculation. Now we're just waiting to see what RX Vega is like. Soon!
 
this page made me feel a little better... no less worried about possible pricing tho

this launch is going to be rough though, considering the high demand for mining cards and a likely shortage at every retailer under the sun. bad timing; especially so if the product falls a bit short of expectation.
 
Malogeek said:
Yep you basically summarized the last few weeks of insanity regarding Vega FE, and don't bother going back and reading all the crazy speculation. Now we're just waiting to see what RX Vega is like. Soon!
Click to expand...

I read some crazy stuff already.
I think the most reasonable explanation is, that AMD needs more time to test and validate the new driver software.
Look at polaris, ryzen. All good products that deliver what AMD promised (polaris : 1080p gaming, ryzen : good cpu for multithreading and singlethreading). But the drivers and agesa needed some work.
Vega will not be different.
I really hope that AMD will have 7 fat years with lots of black numbers on the financial charts. Then they can put more R&D and man power in their software department.

Besides as an example, long ago, Gigapixel made a tile based rendering gpu called GP-1. Gigapixel was bought by 3dfx and 3dfx was later acquired by Nvidia.
I mean to say that even Nvidia may have had needed some time to get the efficient architecture they have now.
It all takes time.
 
Malogeek said:
I guess you've missed the past few weeks of discussion regarding Vega FE and Fiji. Vega FE has a 70% higher clock speed than Fiji, so yes it's 70% faster.
Click to expand...
William Gaatjes said:
🙁

After comparing the clockspeeds, yep your right. So busy trying to translating the text myself, i overlooked that the clock speed was different.
Well, then it is hoping again that vega runs in legacy mode only and that hopefully the driver bugs for the new features are all worked out within a month or two.
Click to expand...
Stated in the translation:

"With the Radeon Vega Frontier Edition, we re-launched the demo and obtained an amazing performance: with the exception of a few synthetic polygons, we have seldom seen the theoretical increase in the computing performance compared to the Radeon R9 Fury X of +52.4% - of architectural improvements not to mention. Many new, especially gaming performance-acceptable functions, it is nebulous in the Internet, are not yet integrated into the driver. With the 2nd Stage Boss demo, we have apparently found an application where Vega can play its strengths. +72 percent increase in performance compared to the Fury X"

52.4% faster clocks giving 72% increase in performance = 13% increase/clock of Vega vs Fiji in that demo. Not fantastic but also not identical at all.
 
biostud said:
So basically a fiji on 16nm and hbm2 support would give the same results...
Click to expand...

I know there's "too good to be true", but on the flip side this almost seems to inept to be true. I understand there're things like the 16-bit FP that AMD added that do nothing unless specifically programmed or optimized for, but what hell were they doing for the last two years if Vega is that bad? Is GCN tapped out to the point that there's so little performance to gain? Even Intel has made more progress with their graphics over that span.
 
dogen1 said:
It's not really even a benchmark, it's a demo that probably just hits the ALUs hard and not much else.

https://forum.beyond3d.com/posts/1992321/
Click to expand...

At least the horse power is all there. And we've seen in at least one geometry benchmark that Vega is strong in geometry throughput, though apparently not quite as strong in geometry culling. So where's the weakness? Is it that pesky non-functional tiled rasterizer? Maybe it's even the memory (controller).
 
geoxile said:
At least the horse power is all there. And we've seen in at least one geometry benchmark that Vega is strong in geometry throughput, though apparently not quite as strong in geometry culling. So where's the weakness? Is it that pesky non-functional tiled rasterizer? Maybe it's even the memory (controller).
Click to expand...

Non functional or disabled primitive discard accelerator possibly.
 
https://videocardz.com/71280/amd-vega-10-vega-11-vega-12-and-vega-20-confirmed-by-eec

ECC, Eurasian Economic Commission is a regulatory body similar to Korean KCC or US FCC regulators. Before any products enters the market it needs to be certified. This applies to all electronic devices, including graphics cards.

AMD VEGA 20 with 32 GB HBM2
If you still remember, we were the first to tell you about Vega 20. Unlike Vega 10, Vega 20 is said to have four HBM2 stacks, which enables 32 GB capacity. According to the list from ECC, Vega 20 is currently only expected as GLXT variant, which means Radeon Pro/Instinct series.

AMD VEGA 11, 12
This is the first trace of Vega 11, a GPU we discussed a few weeks ago. It’s a smaller Vega chip for mid-range segment. Based on the charts we posted it was meant to replace Polaris, however that was a long ago, so the plans could’ve changed. The list below lists Vega 11 XT and Vega 11 PRO for AIBs, which basically mean custom cards based on Vega 11. There’s also an entry for FirePro card.

There’s also one entry with Vega 12 XT, a model listed as FirePro card.

AMD VEGA 10 XTX, XT and XL
Finally, the list confirms rumored codenames for upcoming Radeon RX Vega lineup. The XTX variant will launch as a liquid-cooled card, but it will also be available with air cooling. The XTX variant has higher TDP than XT, which is also listed below.

Vega 10 XL is the last variant listed. It’s the card for AIBs and OEMs.

AMD VEGA SERIES
Vega Listing GPU Variant Comments
VEGA11 XT AIB MBA VEGA 11 XT Vega 11 XT for AIBs
VEGA11 PRO AIB MBA VEGA 11 PRO Vega 11 PRO for AIBs
VEGA10 XT MBA DTOEM VEGA 10 XT Vega 10 XT for OEMs
VEGA10 XL MBA DTOEM VEGA 10 XL Vega 10 XL for OEMs
VEGA10 XT MBA AIB VEGA 10 XT Vega 10 XT for AIBs
VEGA10 XL MBA AIB VEGA 10 XL Vega 10 XL for AIBs
VEGA10 XTX LIQUID MBA AIB VEGA 10 XTX Vega 10 XTX for AIBs (LIQUID EDITION)
VEGA10 XT MBA AIB Reggs FCST VEGA 10 XT Vega 10 XT for AIBs
VEGA10 XTX LIQUID MBA AIB Reggs VEGA 10 XTX Vega 10 XTX for AIBs (LIQUID EDITION)
VEGA10 XTX AIR MBA AIB VEGA 10 XTX Vega 10 XTX for AIBs (AIR EDITION)
VEGA10 XTX AIR MBA AIB Reggs VEGA 10 XTX Vega 10 XTX for AIBs (AIR EDITION)
VEGA10 XT MBA DTOEM DELL NO EXTENDER VEGA 10 XT Vega 10 XT for OEMs
VEGA10 XT MBA DTOEM Dell med EXTENDER VEGA 10 XT Vega 10 XT for OEMs
AMD FirePro VEGA12XT WORKSTATION FCST VEGA 12 XT VEGA 12 XT FIREPRO
AMD FirePro VEGA11PRO WORKSTATION FCST VEGA 11 PRO VEGA 11 PRO FIREPRO
AMD FirePro VEGA11XT WORKSTATION FCST VEGA 11 XT VEGA 11 XT RADEON PRO
VEGA10 GLXT V320 MBA VEGA 10 GLXT Vega 10 GLXT RADEON PRO
VEGA10 GLXT MI25x2 MBA VEGA 10 GLXT Vega 10 GLXT Dual INSTINCT MI25
VEGA10 GLXL WX8100 MBA VEGA 10 GLXT Vega 10 GLXT RADEON PRO WX8100
VEGA10 GLXT WX9100 MBA VEGA 10 GLXT Vega 10 GLXT RADEON PRO WX9100
VEGA10 GLXT V340 MBA, VEGA 10 GLXT
VEGA10 GLXT MI25 MBA VEGA 10 GLXT Vega 10 GLXT INSTINCT MI25
VEGA10 GLXT SSG MBA VEGA 10 GLXT Vega 10 GLXT RADEON PRO VEGA SSG
VEGA20 GL HPC 32GB OEM FCST VEGA 20 GL Vega 20
VEGA20 GL HPC 32GB CHANNEL FCST VEGA 20 GL
VEGA20 GL HPC 16GB CHANNEL FCST VEGA 20 GL
VEGA20 GL HPC 16GB OEM FCST VEGA 20 GL
VEGA10 GLXT MI25 MBA GIBRALTAR ES VEGA 10 GLXT
VEGA10 GL XT SSG CHANNEL FCST VEGA 10 GLXT
VEGA10 GLXL WX8100 MBA FTS FCST VEGA 10 GLXT
VEGA10 GLXT MI25 MBA GIBRALTAR QS VEGA 10 GLXT
VEGA10 GLXT MI25 MBA GIBRALTAR VEGA 10 GLXT
VEGA10 GLXT SSG MBA Reggs FCST VEGA 10 GLXT
VEGA10 GLXT WX9100 MBA Reggs FCST VEGA 10 GLXT
RADEON VEGA FRONTIER EDITION AIR RETAIL VEGA 10 GLXT
RADEON VEGA FRONTIER EDITION LIQUID RETAIL VEGA 10 GLXT
VEGA10 GLXT MI25 MBA LENOVO FCST VEGA 10 GLXT
VEGA10 GLXT SSG MBA Reggs LTD ED FCST VEGA 10 GLXT
VEGA10 GLXT WX9100 MBA Reggs LTD ED FCST VEGA 10 GLXT
Click to expand...
 
4 HBM stacks would not only provide 32GB but also nearly 1000GB/s of bandwidth.

I'd like to see some comparisons with Vega FE if possible.
 
geoxile said:
At least the horse power is all there. And we've seen in at least one geometry benchmark that Vega is strong in geometry throughput, though apparently not quite as strong in geometry culling. So where's the weakness? Is it that pesky non-functional tiled rasterizer? Maybe it's even the memory (controller).
Click to expand...
Pixel fillrate is definitely miles behind competitors products. Even GTX 1070 is quite a bit ahead.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top