AMD was foregoing the lucrative server market because they misjudged the types of workloads required when they designed bulldozer. Not being power and performance competitive doesn't get you many salesThe biggest issue with AMD is that they forego the lucrative and expensive markets like servers and professional graphics and compute, which allowed Intel and Nvidia to swoop in and uncontested get all that money.
They can't gain any sort of significant profits with low and mid range cpu's and gpu's, which is what they've been doing for the past 4-5 years with garbage APU's for ultra low end, ultra low cost potato mashers.
I mean even though the Fury and Nano series weren't the best in terms of performance, it still gave them big profit boosts because of how expensive they were. The Nano for the niche market, Fury X with water cooling from start, it was something that enthusiasts and niche markets took to.
So we might get some information, or this is another "quality" piece of news from that site.
Dunno.
According to WTTFtech, "AMD Taking The Covers Off Vega, Navi & Zen+ On May 16th". May 16th is AMD's Financial Analyst Day.
So we might get some information, or this is another "quality" piece of news from that site.
If it's anything like previous years' events, expect no new information that we would care about, i.e. prepare to be disappointed.
Which is why I refer to them as WTTFtech.
For me it doesn't mean anything. Anyway, it's related so it's worth posting I guess.
the various rumours about Vega are not good. Poor performance, HBM2 shortage and low initial product volume are all pointing towards a repeat of the Fiji disaster. AMD's revenue increase forecast for the 2017 financial year is also not so good. I think AMD's financial turnaround is looking like it will take a lot more time. AMD would need atleast 2-3 generations of very competitive CPU and GPUs to get back to much higher revenues and sustainable profits. imo AMD need to design their upcoming GPUs to utilise simpler, easier to manufacture and available in higher volume memory technologies like GDDR5X and the upcoming GDDR6. Anyway as every day passes by Vega is looking more and more like too little too late.
Got anything positive to say?
Vega is looking to provide us with direct competitors for the GTX 1070 (the future budget card), The GTX 1080 and hopefully the GTX 1080ti
It's giving the consumers access to HBM2 memory to experience.
It's following a very successful Ryzen launch.
Do I wish it would come earlier, yes, do I think the sky is falling? Lolno.
Right now there is a lot of unanswered questions about Vega performance, price and volume availability. imo unless AMD has a GDDR5 based small Vega ( Vega 11 ) which addresses the USD 300 - USD 400 price point and competes with the GTX 1070 / GTX 1080 they are not going to take meaningful market share. More importantly is what kind of performance, price and more importantly product volume availability are we going to see with big Vega (Vega 10).
16,000 is a fairly average number for a Radeon enthusiast release. (apparently)
I've got a great idea, why don't we wait and find out.
According to TPU Fury X is within 2% of the 1070 at 4K.Remember that vega 10 is around 500mm2.if vega10 competes only with crippled GP104 alias GTX1070 then its epic fail.GTX1070 have 33% GPU disabled(1GPC disabled) + its only 314mm2.
This is pretty much worse situation than in 4870 vs GTX280 days.GTX280 was atleast faster than 4870.
AMD need small vega +- 350mm2 to compete with GTX1070 and 1080.Vega10 should beat 1080TI because its bigger than FULL GP102 and 1080TI is not even full GP102.
According to TPU Fury X is within 2% of the 1070 at 4K.
What are the odds that Vega, with ~50% more transistors and improved clock speeds is no faster than Fury?
who really thinks nvidia sold way over 16k 1080tis in its first month(s)?
They might have done - NV appear to have a genuinely big, 'instant upgrader' market. No chance of Vega having the same of course, especially with it launching a fair way behind in terms of time.
Definitely positive if they've got that many more than they had with Fury.
Very much doubt that. If they have a good product and is already being manufactured, we would see reviews by now. Better to release with limited stocks than create doubt by delays which easily pushes potential buyers towards Nvidia.Could be the reason for the "delays", stockpiling.
Very much doubt that. If they have a good product and is already being manufactured, we would see reviews by now. Better to release with limited stocks than create doubt by delays which easily pushes potential buyers towards Nvidia.
who really thinks nvidia sold way over 16k 1080tis in its first month(s)?
They could be attempting to make a decent release for a change you know? One with enough cards for initial demand, one with proper (mature) drivers and what not. I believe that even early adopters would appreciate.Very much doubt that. If they have a good product and is already being manufactured, we would see reviews by now. Better to release with limited stocks than create doubt by delays which easily pushes potential buyers towards Nvidia.
They could be attempting to make a decent release for a change you know? One with enough cards for initial demand, one with proper (mature) drivers and what not. I believe that even early adopters would appreciate.