Vega/Navi Rumors (Updated)

Page 99 - 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.

Karnak

Senior member
Jan 5, 2017
399
767
136
It's 20% faster core clocks and 40% faster memory versus a Fury X yet only 6% more performance.
1050MHz vs. 1200MHz is only ~14% higher clock speeds and the memory isn't "faster", actually it's way "slower" compared to the Fury X.

Fiji = 4 Stacks HBM, 4096 bit Interface, HBM running at 500MHz. That results in 512Gbps
Vega= 2 Stacks HBM2, 2048 bit Interface, HBM2 running at 700MHz according to the Time Spy Benchmark we have. That results in only 358Gbps, which is 30% less than Fiji.

Vega needs the HBM2 to clock at 1000MHz to achieve the 512Gbps bandwidth from Fiji.
 
Reactions: T1beriu

.vodka

Golden Member
Dec 5, 2014
1,203
1,537
136
1050MHz vs. 1200MHz is only ~14% higher clock speeds and the memory isn't "faster", actually it's way "slower" compared to the Fury X.

Fiji = 4 Stacks HBM, 4096 bit Interface, HBM running at 500MHz. That results in 512Gbps
Vega= 2 Stacks HBM2, 2048 bit Interface, HBM2 running at 700MHz according to the Time Spy Benchmark we have. That results in only 358Gbps, which is 30% less than Fiji.

Vega needs the HBM2 to clock at 1000MHz to achieve the 512Gbps bandwidth from Fiji.

One would think they'd at the very least have the memory compression techniques implemented in Polaris available on Vega..



Even with that taken into account, this Vega chip is clocked faster than Fiji. It should outperform it with the same amount of hardware on paper at higher clocks... but it doesn't. It's a regression over AMD's most unbalanced and bottlenecked chip in the past few years. Yuck.

Either AMD in good old ATI fashion pulled another R600 (maybe even worse, their own NV30) or it's fake. Need more data points/leaks.
 
Last edited:

Karnak

Senior member
Jan 5, 2017
399
767
136
Even with that taken into account, this Vega chip is clocked faster than Fiji. It should outperform it with the same amount of hardware on paper at higher clocks... but it doesn't. It's a regression over AMD's most unbalanced and bottlenecked chip in the past few years. Yuck.
It does outperform Fiji. Graphics score for the Fury X @1050MHz is around 5100. So we're talking about a ~12% higher graphics score (5721) with +14% higher clock speeds and 30% less bandwidth compared to the Fury X . If this is true.

Would be interesting to know how the bandwidth affects 3DMark/Time Spy results.
 

.vodka

Golden Member
Dec 5, 2014
1,203
1,537
136
Hmm... Do you consider a 10% increase over Fiji under these conditions worthy of what we've been shown so far about Vega on paper? To me it isn't, I'd even say it smells like Bulldozer.

If this is true, Polaris GCN expanded to Hawaii or Fiji size without being memory bandwidth starved as Polaris is would've been a much better investment, not as costly as doing an architecture overhaul as Vega is with arguably higher performance in the end. Similar to taking Phenom II, adding two more cores and corresponding extra L3 cache, shrinking it to 32nm (Llano cores, the job had already been done with the first gen APUs) and calling it Phenom III x8 would've made 1st gen Bulldozer even more of a joke it already was.

It would make sense if this was small Vega yet it isn't... something doesn't add up.

I'll reserve further judgement until there's more data. This has to be a well made fake that got past Futuremark's controls.
 
Last edited:

Nachtmaer

Junior Member
Oct 26, 2014
11
2
81
This might be a bit of an incoherent rant, but I'm mostly putting this down because I've had this (and others here too) on my mind ever since Vega got announced and I'm still trying to make sense of the whole situation.

It's been a while so I don't remember the exact details, but I think Vega first got mentioned in an interview on AT with Raja(?). "We have Polaris 10 and 11, 10 being the bigger one, and we also have Vega 10 and 11" It was then speculated that Vega 11 would be the bigger of the two.

Time and speculations went on and the seemingly logical guesstimate would be that since P10 being of similar size to Pitcairn, that it was going to be its successor and competitor to GP106. As the mid to low range was established, Vega could only be two higher end chips. My thought, and other people's, was that perhaps small Vega would end up being in the range of Tahiti (=>350mm²) to go up against GP104 and big Vega being somewhere inbetween Hawaii and Fiji (>450mm²) as a GP102 competitor.

Then we had that 64CU rumor floating around since forever and you'd think that one would be small Vega. You take Fiji, shrink it to 14nm and throw a bunch compute (if Fiji even had that much) out because this would be primarily a gaming chip. I know I'm oversimplifying process shrinks and not all parts of a GPU scale that easily, if at all. To me it seemed plausible that this could end up in that aforementioned die size range. Nowadays we're starting to see Fiji stretch its legs in same games and it actually manages to keep up with GP104. So far so good, I guess.

Big Vega on the other hand still seemed like a mystery to me. Are they going to throw more shaders at it? I think I saw some people say like 80CUs or something. I guess it could work given HMB2 doesn't need a memory controller as wide as Fiji's if they use two stacks and you still have a smaller process.

Now here's the confusing part. We've been shown a Vega chip being about >500mm² with two stacks of HBM2. They called it RX Vega which pretty much means one chip (with its derived SKUs). That basically confirms it being the big one, unless AMD are insane enough to go even beyond that. After all this talk of NCU and all the other tweaks they did, it seems a given that all this stuff will eat up extra die space. Perhaps 64CU does make sense. Again, Fiji without its bottlenecks and a decent bump in frequency might be able to compete with GP102. Then they've also shown that Doom demo just beating a 1080, which, as mentioned plenty of times, could be down to an ES running at lower clocks, immature drivers, etc etc.

So now the question is, what happened to small Vega? Did they decide to can it because they couldn't feed it properly? HBM2 on a GPU that should slot into the GP104 range might not be economically viable. GDDR5 could be an option, but since Polaris barely manages to get by with its 256-bit bus, they'd probably have to go 384-bit wide. I don't think it'd look good from a marketing POV that a cheaper/slower card has 6/12GB memory while RX Vega only has 8GB. That kind of memory controller would also eat into their power budget too. I guess GDDR5X + 256-bit is an option and I think I read Polaris supports it, so who knows.

I guess you could go into tinfoil hat territory and say the demos they showed were actually running on small Vega while the package they showed was the big one to throw people off, but that sounds too ridiculous.

I could be totally off on any of this, so feel free to point it out.

TL;DR: I don't know anymore.
 
Last edited:

Samwell

Senior member
May 10, 2015
225
47
101
So now the question is, what happened to small Vega? Did they decide to can it because they couldn't feed it properly? HBM2 on a GPU that should slot into the GP104 range might not be economically viable. GDDR5 could be an option, but since Polaris barely manages to get by with its 256-bit bus, they'd probably have to 384-bit wide. I don't think it'd look good from marketing POV that a cheaper/slower card has 6/12GB memory while RX Vega only has 8GB. That kind of memory controller would also eat into their power budget too. I guess GDDR5X + 256-bit is an option and I think I read Polaris supports it, so who knows.

Big Vega was the first and in december they had freshly got silicon. As it's been clear that Vega 10 comes at the end of H1, small Vega should come later. Expect it in 3-6 month.
 

Nachtmaer

Junior Member
Oct 26, 2014
11
2
81
Big Vega was the first and in december they had freshly got silicon. As it's been clear that Vega 10 comes at the end of H1, small Vega should come later. Expect it in 3-6 month.

That certainly might be the case regarding when small Vega launches. I guess I should've worded it differently as I'm more curious about what it'll actually be.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
110,810
29,564
146
a single cherry-picked demo

but it's an actual demo of a known product...compared to a completely anonymous single synthetic benchmark score, of unknown provenance, of unknown hardware and version of said hardware.
I mean, it is reasonable to be entirely skeptical of both, but it is strange to dismiss an actual known demonstration of product as being cherry-picked, when it is presented in response to some random internet garbage.
 

swilli89

Golden Member
Mar 23, 2010
1,558
1,181
136
but it's an actual demo of a known product...compared to a completely anonymous single synthetic benchmark score, of unknown provenance, of unknown hardware and version of said hardware.
I mean, it is reasonable to be entirely skeptical of both, but it is strange to dismiss an actual known demonstration of product as being cherry-picked, when it is presented in response to some random internet garbage.
Exactly. That poster is in here with one motive and that's to thread crap and spread FUD.
 
Last edited:

Mockingbird

Senior member
Feb 12, 2017
733
741
106
but it's an actual demo of a known product...compared to a completely anonymous single synthetic benchmark score, of unknown provenance, of unknown hardware and version of said hardware.
I mean, it is reasonable to be entirely skeptical of both, but it is strange to dismiss an actual known demonstration of product as being cherry-picked, when it is presented in response to some random internet garbage.

I will say this: if AMD has a really great product that is supposedly at most a couple of months from release, AMD wouldn't be able to resist talking about the product every chance it gets.

We would know by now if AMD is going to knock the socks of NVIDIA.
 
Last edited:

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
110,810
29,564
146
I will say this: if AMD has a really great product that is supposedly at most a couple of months from release, AMD wouldn't be able to resist talking about the product every chance it gets.

We would know by now if Radeon RX Vega is going to blow the doors off.

I know that 2 months is a relatively short amount of time in tech world, but ....Ryzen release. You can't have already forgotten, have you? AMD released one demo with 2 benchmarks, that showed extremely favorable comparables--and that was highly, thoroughly criticized by everyone...and yet it was all that was known until the week before actual release. That was months ahead of Ryzen release, and that's all there was. and Ryzen turned out to be exactly that good...and actually a bit better than everyone expected.

Such is the same with the one actual demo we have of Vega. I'm not sure why you'd make such a comment that is instantly refuted with actual, and very recent, history.
 

tviceman

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2008
6,734
514
126
www.facebook.com
I will say this: if AMD has a really great product that is supposedly at most a couple of months from release, AMD wouldn't be able to resist talking about the product every chance it gets.

We would know by now if Radeon RX Vega is going to blow the doors off.

This entire situation reminds of Fermi's delays and silence from Nvidia during the HD's 5870/5850 reign. Nvidia held two press days regarding Fermi's features but was otherwise silent and the lack of GOOD leaks peristed. Yes, I know GTX 480 ended up faster than the HD 5870, but it was a hot mess and was supposed to be way better than it initially was.

I see big Vega being $599, consistently 5-15% slower than 1080 TI (5% in heavily favored AMD titles) and, in true AMD fashion, the second tier card of big Vega will be $499, only 10% slower than big Vega, making it 5-10% faster than the GTX 1080.
 
Last edited:

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,546
13,113
136
...AMD wouldn't be able to resist talking about the product every chance it gets...
Oh but Ryzen! I would normally agree with everyting you just posted, but this past year this company have been *dark* and severely underplaying its hand. I am not predicting *anything* in regards to vega, it mat be a dud it may be a second coming... I will know when I read the reviews..
Basicly I wouldnt read anything into "lack of info" from amd at all...
 

Yakk

Golden Member
May 28, 2016
1,574
275
81
After the media frenzy around Ryzen IMHO AMD is due to keep quiet about new products for the next while and let reviews act as marketing to support Vega initially. AMD could then follow-up with Ryzen/Vega combos in conjunction with Bethesda releases for all the marketing they'd need really along with continued Xbox Scorpio talk.
 

Bacon1

Diamond Member
Feb 14, 2016
3,430
1,018
91
Such is the same with the one actual demo we have of Vega. I'm not sure why you'd make such a comment that is instantly refuted with actual, and very recent, history.

Two if you count the Vega demo of Battlefront during Ryzen release info.

Plus how many times did Nvidia show off 1080 Ti? Titan Xp? None? Oh...
 

Atreidin

Senior member
Mar 31, 2011
464
27
86
I know that 2 months is a relatively short amount of time in tech world, but ....Ryzen release. You can't have already forgotten, have you? AMD released one demo with 2 benchmarks, that showed extremely favorable comparables--and that was highly, thoroughly criticized by everyone...and yet it was all that was known until the week before actual release. That was months ahead of Ryzen release, and that's all there was. and Ryzen turned out to be exactly that good...and actually a bit better than everyone expected.

Such is the same with the one actual demo we have of Vega. I'm not sure why you'd make such a comment that is instantly refuted with actual, and very recent, history.

That's easy...

Exactly. That poster is in here with one motive and that's to thread crap and spread FUD.

All he's doing is stirring the pot.
 
Reactions: Bacon1
Mar 10, 2006
11,715
2,012
126
Two if you count the Vega demo of Battlefront during Ryzen release info.

Plus how many times did Nvidia show off 1080 Ti? Titan Xp? None? Oh...

NVIDIA didn't show off the 1080 Ti or Titan Xp because it wasn't hard to extrapolate potential performance from the in-market GP102-based Titan X (Pascal).

Anyway, the difference between NVIDIA and AMD is that NVIDIA has had complete and undisputed dominance of the high-end market since May 2016 and has been regularly releasing product. AMD has been talking about/promoting Vega for nearly a year-and-a-half and even with all of the hype hasn't done any sort of head-to-head comparisons with NVIDIA's products.

I hope Vega launches soon, though, looking forward to seeing how it does, how it's priced, etc.
 
Reactions: cytg111

Crumpet

Senior member
Jan 15, 2017
745
539
96
Funny how Sweepr always likes Mockingbird's posts. Wonder if they are one and the same.

Anyway, if Vega does manage to beat Nvidia's best offerings, lets face it, it would be nothing short of a miracle. They have a fraction of the budget and are starting from behind. This is why I won't be gutted if they don't produce the fastest GPU to date, I just want them to be competitive.
 

linkgoron

Platinum Member
Mar 9, 2005
2,334
857
136
Initially I was hopeful for Vega, but I must admit that as time goes by I am more skeptical. Then again, I was also skeptical about Ryzen and it turned out really great. Hopefully AMD delivers, and the haters will turn silent as they have in the Ryzen threads.

Anyway, the difference between NVIDIA and AMD is that NVIDIA has had complete and undisputed dominance of the high-end market since May 2016

Since June 2nd 2015. AMD still don't have a card that is faster or even close to after-market 980tis .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |