The Founders edition Vega card is a pretty standard 10.5 inch dual slot card. It would be very odd if any external gpu case couldn't fit it.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
AMD Reveals Radeon VII
- Thread starter tyfon
- Start date
The Founders edition Vega card is a pretty standard 10.5 inch dual slot card. It would be very odd if any external gpu case couldn't fit it.
It's liquid cooled though, right? I should probably research it more.
Having a flagship to compete with flagships is important, but I don't know if having a competitor to the 2080 right now is more important than having a 2060 competitor (I know Vega 56 kinda qualifies for that, but it is not the same as a new card. Vega 56 isn't a bigger competitor to the 2060 than the 1070 and 1070ti)
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814105073
I'm don't use cards for workstations so can't be much help.
saw this on beyond3d. im assuming AMD supplied numbers. i dont think this is enough to put it ahead of a 2080 in most games
I feel like Radeon VII is a mind share move, trying to get the general public aware of AMD GPUs again by reaching for the high end, while Navi will roll out later for the midrange market.
Midrange cards are also less hype-worthy in general, compared to the higher end stuff.
I was hoping for GPU news but this ain't it. 2080 performance for the same price but without the RTX features? That's more than I spend on GPUs anyway, but that aside there wouldn't be any reason to spring for this over a 2080 if the adaptive sync works with my freesync monitor.
So, 2080/TitanXp level performance at $700...
It's not a bad price, it just doesn't undercut Nvidia as much as people hoped.
That said, if dropping Vega (old architecture) to 7nm nets these gains, then I'm more interested in Navi now.
It's not a bad price, it just doesn't undercut Nvidia as much as people hoped.
That said, if dropping Vega (old architecture) to 7nm nets these gains, then I'm more interested in Navi now.
It's basically just a die shrink of Vega I think. Navi should be where things get interesting, but who knows when that's going to release.
Absolutely. AMD could only show their most powerful card at an event and time like this. The reaction would have been abysmal if they had shown a mid-range card alone, while a flagship can stand on its own hype.
I'm just thinking that if they made a cut version of this card (say 8GB, and possibly every other area) and get it around $400 it would just move a lot more units.
it's always sad the comparision between AMD and Nvidia. If this thread was a new Nvidia GPU it would have been 10 pages by now. That brand mindshare :/
Wasn't most of the hype about the $250 2060/1080/2070/etc killer (Vega64+15%....)?
I wanted to upgrade my RX 580 but not sure if I want to pick this up. The good news is maybe the Vega cards will drop in price? Other than that, I guess it's best to wait for Navi.
What a weird product, it's too close to RTX 2080 pricing territory and offers close to the same performance without the extra stuff that makes the RTX line interesting. For gaming this seems like a bust.
However the card seems really interesting for workstations due to the amount of VRAM and probably really impressive OpenCL performance, i could see this thing get some traction among developers or artists that depend on GPU compute based workloads.
However the card seems really interesting for workstations due to the amount of VRAM and probably really impressive OpenCL performance, i could see this thing get some traction among developers or artists that depend on GPU compute based workloads.
I was really hoping there was some truth to that rumor, would have been way more interesting than this.
Apparently Vega suffered from being bandwidth starved, and cutting the HBM to 8GB would noticeably hurt performance and leave this card bandwidth starved too. Whatever is below this card will probably use GDDR.
Last edited:
They already have? You can go on Newegg right now for US and get a vega for $399. You can get a Liquid cooled one for $499.
I feel people are underplaying what this card can do outside of gaming. And if you think they won't improve drivers like they did for Rx vega showing on average 8% increase in performance than you have another thing coming.
16gb of HBM2 memory with double the ROPS is actually big if developers learn to utilize vulkin api more.
Possibly in terms of actual purchase interest, yes. But in terms of perception, AMD couldn't continue to go without an answer to the 1080ti and above. The narrative of "Nvidia is the only option for high-end enthusiast" has been gaining some momentum.
They've been $400 for months now(since November) and it's for the blower cards. I've been waiting for the nitro + card to be a decent price.
Look how long it took for them to reach 1080ti.
When Nvidia hits 7nm gap will just widen again.
You won't find those on the market anymore and you can blame miners, and the terrible launch for original vega. The blower style are fine, and even if lets say sapphire Nitro+ goes back in stock, it costs them a lot to make those because of their custom coolers/pcb and all that. You think you can get one for below $500?
I saw them once for $569 and like a flash they were gone. They go for insane amounts on ebay, and its because they are better cooled wise for 24/7 mining. miners seriously have fucked the GPU market. I would honestly if you want look at the Liquid cooled one thats on newegg right now. It's cooler than anything by Sapphire or and of the Red devil line.
It's $499 currently and with the adrenaline drivers with some tweaks beats a 1080, and trades blows with a 2070 if not beating it in a good amount of games. If you tweak it you can get power usage to 250-275w.
Ehh. 1080ti stays. Nothing in the new card categories on either side entices me yet. And now with Nvidia starting to support Freesync. I still want a reason to switch, but I'm not getting it yet.
They support a small amount of monitors, and those monitors so far are all high end models of Freesync. SO if you want to go and get yourself a MSI, or a Pixio good luck waiting for those to pass their rigorous testing.
No, Nvidia supports all freesync monitors over DisplayPort, they are however not promising that every monitor will work correctly and therefore only the certified ones will automatically have variable refresh rate enabled when the graphics driver detect them.
The driver isn't out till next week so we don't know how good their implementation is in practice, but at least according to Nvidia themselves the non certified monitors excibited the same problematic behavior running with AMD hardware.
Still too early to say anything really, if Navi is on track for a release/reveal within the next 12 months there is a good chance the next generation of consoles could run a Zen 2/Navi APU combination.
Radeon VII at it's core is essentially an extreme version of the "in-between" version you are talking about since it's based on the older architecture, but is much more efficient by production changing to a 7nm process.
Rumors are that Sony has worked with AMD on Navi and intend to use that in PS5.
Not really relevant to this card though.
I know they support the monitors themselves, but it's still super selective.
See:
"The trouble is, Nvidia told me, that only 12 of 400 monitors have passed its stringent checklist so far, which range from having the correct settings enabled in the screen's OSD menu as standard to not suffering from the above visual issues."
The 12 monitors that have passed the test so far are:
- Acer XFA240, Acer XZ321Q, Acer XG270HU, Acer XV273K
- Agon AG241QG4
- AOC G2590FX
- Asus MG278Q, Asus XG248, Asus VG258Q, Asus XG258, Asus VG278Q
- BenQ Xl2740
Still in my opinion is NVIDIA being nvidia and understanding that leveraging the tech and not requiring sun-standards like they seem to do with G-Sync is why there are far more models out there that support Freesync than G-Sync and far more sales for those because of difference in cost.
Hmm, I see. So we need more time to have a clue on where next-gen is headed, from both the platforms side and the hardware manufacturers side.
Thanks!
That's the instinct version of this card, this is a gaming focused card with gaming drivers. Companies will probably buy these for workstation use though, yes.
Are you telling me I can sell my nitro + for a profit? I bought mine at the $550ish.
Edit: they are $500ish on eBay.
And who is even gpu mining anymore? Unless ether comes back in a big way it costs more in electricity than you'd get back.
vega 64 is probly the best card in that price range currently. just dont buy the asus strix version
saw this on beyond3d. im assuming AMD supplied numbers. i dont think this is enough to put it ahead of a 2080 in most games
If this is real, yeah it's going to depend on OC potential.
There are some pretty big gains in there though, and then some not so big gains. Interesting. For the most part though I'd say that takes AMD from having a serviceable 4k card to a quite good 4k card. If it can boost to 1900-2000mhz with that bandwith and 16gb vram, I think it will firmly be a better 4k card than a 2080. Yes no ray tracing but if 4k is your primary concern it should be a solid choice unless you want to spend $1300 for a ti.
Looking more closely here with the games I have, I get pretty close to the VII numbers with my uv/OC 64. Doom and BF1 north of 70, FC5 and destiny 2 near 60, Witcher 3 north of 50, ac 35ish. So yeah imo this card is really going to depend on OC potential and if said potential can win anything vs an OCd 2080.
Last edited:
I have to question the decision to publicly give the VII a price before announcing that of the MI50.
I mean the workstation driver better be godlike if they now go on to announce that one at the usual business class premium of like $1500 or more.
Yeah, I feel like they just decided they couldn't have nothing out to compete with the 2080 for potentially a year, so they said ok let's just make a gaming MI50. And the price at $699 is probably about the best they can do with all that hbm on board. I bet the MI50 goes for $1000ish or maybe a bit more.
But the RTX 2060 went up by $100, and power consumption pushed it to 1070 and 1080 levels. I think that Nvidia investment in RTX rather then regular architecture is what led to the higher power consumption, and below expectation performance levels, and worse of all the huge increase in price in all tiers.
Theres a "new other" one right at the top of that page for $500 buy it now.
I don't believe this is true. Newer games started using features that Kepler architecture wasn't particularly good at. Kelper itself is a relic from the Fermi days, and it was designed around limitations of games fro decade ago. Hence the huge performance gap between it and Maxwell. But Maxwell addressed these issues. The architectural improvement for Turing from Pascal strictly for non raytracing tasks is incremental at best.
Yea, like I said depends on if it was used heavily. Prices might have come down after the holidays. I just remember couple months back looking around for a Nitro I couldn't find one new, nor was I finding them under $600.
But my point is you can easily get close to what you paid for yours. Depends on if you think the Radeon VII is a big enough upgrade for you. i think its a great value for what your getting and can actually use/take advantage of unlike RTX currently.
Like no one is talking about content creation portion with this keeping all the good features of the instinct cards.Double precision is in there. Which to have that for $699 is kind of nuts.
Yeah, it is tempting to sell now and pick up the vii. A little tricky with this close to a product launch they just try to return it after finding out about the vii though. It's like a month window and then I can refuse the return.
Last edited:
Or if you do, like me, be ready to replace the dreadful thermal pad Asus cheaped out on. Once you do that, and undervolt, you're good to go.
RX Vega 64 vs Radeon VII gaming benchmark results(tested on 4k max settings)
https://youtu.be/9Ir8WJ8ctWM
So its somewhere between gtx 1080 and gtx 1080ti. But those cards were released almost 3 YEARS AGO.
Im sorry but paying 699$ for that is out of the question. Im disappointed..it just doesnt make sense to buy it
https://youtu.be/9Ir8WJ8ctWM
So its somewhere between gtx 1080 and gtx 1080ti. But those cards were released almost 3 YEARS AGO.
Im sorry but paying 699$ for that is out of the question. Im disappointed..it just doesnt make sense to buy it
Last edited:
Afaik a 1080 ti is something like 30-35% faster than a 1080. These benches seem to line up with that pretty well.
