Personal computing discussed

Moderators: renee, morphine, SecretSquirrel

 
Voldenuit
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2888
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 11:10 pm

Re: Vega FE Fire Strike, on par with GTX 1080

Wed Jul 05, 2017 9:37 pm

DancinJack wrote:
I didn't see anyone post die size yet?

It appears the die (Vega only, no HBM) is roughly 25.90mm x 19.80mm = 512.82mm-ish. (almost cut off a sig fig)


http://wccftech.com/amds-raja-koduri-confirms-vega-10-gpu-is-484mm-large-rx-vega-gaming-cards-july-launch-confirmed/
Wind, Sand and Stars.
 
willyolioleo
Gerbil
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 2:57 pm

Re: Vega FE Fire Strike, on par with GTX 1080

Wed Jul 05, 2017 10:46 pm

Gamers Nexus kids did an "ipc" test.

http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2977- ... clocks-ipc

Long story short: Vega FE performs pretty much identically to fury x at the same speeds. Any differences can more or less be attributed to the memory bandwidth and size.

There's really 2 ways to interpret this:

1. AMD straight up lied to everyone, there are no improvements, no geometry improvements, no rasterizer improvements, and on top of that they managed to make something worse than simply die shrinking fury x, that takes more die space and more power.

2. They just slapped the fury x drivers on Vega so none of the new features are being utilized.

Personally I think #2 is far more reasonable.

Looking at the professional benchmarks, the differences in drivers can triple the performance in some cases. Yeah, I think drivers make a difference.
 
DragonDaddyBear
Gerbil Elite
Posts: 985
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 8:01 am

Re: Vega FE Fire Strike, on par with GTX 1080

Wed Jul 05, 2017 11:31 pm

Given the amount of compute power Vega has I'm leaning towards drivers, too. The Pro side was more hyped to this point than gaming so it would make sense that it accounts for the majority of the development work. That said, my expectations are low. It doesn't seem that much different than a Fury.
 
juzz86
Gerbil First Class
Posts: 137
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 5:37 am
Location: Australia

Re: Vega FE Fire Strike, on par with GTX 1080

Thu Jul 06, 2017 1:57 am

Hit Australia today!
7700K, 32GB, 1080Ti - Suppressor F1
 
chuckula
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2109
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:18 pm
Location: Probably where I don't belong.

Re: Vega FE Fire Strike, on par with GTX 1080

Thu Jul 06, 2017 10:17 am

More on 3DMark 11 numbers: https://videocardz.com/70777/amd-radeon ... erformance

Good news for Vega: The highest scores can beat a GTX-1080 at stock clocks (although not by a huge margin).
Bad news for Vega: The highest scores were of overclocked Vega cards and OC'd GTX-1080 parts may still beat them.
4770K @ 4.7 GHz; 32GB DDR3-2133; Officially RX-560... that's right AMD you shills!; 512GB 840 Pro (2x); Fractal Define XL-R2; NZXT Kraken-X60
--Many thanks to the TR Forum for advice in getting it built.
 
Vhalidictes
Gerbil Jedi
Posts: 1813
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 2:32 pm
Location: Paragon City, RI

Re: Vega FE Fire Strike, on par with GTX 1080

Thu Jul 06, 2017 2:01 pm

willyolioleo wrote:
I'm willing to believe the Fiji drivers theory. Because there is way more going on than just a bad launch. A simple die shrink of Fiji would get better results than this. Why the hell wouldn't AMD just release a 14nm Fiji and be done with it, if these were the numbers they were looking at?

And that's not even counting the new features like the new rasterizer, memory controller, or tile based renderer.

The way it's performing looks like none of the new features are being used, and on top of that, even the raw compute power isn't being used properly either.

If the drivers are basically working like Fiji, but the underlying architecture is different (like how the pixel engine is connected to the L2 cache now) it would basically explain why it's even worse than Fiji.

Otherwise I don't see how they could have managed to screw up THIS badly.


It does indeed look like either the drivers are a total mess or they really did screw up this badly.

Just because they're using a new architecture, doesn't mean that the new architecture is any good! I agree a die shrink Fiji could have been a better performer, but a Fiji die-shrink wouldn't have beaten the 1080 Ti either.
 
chuckula
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2109
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:18 pm
Location: Probably where I don't belong.

Re: Vega FE Fire Strike, on par with GTX 1080

Thu Jul 06, 2017 2:08 pm

Vhalidictes wrote:
willyolioleo wrote:
I'm willing to believe the Fiji drivers theory. Because there is way more going on than just a bad launch. A simple die shrink of Fiji would get better results than this. Why the hell wouldn't AMD just release a 14nm Fiji and be done with it, if these were the numbers they were looking at?

And that's not even counting the new features like the new rasterizer, memory controller, or tile based renderer.

The way it's performing looks like none of the new features are being used, and on top of that, even the raw compute power isn't being used properly either.

If the drivers are basically working like Fiji, but the underlying architecture is different (like how the pixel engine is connected to the L2 cache now) it would basically explain why it's even worse than Fiji.

Otherwise I don't see how they could have managed to screw up THIS badly.


It does indeed look like either the drivers are a total mess or they really did screw up this badly.

Just because they're using a new architecture, doesn't mean that the new architecture is any good! I agree a die shrink Fiji could have been a better performer, but a Fiji die-shrink wouldn't have beaten the 1080 Ti either.


About the whole "It's just Fiji drivers" argument, my question is: If this really is a new architecture then why/how could it even run these programs at all simply using the old driver from a different architecture in the first place? Wouldn't we be talking about a failure to even run properly instead of be quibbling about performance numbers?
4770K @ 4.7 GHz; 32GB DDR3-2133; Officially RX-560... that's right AMD you shills!; 512GB 840 Pro (2x); Fractal Define XL-R2; NZXT Kraken-X60
--Many thanks to the TR Forum for advice in getting it built.
 
Redocbew
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2487
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 11:44 am

Re: Vega FE Fire Strike, on par with GTX 1080

Thu Jul 06, 2017 2:52 pm

There's probably a way you could make it work albeit without any new features that may be present in Vega. I don't usually work on drivers, but it doesn't seem like Vega is so radically different from Fiji that it would cause a complete rebuild.

That being said, I don't buy it. The fact that it's not radically different also means there's less room for these mysterious "optimizations" everyone is talking about.
Do not meddle in the affairs of archers, for they are subtle and you won't hear them coming.
 
Voldenuit
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2888
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 11:10 pm

Re: Vega FE Fire Strike, on par with GTX 1080

Thu Jul 06, 2017 2:52 pm

chuckula wrote:
Vhalidictes wrote:
About the whole "It's just Fiji drivers" argument, my question is: If this really is a new architecture then why/how could it even run these programs at all simply using the old driver from a different architecture in the first place? Wouldn't we be talking about a failure to even run properly instead of be quibbling about performance numbers?


While I don't subscribe to the 'Fiji drivers' theory myself, if Vega is a superset of Fiji, it might be possible to run it with drivers for the older architecture. For instance, if Vega has more registers for in-flight instructions/wavelets, but is otherwise similar to Fiji, an old Fiji driver might be able to work, but would not be able to see or take advantage of the increased IPC, giving sub-optimal performance on Vega. And a similar argument could be made for new features if they were a superset of the old, things like the primitive discard engine.

My gut feeling is that Vega FE drivers are version-appropriate, but unpolished. Some features in hardware may very well be disabled or not implemented in software yet, especially things like the primitive discard engine, which would be beneficial for gaming performance but something you might not want to do in workstation apps.
Wind, Sand and Stars.
 
Waco
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
Posts: 3536
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 4:14 pm
Location: Los Alamos, NM

Re: Vega FE Fire Strike, on par with GTX 1080

Thu Jul 06, 2017 5:45 pm

If Vega is similar enough to Fiji that "basic compatibility" moving forward is easy, but all of the additional features are hard, I could see early drivers being pretty bad from a performance standpoint. As others have said, if Vega supports all of the instructions that Fiji supports (plus some new ones) it's entirely possible for huge performance hits on "compatible" drivers.

Imagine a modern CPU running code that was compiled for something 15+ years ago. Will it run? Sure. Will it perform anywhere near as well as something that can take advantage of new instruction sets, register, etc? No chance. GPU instruction sets move quite a bit faster than any CPU ISA that I know of.
Desktop: X570 Gaming X | 3900X | 32 GB | Eisblock Radeon VII | Heatkiller R3 | 4K 40" | 1 TB SX8200 Pro + 2 TB 660p + 2 TB SATA SSD
NAS: 1950X | Designare EX | 32 GB ECC | 7x8 TB RAIDZ2 | 8x2 TB RAID10 | FreeNAS | ZFS | Dual LSI SAS
 
stefem
Gerbil In Training
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:35 am

Re: Vega FE Fire Strike, on par with GTX 1080

Fri Jul 07, 2017 10:12 am

chuckula wrote:
Vhalidictes wrote:
willyolioleo wrote:
I'm willing to believe the Fiji drivers theory. Because there is way more going on than just a bad launch. A simple die shrink of Fiji would get better results than this. Why the hell wouldn't AMD just release a 14nm Fiji and be done with it, if these were the numbers they were looking at?

And that's not even counting the new features like the new rasterizer, memory controller, or tile based renderer.

The way it's performing looks like none of the new features are being used, and on top of that, even the raw compute power isn't being used properly either.

If the drivers are basically working like Fiji, but the underlying architecture is different (like how the pixel engine is connected to the L2 cache now) it would basically explain why it's even worse than Fiji.

Otherwise I don't see how they could have managed to screw up THIS badly.


It does indeed look like either the drivers are a total mess or they really did screw up this badly.

Just because they're using a new architecture, doesn't mean that the new architecture is any good! I agree a die shrink Fiji could have been a better performer, but a Fiji die-shrink wouldn't have beaten the 1080 Ti either.


About the whole "It's just Fiji drivers" argument, my question is: If this really is a new architecture then why/how could it even run these programs at all simply using the old driver from a different architecture in the first place? Wouldn't we be talking about a failure to even run properly instead of be quibbling about performance numbers?

Because the whole "It's just Fiji drivers" argument is a nonsense and it usually contradict most of what the same people said. Vega is not a completely new architecture and it still based on the same, although revised, GCN ISA so it may be possible that the claim (by AMD?) made last December that Vega was running on Fiji driver was somehow true even if incorrect but now, after 6 month of development that driver could be even remotely considered a driver for Fiji? I think that would be more correct to define it as "yet to optimize" Vega driver.
 
LostCat
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2103
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2004 6:18 am
Location: Earth

Re: Vega FE Fire Strike, on par with GTX 1080

Fri Jul 07, 2017 10:21 am

It is also possible that the new arch features are different enough to need some developer work, so it might be stronger in newer games than older ones.

It's safe to say DX11 is pretty much a solved problem (or, if you prefer, a problem that can't be solved) where DX12 and Vulkan are still improving.
Meow.
 
Aranarth
Graphmaster Gerbil
Posts: 1366
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:56 am
Location: Big Rapids, Mich. (Est Time Zone)
Contact:

Re: Vega FE Fire Strike, on par with GTX 1080

Fri Jul 07, 2017 11:55 am

Correct me if I'm wrong:
The Vega FE is a professional level card and in games has performance around or a small notch above a 1070.

The RX Vega is a gamer card aimed at gaming and it has performance around or a small notch above a 1080.

Currently there is no "1080TI killer" being talked about yet in the AMD camp.

Is this correct?
Main machine: Core I7 -2600K @ 4.0Ghz / 16 gig ram / Radeon RX 580 8gb / 500gb toshiba ssd / 5tb hd
Old machine: Core 2 quad Q6600 @ 3ghz / 8 gig ram / Radeon 7870 / 240 gb PNY ssd / 1tb HD
 
Vhalidictes
Gerbil Jedi
Posts: 1813
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 2:32 pm
Location: Paragon City, RI

Re: Vega FE Fire Strike, on par with GTX 1080

Fri Jul 07, 2017 12:02 pm

Aranarth wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong:
The Vega FE is a professional level card and in games has performance around or a small notch above a 1070.

The RX Vega is a gamer card aimed at gaming and it has performance around or a small notch above a 1080.

Currently there is no "1080TI killer" being talked about yet in the AMD camp.

Is this correct?


That's the current optimistic view, yes. It's possible that the RX version of Vega won't be that fast.
 
Redocbew
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2487
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 11:44 am

Re: Vega FE Fire Strike, on par with GTX 1080

Fri Jul 07, 2017 12:24 pm

I'd say it's possible and likely, but we'll have to wait for independent tests(as always) to know for sure.
Do not meddle in the affairs of archers, for they are subtle and you won't hear them coming.
 
cynan
Graphmaster Gerbil
Posts: 1160
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 2:30 pm

Re: Vega FE Fire Strike, on par with GTX 1080

Fri Jul 07, 2017 12:25 pm

For what it's worth, I would consider that more of a pessimistic view of RX Vega's upcoming performance by the time it will finally be available to purchase 1-2 months out. But realistically, probably not all that pessimistic a view. We already have benchmarks that RX Vega is, as you say on par, to as much as 15% faster than a GTX 1080 from DX11 benchmarks. Once DX12 games are factored in, plus perhaps a bit of overall performance improvement from driver enhancements, I would expect RX Vega to safely beat a GXT 1080 overall by the time you can buy one.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests
GZIP: On