AMD Vega 10, Vega 11, Vega 12 and Vega 20 Rumors and Discussion

Discussion in 'Architecture and Products' started by ToTTenTranz, Sep 20, 2016.

  1. ToTTenTranz

    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    9,999
    Likes Received:
    4,571
    How else can Vega's current uncanny similarity to Fiji's performance-per-clock be called despite having 40%/4.2B transistors more, then?

    As much as the term "Fiji fallback" feels wrong to people on the inside, it sure looks like every single architectural difference that would make Vega 10 work faster than Fiji clock-for-clock is simply not working in games.
     
    looncraz, Aenra and BacBeyond like this.
  2. DavidGraham

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Messages:
    2,789
    Likes Received:
    2,598
    That would be wrong too, AMD already told PCPer they include all the gaming optimizations of the RX driver in the Vega FE driver.
     
    pharma likes this.
  3. Moloch

    Moloch God of Wicked Games
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    2,981
    Likes Received:
    72
    Going by that gamer nexus analysis it seems like the card pcb is seriously over built, I only hope the actual 3d performance of it will improve dramatically with new drivers.
     
  4. hurleybird

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2012
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    4
    It's AMD's fault for throwing the term out there back in January or so. If you want people to be more technically accurate, then don't do that! ;)

    That said, can we hope for some kind of substantial increase in performance with the RX driver? Besides draw stream rasterizer are any other architectural features disabled for the sake of stability? Will the new rasterizer (and/or other features if applicable) be enabled in time for the RX launch?
     
    looncraz and BacBeyond like this.
  5. 3dilettante

    Legend Alpha

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    8,122
    Likes Received:
    2,873
    Location:
    Well within 3d
    There is a fair amount of begging the question (in the classical sense, even) in those queries.
    Outside observers are stating the rasterizer is disabled.
    Saying it is disabled for the purposes of stability is asserting something beyond that.
    Saying any other features are disabled because of stability is asserting beyond even that.

    Also, I'm not entirely sure he's in a position to comment at this juncture...
     
    Cat Merc, Lightman, looncraz and 4 others like this.
  6. leoneazzurro

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Messages:
    518
    Likes Received:
    25
    Location:
    Rome, Italy
    We don't know really what AMD told them, so there could have been a misunderstanding. The difference between demos scores and review scores is staggering.
     
    looncraz likes this.
  7. Genotypical

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2015
    Messages:
    38
    Likes Received:
    11
    smh. you can't just say that and not add anything. people probably weren't literally thinking fiji fallback drivers but a driver closer to previous relive than what will launch with rx vega, so even that doesn't help.

    At least tell us something. for example, how old is the driver?

    actually, based on what he said, this is not what he was told. He simply interpreted it as close to that. He was told that the driver had optimizations up till it was forked off to be readied for launch. that could be days or months before launch. He assumed that was recently.
     
    BacBeyond likes this.
  8. Infinisearch

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2004
    Messages:
    739
    Likes Received:
    139
    Location:
    USA
    Thats alot to ask of somebody who most likely is under NDA or some employment agreement with regards to releasing information.
     
    Lightman likes this.
  9. Geeforcer

    Geeforcer Harmlessly Evil
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,297
    Likes Received:
    464
    Yeah, I am sure the way this thread is turning will greatly encourage future participation from IHV personnel in general and Rys inparticular.
     
  10. Genotypical

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2015
    Messages:
    38
    Likes Received:
    11
    The fiji drivers thing apparently originated in december and with AMD themselves calling it something similar. Modified Fiji drivers or some such. Guessing some folks there weren't happy with that terminology then

    couldnt he restate what raja has already said? even "wait for rx vega launch for real performance" would be a lot

    I doubt they are going to get emotional over regular conversation. weird you would think they would. "If you can't answer, don't answer" is likely how they already do things.
     
    #2770 Genotypical, Jul 5, 2017
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2017
  11. Infinisearch

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2004
    Messages:
    739
    Likes Received:
    139
    Location:
    USA
    This is what really bothered me about what you said, yes he can. He has no obligation to say anything and again most likely isn't supposed to reveal anything. Your post almost comes off as a demand, and thats not right.
    And would you have been satisfied with that?
     
  12. Alexko

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    4,496
    Likes Received:
    910
    It's obviously not Rys's fault in any way but by now AMD has the collective experience to write a few books on how to get bad publicity. The company's communication around this launch leaves a great deal to be desired in my opinion.
     
    Cat Merc, looncraz and BacBeyond like this.
  13. hurleybird

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2012
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    4
    1. Since the tests showing rasterization behaves like all previous GCN architectures were live streamed, it's a fairly reasonable assumption.
    2. Also a reasonable assumption. Purposefully holding back would be insane, and there's close to zero chance that the driver team is so far behind that the code for the new rasterizer is totally non-functional. That leaves stability as the most likely candidate. Another one is that the new rasterization branch breaks so many existing optimisations that a fallback is currently more performant. Whichever the case, it doesn't change much of anything so the possible distinction isn't exactly relevant.
    3. A straw man. Nowhere did I assert that other architectural features were disabled.
     
  14. Anarchist4000

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    1,439
    Likes Received:
    359
    Personally I like Vega running a Fiji VM.

    I'm not sure why the idea of falling back to Fiji paths is a bad thing. It seems an apt baseline, however that Phoronix article mentioned basing around R600.
     
    Putas likes this.
  15. |DommE|

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Would be interesting to see, how it compares to Polaris.
     
  16. 3dilettante

    Legend Alpha

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    8,122
    Likes Received:
    2,873
    Location:
    Well within 3d
    1. Seems to be the most readily supported by the data available, but I did glean from the PC Perspective video that the reviewer didn't really know what to do with the test besides pick a few arbitrary slider positions given by the chat. Whether that mattered isn't clear, but the testing wasn't thorough. It's also not exhaustive, and since there are applications that were improved with Vega, it may not be universally true.
    2. What about correctness? Things can look wrong without crashing the software, or possibly act in some non-compliant manner like not crashing when they probably should.
    3. I took the second half of the rasterizer statement to be a logical continuation of the first, although I see now it can be interpreted more freely than the first half.
     
  17. hurleybird

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2012
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    4
    1. I don't see the chances as being too high, but I can definitely get on board with the call for more thorough testing.
    2. I imagine that scenario is basically the same as lack of optimisation, since the problem isn't likely to be so much as making things look correct, but looking correct while being performant.
    3. Thank you. Yeah, I didn't mean to imply that more things are necessarily disabled, but I am curious if they are or not. That's another reason I'd like to see more thorough testing. Has anyone tried tessmark (or something similar) yet? How about packed math?
     
  18. looncraz

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2017
    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    7
    I think most people know that. The intended takeaway is that this is the only level of optimization the driver has and that it is treating Vega, to the extent possible, as if it were just Fiji.

    The apparent lack of tiled rasterization, performance, and efficiency - coupled with the driver declaring itself as 17.1.1 - certainly lead to that conclusion.
     
    hurleybird, T1beriu and BacBeyond like this.
  19. MDolenc

    Regular

    Joined:
    May 26, 2002
    Messages:
    690
    Likes Received:
    425
    Location:
    Slovenia
    Which of the architectural changes should show up it's nose under current testing though? HBCC on a 16GB card? FP16 needs game support. IHVs cant just show it down the games throat (well... :lol:). Primitive shader (what ever it is) is again something that's not in DX description and is presumably something that will have to be explicitly coded for somehow. Are there geometry throughput improvements outside of primitive shader that we know about? Same with upgraded FL_12_1 features they need game support to show up.
    The wildcard is the draw stream binning rasterizer. But I find it very strange that people are expecting it to show up and behave exactly the same as the NV approach does. And how long was Maxwell out anyway until general public caught up on that one? :smile:
     
    Malo, BRiT, pharma and 1 other person like this.
  20. AnomalousEntity

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2016
    Messages:
    38
    Likes Received:
    25
    Location:
    Silicon Valley
    The main advantage of TBDR is saving memory bandwidth (hence power too) but it can actually lead to worse performance due to extra overhead of binning and re-ordering of unseen fragments. This is especially true for applications heavy in geometry and if they already do a Z-prepass step in their engine then the benefit goes away. On Maxwell/Pascal, the driver fallsback to Immediate Rendering if a game isn't getting much benefit from TBDR mode. Now AMD should theoretically have a better implementation than NV here as they've designed all this from scratch but then again this is a brand new arch and anything can go wrong. People are expecting huge gains from TBDR but it's not a magic pill which makes everything run faster.
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...