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

Kaotik said:
It has been $499 since day 1 and hasn't changed at any point, it didn't become $100 more expensive.
Click to expand...
Maybe; on the other hand we have two large Swedish hardware websites painting a very different picture: (Can't post a google translate link to the first website, because translate looks like an adblocker to the site... :p)

https://www.nordichardware.se/nyhet...r-inga-fler-rx-vega-64-kort-6-000-kronor.html

Google Translate excerpts, because I'm too lazy to do it myself - be aware of possible lingual weirdness:
It quickly turned out that the prices really sounded a little too good to be true and with only 27 dealers worldwide, it was awarded AMD's reference card. In the north, Komplett.se was the only retailer to receive pricing and allocation of cards prior to launch. The company sold a handful of different reference models for SEK 590, but the cards ran out of 9 hours (!). It now confirms the employees at Komplett that the editorial staff had been in touch with during the week.

The same source also confirms that no more RX Vega 64 graphics cards will be sold for this price tag in the near future. SEK 5 090 was an introductory offer and the new price tag is SEK 6 090, but perhaps even higher for other Swedish stores. Other retailers have listed Radeon RX Vega for 6,200 - 6,400 SEK without any accompanying games, which further puzzles the media and consumers.

AMD refuses to comment
AMD has, despite great pressures from, among other things, NordicHardware and our colleagues in the Nordic region, not delivered any statement about the misleading pricing at launch. Accordingly, NordicHardware decided, shortly after the publication of our test article (36 hours later), to change both the heading and the end result, to reflect the price data available in Swedish stores.
Click to expand...


Google translate link:
https://translate.google.se/transla...ingen-av-radeon-rx-vega-64&edit-text=&act=url

Important excerpts: (my emphasis.)
Nevertheless, it was a welcome launch, as it meant that AMD returned to the performance segment and at a competitive price - at least initially. Behind the scenes there was an uneasiness in the editorial board about Swedish prices, which made it impossible to judge the duo fairly.

Now, however, more and more points out that the first prices were no more than a way to get attention and good reviews in tests. The AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 actually costs a thousand kronor more and this seems to have been the plan from the start.
Click to expand...

The recommended price of SEK 5 090 was still too low to sue, and AMD's representative double-checked therefore with his sales representative for the Nordic region, to announce later that he confirmed the price picture. When signed was still skeptical and said it had to be a limited campaign, the answer came: "You're seeing something that's not there" .

The fact that we initially were skeptical can be attributed to three years of direct incorrect AMD prices, which means that we always need to confirm the prices of third parties. That is, dealers. Prior to each launch in the last three years, the company has published a recommended price to the media, which can therefore be used for assessment, but later proved to be a purchase price that naturally amounts to several hundred kronor below the retail price.

What is worth mentioning is that AMD is the only operator to communicate prices in this way, as others usually manage to deliver Swedish prices that are correct when the product is found in the store on the launch day. Whatever the manufacturer, SweClockers has the practice of double checking that prices are correct.

When AMD is placed against the wall about this we get no wise answers, but they fall back on an inconsistent response that it is the dealers who put the prices.
Click to expand...

So forgive me for being sceptical if AMD puts blame on retailers for raised prices, as this would seem to be a pattern of behavior of theirs, due to their underreporting of their own retailer prices (presenting supplier cost as retail price.)

Neither website has posted any retractions or further comments from AMD in the days since posting these articles, so as far as I am concerned these facts still stand.
 
Despite all the things gone wrong with the cards and launch, I really like the tech part of Vega. My initial plan before the reviews was to upgrade my Fury X with it, now I won't. But, my "hope" is that AMD is working on a 14nm+ version (7nm is too soon), and it will come pretty quickly and fix some thermal and power consumption problem (and eventually fix other hardware issues). They can't stay like that with Volta on the way (and with the 1080TI already being way more powerfull)
 
Rootax said:
Despite all the things gone wrong with the cards and launch, I really like the tech part of Vega. My initial plan before the reviews was to upgrade my Fury X with it, now I won't. But, my "hope" is that AMD is working on a 14nm+ version (7nm is too soon), and it will come pretty quickly and fix some thermal and power consumption problem (and eventually fix other hardware issues). They can't stay like that with Volta on the way (and with the 1080TI already being way more powerfull)
Click to expand...
There is no "14nm+", there's only 14LPP at their disposal, same that has been since first Polaris even if it has matured on the way.
 
This Volta this, Volta that and "poor Vega as an Volta competitor" ( AMD got hit by their own boomerang ;) ) talk is kind of a recurring theme in posts here.

Do we have any timeline for a desktop Volta replacement for 1070 & 1080? Since JHH said no Volta on desktops this year, I'd speculate we will most likely see something in summer or mid spring at the very earliest.

So Vega will spend a decent ammount of time being beaten "just" by Pascal.
 
entity279 said:
This Volta this, Volta that and "poor Vega as an Volta competitor" ( AMD got hit by their own boomerang ;) ) talk is kind of a recurring theme in posts here.

Do we have any timeline for a desktop Volta replacement for 1070 & 1080? Since JHH said no Volta on desktops this year, I'd speculate we will most likely see something in summer or mid spring at the very earliest.

So Vega will spend a decent ammount of time being beaten "just" by Pascal.
Click to expand...
Probably first GTC next year
 
Kaotik said:
There is no "14nm+", there's only 14LPP at their disposal, same that has been since first Polaris even if it has matured on the way.
Click to expand...

Well it's appears on official AMD slides, right after 14nm.

AMD-Zen_3.png


mark-papermaster-page-020.jpg
 
Last edited:
Kaotik said:
There is no "14nm+", there's only 14LPP at their disposal, same that has been since first Polaris even if it has matured on the way.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure I've seen "14nm+" or "14+" in an AMD slide, but I have no idea where to find it at the moment.

Anything between 14LPP and 7DUV is completely absent from GF's roadmaps, though.
 
I'm aware of the slides, but I'm quite certain it's same mumbojumbo as "Latest generation 14nm FinFET" on RX 500, it's still the same 14LPP since it's the only 14nm process GloFo has. "Latest generation" or "14nm+" almost certainly refers to just maturity of the process
 
Intel does the same thing. It's just indicating that lessons were learned after manufacturing chips in volume and those lessons were used to refine the processor design/process for better performance.
 
So, in theory, and the way they show it on the marketing roadmaps, ok it will be the same process, but with optimisations, right ? In a big chip like Vega, I'm sure they can optimize it, nop ?
 
I'm pretty sure the 14nm+ is for the APUs that will come later this year and that need the best process to contain the TDP of a high performance CPU + high performance GPU, we are talking about 4c8t cpu + 768CU GPU.

I really doubt we're gonna see a current vega with 14+ its too soon, maybe a secound generation vega or maybe another SKU like the Nano.
 
xEx said:
I'm pretty sure the 14nm+ is for the APUs that will come later this year and that need the best process to contain the TDP of a high performance CPU + high performance GPU, we are talking about 4c8t cpu + 768CU GPU.

I really doubt we're gonna see a current vega with 14+ its too soon, maybe a secound generation vega or maybe another SKU like the Nano.
Click to expand...

Vega 12 & 20?
 
xEx said:
I'm pretty sure the 14nm+ is for the APUs that will come later this year and that need the best process to contain the TDP of a high performance CPU + high performance GPU, we are talking about 4c8t cpu + 768CU GPU.

I really doubt we're gonna see a current vega with 14+ its too soon, maybe a secound generation vega or maybe another SKU like the Nano.
Click to expand...
There is no "14nm+ process"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top