AMD Vega Hardware Reviews

Discussion in 'Architecture and Products' started by ArkeoTP, Jun 30, 2017.

  1. lanek

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2012
    Messages:
    2,469
    Likes Received:
    315
    Location:
    Switzerland
    For be honest, i more interested on the Vega 16GB FE or 8 GB, but not for gaming, but raytracing.. 2 of them.. ( 26Tflops of FP32 )...
     
  2. Anarchist4000

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    1,439
    Likes Received:
    359
    Probably, but AMD was using it as a block device so there wouldn't be a filesystem to mount. Probably want to tweak the page size for HBCC with all that, but I'd imagine they fill it like a standard graphics/compute resource.

    With Threadripper you can probably get away with 1-2 more. Guess it depends on your dataset.
     
  3. rcf

    rcf
    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2013
    Messages:
    400
    Likes Received:
    325
    I would like to see Radeon Pro Vega compared to Quadro GP100 as both have 16GB HBM2.
     
  4. Anarchist4000

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    1,439
    Likes Received:
    359
  5. lanek

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2012
    Messages:
    2,469
    Likes Received:
    315
    Location:
    Switzerland
    Well it is more a question of money ( as it is for my home system ).
     
  6. RedVi

    Regular

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    Messages:
    387
    Likes Received:
    39
    Location:
    Australia
    Now if only power consumption is no more than the 210w tdp... Of course, a 1070 can likely be overclocked 20% and have a similar performance and power consumption. I do wonder if that is a reference 1070 or aftermarket overclocked one. I guess we will find out how Vega does soon enough, but Vega 56 could interest me if power consumption is in check and I can get one easily with a cooler I am happy with.
     
  7. DavidGraham

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    2,658
    You have to keep in mind that Vega 56 is 14% behind Vega 64 in resources, which -assuming perfect scaling- means it's 10~15% behind Vega 64 in performance. As such it can easily be OC'ed to reach Vega 64 level, just like Fury to FuryX before, this makes it a very attractive option, considering the price.

    EDIT:
    Reviewing the numbers they are probably min fps, Doom numbers are on the low side for a 1070, considering I get 90fps+ @1440p with a 3770K, BF1 @1440p gives me 85+fps. Nothing in my system is OC'ed.
     
    #587 DavidGraham, Aug 3, 2017
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2017
    Lightman likes this.
  8. sebbbi

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Messages:
    2,924
    Likes Received:
    5,288
    Location:
    Helsinki, Finland
    Vega 56 also has clock disadvantage over Vega 64. Total FLOP disadvantage is 20.5% and memory bandwidth disadvantage is 18.0% against the cheaper Vega 64 model. But clock difference between Vega 56 and 64 is only 5%(boost)-7%(base). If the bottleneck is geometry based or ROP based, Vega 56 might actually get quite close to Vega 64. And we don't know how thermals play out in this comparison. Vega 56 has lower clocks and some disabled CUs. This might actually help it.
     
    Cat Merc likes this.
  9. Cat Merc

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    May 14, 2017
    Messages:
    124
    Likes Received:
    108
    https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Radeon_RX_Vega_Preview/5.html

    TPU posted full slide deck. Couple of interesting notes:
    ▪HBCC increased FPS in Heaven by 7% without aritifical VRAM limit.

    ▪Calculating from TDP's, being 295W for balanced and 210W for power saving, we get in BF1 4k:
    295W for 75.8FPS~
    210W for 72.6FPS~

    This is quite extreme power scaling.

    DOOM is highly variable depending on where you test it.

    https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Zotac/GeForce_GTX_1080_Mini/12.html

    A 1070 gets even lower than those numbers in TPU's testing.
     
    BRiT and BacBeyond like this.
  10. ToTTenTranz

    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    10,073
    Likes Received:
    4,648
    Yup. I guess the significantly lower power draw from HBM2 (and probably some aggressively low core clocks/vcore states) allows for large power savings.

    [​IMG]

    The endnote slide
    claims it's all using the highest settings in every game, but it's all on 1080p though. It might still make Vega the most power efficient card for older and less demanding games.


    Another interesting fact is that you can apparently decide in the driver how much system RAM HBCC can take over. I wonder if this will make the game recognize the GPU's total VRAM as HBM2+system-alocated RAM.
    If the HBCC is successful at seamlessly prioritizing what needs to be in the HBM2 and what can be streamed through PCIe, this could indeed be a game changer for lower-end GPUs with single HBM2 stacks (i.e. Vega 11 wouldn't really hurt by having only 4GB, for example).
     
  11. Picao84

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,567
    Likes Received:
    716
    T̶u̶r̶b̶o̶C̶a̶c̶h̶e̶ ̶(̶c̶a̶n̶t̶ ̶r̶e̶m̶e̶m̶b̶e̶r̶ ̶w̶h̶a̶t̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶A̶M̶D̶ ̶s̶o̶l̶u̶t̶i̶o̶n̶ ̶w̶a̶s̶ ̶c̶a̶l̶l̶e̶d̶)̶ ̶ HyperMemory says hello to his grandson!!!
     
    #591 Picao84, Aug 3, 2017
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2017
    kalelovil and RecessionCone like this.
  12. ToTTenTranz

    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    10,073
    Likes Received:
    4,648
    Another very interesting tidbit is the "Power Save Mode" slide, showing ~20-40% savings in a number of high-profile games:

    [​IMG]

    At first I thought this was a bit of a rehash of the Radeon Chill slide, but turns out these results are taken at 4K and highest settings.
    And the actual performance difference between turbo and power saving modes is 2 and 3%.

    [​IMG]



    And AGP Texturing from the late 90's says hello to those teenagers.
     
    #592 ToTTenTranz, Aug 3, 2017
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2017
    Lightman, BRiT and BacBeyond like this.
  13. Picao84

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,567
    Likes Received:
    716
    Was it actually used though? I seem to remember some tweaking guides where that was one of the AGP features recommended to be turned off. With PC's having such low amounts of memory at time, seemed quite counter productive.
     
  14. fellix

    fellix Hey, You!
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2004
    Messages:
    3,494
    Likes Received:
    405
    Location:
    Varna, Bulgaria
    Only Intel's i740 had proper functioning implementation of AGP texturing, to cut costs from the on-board memory. Since a lot of the user base at the time was using dodgy AGP chipsets with even dodgier driver support, most of the graphics IHVs didn't bother too much with the enhanced features of AGP. 3Dfx was a prime example of that and by the time they folded, the DRAM prices allowed for larger amounts of video memory, that negated further the usability of AGP texturing.
     
    homerdog and BRiT like this.
  15. Anarchist4000

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    1,439
    Likes Received:
    359
    That's rather interesting as I'd expect HBCC to only help when constrained by memory. On an 8GB card with a game needing half of that you would think it would preload all the resources. This would seem to indicate that from the onset it's paging only required data and increasing minimum framerates (decreasing stall time) as only a fraction of the original data would need moved.

    HBM should be acting like cache so primarily non-addressable. In that case the game would see whatever value of system memory is assigned. That said there are likely different pools making it a bit more complex.
     
    BacBeyond likes this.
  16. Cat Merc

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    May 14, 2017
    Messages:
    124
    Likes Received:
    108
    It is very interesting. Max FPS shouldn't go up under any circumstance I can think of, but frametime consistency could improve.
     
    BacBeyond likes this.
  17. gamervivek

    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    Messages:
    715
    Likes Received:
    220
    Location:
    india
    Interesting, the benchmark is small enough for caching I suppose and however it's being cached.:?:

    AMD is making a great case for buying this card just to tinker around with it.
     
  18. Anarchist4000

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    1,439
    Likes Received:
    359
    They would if constrained by memory, but I wouldn't think that is the case on this benchmark.

    Another likely possibility is that the HBCC absorbed the resource management work from the CPU. Lower CPU load leading to higher max FPS.
     
    Cat Merc likes this.
  19. Anarchist4000

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    1,439
    Likes Received:
    359
    Lightman and Ike Turner like this.
  20. Mize

    Mize 3dfx Fan
    Moderator Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    5,064
    Likes Received:
    1,128
    Location:
    Cincinnati, Ohio USA
    Thing is it doesn't really beat the 29MH/s @95W one can get from a GTX 1070.
     
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...