AMD Vega launch brought forward to October, says report

[The Hand]

Some other bloke has posted that it's Polaris that's coming in October (ie, 'delayed') rather than Vega. New article Hexus?

http://www.overclock.net/t/1599305/v...#post_25149678

So the 390, Fury cards would have to hold the fort against the 1080 and 1070 for 4 months? If true, I smell an AMD graphics price crash..!

[jigger]

So the 390, Fury cards would have to hold the fort against the 1080 and 1070 for 4 months? If true, I smell an AMD graphics price crash..!

Well if some block said it then it must be true. I don't see why R9 390 price would drop though. Maybe Fury prices might a little.

[jag272]

Well if some block said it then it must be true. I don't see why R9 390 price would drop though. Maybe Fury prices might a little.

Of thw two I'd say the 390 is more likely to drop personally. We've seen in the leaked Ashes benchmarks that the new Nvidia cards still struggle with very high performance at 4k. They're certainly much better than Maxwell, but if you try to max out 4k on them their memory appears to choke, whereas the Fury still has remaining memory bandwidth to keep going. Considering the Fury is primarily targetted at high res anyway, and that it still does a better job at 4k (though I'm sure some people will take higher fps and lower 4k specs over 45 fps and maxed out 4k) than the new nvidia competition, I'd say the Fury is still in the same position it was before.

They may still discount it anyway just to tide them over, but I think for now atleast the Fury is still going along its own track, undisturbed by the new GPUs until HBM2 cards are released.

[DanceswithUnix]

They may still discount it anyway just to tide them over, but I think for now at least the Fury is still going along its own track, undisturbed by the new GPUs until HBM2 cards are released.

Looking at the stock levels at Novatech, well, they don't have much. As I type, they seems to have 3 Nano cards and a single Pro Duo card.

http://www.novatech.co.uk/products/c...r9furyxseries/
http://www.novatech.co.uk/products/c...dr9furyseries/
http://www.novatech.co.uk/products/c...dr9nanoseries/

If all the etailers are like that (hard to tell, they don't usually give stock figures or maybe even discriminate between at their suppliers for direct delivery vs in their warehouse) then there isn't a reason for the deep discounts we saw just before the 300 series was announced.

[anselhelm]

If this is true, it's absolutely amazing good news.

That said, it sounds just too good to be true, so as much as I'd love to believe this, I just can't for the time being.

I'll be happy to be proven wrong though in this case if Vega does launch within 2016.

[lon3wolf2002]

Hopefully they won't rush it too much so as they drop the ball in trying to compete with Nvidia.

[kalniel]

Hopefully they won't rush it too much so as they drop the ball in trying to compete with Nvidia.

They've been working on Vega for several years, no worry about them suddenly rushing.

[gupsterg]

Some other bloke has posted that it's Polaris that's coming in October (ie, 'delayed') rather than Vega. New article Hexus?

http://www.overclock.net/t/1599305/v...#post_25149678

Some other bloke used to run a IT news site, which went defunct as he had other projects that took priority IIRC .

I've been tailing him for a while and his "leaks" seem on the £ . In this post is a list of some of his leaks which were true. Besides that summary I looked at posts of those leaks for dates, etc .

They may still discount it anyway just to tide them over, but I think for now atleast the Fury is still going along its own track, undisturbed by the new GPUs until HBM2 cards are released.

Perhaps possible discounting but I'd reckon they may not have much room. Not that I'm in the "know" but just thinking die size/HBM cost, how longs it's been out/recoup, etc.

I'd agree Fiji gonna roll on until Vega.

Looking at the stock levels at Novatech, well, they don't have much. As I type, they seems to have 3 Nano cards and a single Pro Duo card.

http://www.novatech.co.uk/products/c...r9furyxseries/
http://www.novatech.co.uk/products/c...dr9furyseries/
http://www.novatech.co.uk/products/c...dr9nanoseries/

If all the etailers are like that (hard to tell, they don't usually give stock figures or maybe even discriminate between at their suppliers for direct delivery vs in their warehouse) then there isn't a reason for the deep discounts we saw just before the 300 series was announced.

Yeah I've been viewing stock levels (where shown) /skus numbers stocked by ebuyer / scan / bt shop , etc for a number of weeks now and seems all keep very tight numbers.

[jigger]

Of thw two I'd say the 390 is more likely to drop personally. We've seen in the leaked Ashes benchmarks that the new Nvidia cards still struggle with very high performance at 4k. They're certainly much better than Maxwell, but if you try to max out 4k on them their memory appears to choke, whereas the Fury still has remaining memory bandwidth to keep going. Considering the Fury is primarily targetted at high res anyway, and that it still does a better job at 4k (though I'm sure some people will take higher fps and lower 4k specs over 45 fps and maxed out 4k) than the new nvidia competition, I'd say the Fury is still in the same position it was before.

They may still discount it anyway just to tide them over, but I think for now atleast the Fury is still going along its own track, undisturbed by the new GPUs until HBM2 cards are released.

The 390 and 390X are the two best cards on the market by a very long way. The GTX1080 looks to be 20-25% faster than the FuryX for about 10% more money so the FuryX might drop 10-15%.

[jag272]

The 390 and 390X are the two best cards on the market by a very long way. The GTX1080 looks to be 20-25% faster than the FuryX for about 10% more money so the FuryX might drop 10-15%.

At lower resolution yes, and with options turned down at 4k yes. However if the leaked Ashes benchmarks are to be believed, once you attempt max settings at 4k, The Fury X begins to beat out the 1080 still. That is why I think of the 2 the Fury series is less likely to drop in price. Their key selling point, their higher memory bandwidth, is still kicking the new nvidia cards up the rear. The pascal cards are indeed faster as far as their memory bandwidth extends, but they are still very much limited by GDDR5, X or not. Now realistically how many people are looking to absolutely max out 4k res, considering the benchmark suggested a 45fps average on those settings, with around 39 on the 1080 iirc, as opposed to simply going for the highest settings on 4k they can get with solid 60fps is another question. But for now, the Fury cards are still fulfilling the purpose they were built for, and pascal isn't yet competing with that. 4k Ashes on High, 1080 smashes it, 4k on ultra, 1080 smashes it, 4k on crazy, Fury X regains the lead by a reasonably large margin.

Edit: Just went and checked, turns out it was the videocardz source I posted on another thread.

http://videocardz.com/59725/nvidia-g...x12-benchmarks

Less of a difference than I recalled, was recalling the score numbers, Fury on Crazy 4k is 41,00 while there are two "Nvidia Graphics Device" listings which are suspected to be the 1080s, 2 runs within margin of error of each other. These score 40,40 and 39,40 respectively on average. So the fury pulls a slight lead, or factoring in margin of error may be just about on par.

Now when you get down to "Extreme 4k" as they call it, the Nvidia scores 70,60 while the Fury scores 42,00. To me, that suggests that at Extreme 4k the memory bandwidth of the 1080 isnt being exceeded, and so it can benefit from the speed of the new cards much more easily, leaving the fury in the dust. Meanwhile on Crazy 4k, we see the memory bandwidth become an issue and the Fury with its HBM then takes the lead. Now thats just my own interpretation of the results, based upon leaked benchmarks, so take it all with a pinch of salt. But to me that suggests the Fury is indeed still doing its intended job, providing for the higher resolution users. Some 4k users will want the higher framerate, some will prefer eye candy.

The "High 4k" results are especially worthy of consideration for how reliable the leaks are, since there the Nvidia device scores 56,60 while the Fury scores 50,00. That puts the high results lower for the 1080 than on Extreme, though the Fury sees a gain. It has been suggested that they've also benched the 1070 under the same generic name, which would explain the lower score, since it comes pretty close to the 980 ti which is rumoured to be similar performance. But again, all with a pinch of salt.

[lumireleon]

are all of you aware that most of the time it is the software itself which is bottlenecking?

[kalniel]

are all of you aware that most of the time it is the software itself which is bottlenecking?

No, what a strange statement. Got any evidence for that?

I can disprove it by simply turning up the hardware speed - as my frame rate increases without changing the software it can't have been bottlenecked by the software, just the hardware.

[lumireleon]

soon am to buy the LG 98 inch 8K super UHD LED TV, will the 1080 handle Witcher 3 at max settings?

[kalniel]

soon am to buy the LG 98 inch 8K super UHD LED TV, will the 1080 handle Witcher 3 at max settings?

Cool - if you can afford that you can probably afford a FE 1080 and tell us yourself!

[DanceswithUnix]

Can HDMI 2.0a handle 8K at useful frame rates?

[lumireleon]

1080 in SLI can handle 8K, and here is the news; the 1080 series and others will not support tri or quad SLI!!