By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - PC Discussion - Nvidia Gets SALTY

It is the best to laught last, so let's wait for Navi GPU, according to Forbes' leaks, created for Sony and PS5.
The Forbes leak has it as we see, underwhelming Vega ( perphaps will be included in Xbox Scarlett, thus Phil/X logo on the floor ), and nex gen arch for Sony.
The AMD is MAD winner this gen, with Ryzen they catch up with competition, they have no need to worry about a competitor AMD has won in console space for sure.



Around the Network
KingofTrolls said:
It is the best to laught last, so let's wait for Navi GPU, according to Forbes' leaks, created for Sony and PS5.
The Forbes leak has it as we see, underwhelming Vega ( perphaps will be included in Xbox Scarlett, thus Phil/X logo on the floor ), and nex gen arch for Sony.
The AMD is MAD winner this gen, with Ryzen they catch up with competition, they have no need to worry about a competitor AMD has won in console space for sure.

There wasn't a doubt they won this console gen, because they were the ones who signed the one time deal (One time, as in, who is going to swap from AMD to NV mid gen). I don't see how AMD is going to absolutely slaughter everyone for all of time, going forward, when their current GPU lineup is underwhelming. If they do a deal with Navi, that means it;ll be a one time deal with Sony, meaning Nvidia can just release a newer chip before or after Navi, and then another one, but you can't do that with a closed off box, which isn't meant to be tampered with constantly. 

Don't forget, NV also has their deal with Nintendo, and the Switch has been rising in popularity and sales over a short period of time. 



I think some people dont get the Radeon VII that well. Perdormance on par with the RTX 2080 for games is impressive at the same price. Ray tracing at this point doesn,t matter. DLSS at this point doesn't matter.

The problem is that this card will absolutely clobber NVIDIA in the prosumer market. The massive amount of memory bandwith combined, combined with Vega's compute prowess and appearantly untouched FP64 performance (remember this card is a repurposed datacenter card) will eat into Titan V and RTX Titan sales.

You can get monster workstation performance for a lot less then what NVIDIA's charging you for and that hurts them. This card does just ok for gaming, I think AMD knows fully wel the real meat and potatoes is to be found in the mid range when they'll release Navi later on.

At this point, NVIDIA's response is like Apple: "No one does what we do, so the competition doesn't compare". To bad NVIDIA's distinguishing features (RTX, DLSS) are clearly suffering from 1st generation syndrome. AMD can let NVIDIA do all the work cracking open the initial market for ray tracing because it'll be years from now untill the feature will be mainstream and widespread.



Bofferbrauer2 said:

Seriously Perm?

If it was just a die Shrink plus increased clock speeds and more bandwith, then it wouldn't have outperformed the old Vega 64 by such a large margin. Radeon VII has some architectural improvements, because the numbers don't add up otherwise. It's certainly not the Bandwith, as many of these games listed weren't limited in that domain to begin with.

Vega 7's clockspeed increased by 16.4%. - That means the Render Output Pipelines (A big limiter on Vega), Texture Mapping Units operate that much faster. - The ROPS is a big one as AMD always seems to be ROP starved.

Compute increased by 9.5% over Vega 64.

Bandwidth increased by a whopping 112.27%.

The 25% or so increases is more or less from increases in clockrate and that bandwidth boost... Vega was never compute bound to begin with.

So yes, seriously. Vega 7 is just like RX 590, few enhancements... Bulk of the gains due to clock increases thanks to the smaller fabrication process opening up extra headroom.

Is there some secret sauce hidden somewhere? Possibly, but we don't know at this point in time... And it is best to leave such speculation until Anandtech has done a thorough analysis on the hardware when it releases.

Bofferbrauer2 said:
And you got the wrong keyword. The keyword is also, as like I said it's for someone who plays games, but who uses his GPU also for other things, like work for instance. It is what the Titan series was on NVidia's side of things... until the RTX Titan that is, which got turned into a pure gaming GPU without any productivity extras while keeping the huge pricetag.

They still marketed it to Gamers. - AMD has a different brand for non-gamers... You might have heard of them under the banner of "Fire Pro".

AMD could have also done what they initially did with Vega... And called it the "Frontiers Edition" - Which WAS marketed towards gamers+professionals.

Drawing comparisons to Titan is a bit silly, they both have vastly different price points and targeted audiences... I mean. The Titan is actually a good card for professionals, gamers and prosumers.

WolfpackN64 said:
I think some people dont get the Radeon VII that well. Perdormance on par with the RTX 2080 for games is impressive at the same price. Ray tracing at this point doesn,t matter. DLSS at this point doesn't matter.

AMD can't just be "on par" with the RTX 2080.

The issue is... By the time the Vega 7 launches, the RTX 2080 may have dropped a notch on the pricing ladder.
...Plus the RTX 2080 isn't even nVidia's fastest GPU, the RTX 2080 Ti and Titan sit above it, let alone what Pascal offers.

The Geforce RTX 2080 not only gets essentially "Free" Ray Tracing and DLSS... But does everything whilst consuming less power... For the gamer, there is little value in what Vega 7 offers... And this is coming from someone who generally only buys AMD GPU's.

WolfpackN64 said:

The problem is that this card will absolutely clobber NVIDIA in the prosumer market. The massive amount of memory bandwith combined, combined with Vega's compute prowess and appearantly untouched FP64 performance (remember this card is a repurposed datacenter card) will eat into Titan V and RTX Titan sales.

You can get monster workstation performance for a lot less then what NVIDIA's charging you for and that hurts them. This card does just ok for gaming, I think AMD knows fully wel the real meat and potatoes is to be found in the mid range when they'll release Navi later on.

AMD has always offered GPU's with surprising amounts of compute... Hence why they were gobbled up left, right and center by crypto currency miners. - But games generally need more than that. - Vega 7 should do well in those markets that are looking for more compute.

What AMD really needs to do is ditch Graphics Core Next and move onto Next-Gen already.

WolfpackN64 said:

At this point, NVIDIA's response is like Apple: "No one does what we do, so the competition doesn't compare". To bad NVIDIA's distinguishing features (RTX, DLSS) are clearly suffering from 1st generation syndrome. AMD can let NVIDIA do all the work cracking open the initial market for ray tracing because it'll be years from now untill the feature will be mainstream and widespread.

I don't actually like nVidia's approach to Ray Tracing. - Ray Tracing is generally a compute and memory constrained issue, so nVidia has taken what seems to be a fixed-function route which is efficient from a transistor point of view with the amount of performance it offers, but it also means those units cannot be leveraged for general rasterization tasks... And lets face it, we still live in a rasterization world.

Hopefully AMD takes another approach to Ray Tracing.

It smells like the Geforce FX all of again.... Lots of fixed function stuff at the expense of other hardware... And the irony was... It is the perfect Storm for AMD to pull another Radeon 9700 Pro all over again.
However... Despite nVidia essentially crippling itself, AMD still cannot get a decisive victory even at 7nm, it's a testament to how efficient nVidia's GPU's are right now, AMD is years away from even matching them.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Pemalite said:

It smells like the Geforce FX all of again.... Lots of fixed function stuff at the expense of other hardware... And the irony was... It is the perfect Storm for AMD to pull another Radeon 9700 Pro all over again.
However... Despite nVidia essentially crippling itself, AMD still cannot get a decisive victory even at 7nm, it's a testament to how efficient nVidia's GPU's are right now, AMD is years away from even matching them.

This is exactly my sentiment as well - instead of kicking nVidia in the nuts right now with a GPU that has massive fps advantage in current titles over their RTX offerings, AMD is coming out with something that is around 2080 level with higher TDP and on smaller node.

I'm really glad that Ryzen finally brought them back into CPU game, but it seems they just can't get their shit together when it comes to GPUs.



Around the Network
Pemalite said:
thismeintiel said:

I do find it interesting that AMD had Xbox onstage and then later announced the Radeon VII, and used it to run FH4. Wonder if this is what XB2 is getting, while PS5 gets Navi.

People thought the same about Ryzen and the Xbox One X. - Microsoft had a demo running that had a Zen CPU in it... And people automagically chalked the Xbox One X to having Zen... Obviously I argued the contrary due to cost reasons. :P

And I argued the same thing.  There are differences, though.  Ryzen launched only a few months before the X did.  No way would they have a CPU of that quality just months after it launched itself.  Like you said, the cost would have been crazy.  Forget $499, it would have been the PS3's $599 all over again.  I'm sure it would have also taken more effort from MS, making sure that every game ran correctly on a new CPU with a different architecture.

Radeon VII, on the other hand, launches next month.  That's 1 1/2 years, seeing as XB2 isn't expected until late 2020, to get costs down.  I'm guessing if it did use it, it would also be a slightly parred down version of it.  I could definitely see this being used in the top of the line XB2, while the PS5 gets Navi, which Sony is rumored to be having input in its development.



freebs2 said:
DonFerrari said:
And they will be extra salty with PS5 and Scarlet being AMD powered again and doing good sales plus having good performance for console side.

For their prospective probably while ps and xb move a lot of units, console chips have very thin margins compared to graphics cards and laptops gpus.

Mind me, I don't have anything against AMD, but PS and Xbox use their chips not because they're superior to Nividia's but only because they're chepaer.

Not only because it's cheaper. I guess both Sony and Microsoft doesn't really want to work with Nvidia at this point. Nvidia screwed both companies in the past. They screwed Microsoft with GPU prices for original Xbox which led to a lawsuit. And they made the worse GPU for PS3 than what was inside Xbox360 which came out a year before. I guess it costed more for Sony than X360 GPU as well.

shikamaru317 said:

This is just one of many reasons why I dislike Nvidia. Yes, it's kind of sad that it took a die shrink down to 7nm for AMD to match or slightly exceed Nvidia's 12nm GTX 2080, but that is no good reason for Nvidia to trashtalk AMD. I like people and companies who are humble instead of those that gloat and trashtalk. And this is just one reason why I dislike Nvidia, I also dislike them because of their practice of designing tech like PhysX and Hair Works specifically so that it will have trouble running on AMD cards, and then moneyhat developers into using that tech in their games, effectively handicapping AMD cards in those games (and the consoles since they use AMD APU's). It is one thing to moneyhat an optimization deal where a dev spends more time optimizing for your cards than for your competition's cards, both AMD and Nvidia do that, but it is another entirely to pay a dev to handicap the competition. It is because of underhanded tactics like that that I will never buy an Nvidia card again, even if they are technically superior to AMD cards in some ways.

In the end, AMD gets the last laugh, it's looking like they got the contract for both Xbox Scarlett and PS5, so that is basically 160m+ APU's they just sold next gen.

The same. This is the exact same reason I stopped buying Nvidia GPUs 6 years ago. I just don't feel like supporting such business practices.

shikamaru317 said:
thismeintiel said:

Probably more salty that they won't see an almost guaranteed 120M+ sales from the PS/Xbox lines again.

I do find it interesting that AMD had Xbox onstage and then later announced the Radeon VII, and used it to run FH4. Wonder if this is what XB2 is getting, while PS5 gets Navi.

It's possible that Xbox Scarlett Anaconda will use a cut down version of this with a few less cores and with GDDR6 instead of the more expensive HBM2 I suppose, but even then it might be too expensive. Radeon VII offers roughly RTX 2080 tier performance for $700, while the top end Navi GPU, the RX 380, will supposedly offer GTX 2070/Vega 64 tier performance for $250. That is a huge price difference, and I can't see MS having a massively higher launch price on Anaconda just to get a measly 15% performance advantage over PS5, at most Anaconda will be $100 more than PS5 imo. 

The price difference won't be the same as in retail. Not to say that the console GPUs will only be based on desktop counterparts, not be the exact same thing. Console manufacturers never pay retail prices for their chips. Otherwise we would never have seen a 400-500$ consoles. I also hope Microsoft won't go with Radeon VII for Scarlett. Choosing Navi even if it will be slightly less powerful would be a wiser choice as this GPU will have more new technologies that won't be present in Radeon VII



 

derpysquirtle64 said:
shikamaru317 said:

It's possible that Xbox Scarlett Anaconda will use a cut down version of this with a few less cores and with GDDR6 instead of the more expensive HBM2 I suppose, but even then it might be too expensive. Radeon VII offers roughly RTX 2080 tier performance for $700, while the top end Navi GPU, the RX 380, will supposedly offer GTX 2070/Vega 64 tier performance for $250. That is a huge price difference, and I can't see MS having a massively higher launch price on Anaconda just to get a measly 15% performance advantage over PS5, at most Anaconda will be $100 more than PS5 imo. 

The price difference won't be the same as in retail. Not to say that the console GPUs will only be based on desktop counterparts, not be the exact same thing. Console manufacturers never pay retail prices for their chips. Otherwise we would never have seen a 400-500$ consoles. I also hope Microsoft won't go with Radeon VII for Scarlett. Choosing Navi even if it will be slightly less powerful would be a wiser choice as this GPU will have more new technologies that won't be present in Radeon VII

True, and they have about a year to get costs down before Xbox Scarlett Anaconda actually enters production. Still, I would hope they use a Navi based design instead since Navi should have additional architectural improvements that aren't present on the Radeon 7. Navi is worth it over Radeon 7 for TDP alone, RX 3080 is rumored to have a 150 watt TDP, half of the 300 watt TDP on Radeon 7, lower power usage is essential for a console if you don't want it to run hot and loud like PS4 Pro. Ideally it would be cool to see MS order a custom Navi based chip that actually has more CU's than the RX 3080.  

Last edited by shikamaru317 - on 13 January 2019

derpysquirtle64 said:
freebs2 said:

For their prospective probably while ps and xb move a lot of units, console chips have very thin margins compared to graphics cards and laptops gpus.

Mind me, I don't have anything against AMD, but PS and Xbox use their chips not because they're superior to Nividia's but only because they're chepaer.

Not only because it's cheaper. I guess both Sony and Microsoft doesn't really want to work with Nvidia at this point. Nvidia screwed both companies in the past. They screwed Microsoft with GPU prices for original Xbox which led to a lawsuit. And they made the worse GPU for PS3 than what was inside Xbox360 which came out a year before. I guess it costed more for Sony than X360 GPU as well.

shikamaru317 said:

It's possible that Xbox Scarlett Anaconda will use a cut down version of this with a few less cores and with GDDR6 instead of the more expensive HBM2 I suppose, but even then it might be too expensive. Radeon VII offers roughly RTX 2080 tier performance for $700, while the top end Navi GPU, the RX 380, will supposedly offer GTX 2070/Vega 64 tier performance for $250. That is a huge price difference, and I can't see MS having a massively higher launch price on Anaconda just to get a measly 15% performance advantage over PS5, at most Anaconda will be $100 more than PS5 imo. 

The price difference won't be the same as in retail. Not to say that the console GPUs will only be based on desktop counterparts, not be the exact same thing. Console manufacturers never pay retail prices for their chips. Otherwise we would never have seen a 400-500$ consoles. I also hope Microsoft won't go with Radeon VII for Scarlett. Choosing Navi even if it will be slightly less powerful would be a wiser choice as this GPU will have more new technologies that won't be present in Radeon VII

It will be interesting to see if Nintendo has the same problems with Nvidia that the other two did.  On one hand, they may not want to screw up their last chance to stay in the console market, so will treat Nintendo well.  On the other hand, which the way the CEO talks make me think it may go this way, they know they have Nintendo by the balls for a mobile chip suitable for them, so may refuse to negotiate much lower prices.  This could affect Nintendo's ability to price cut when needed.

As for Navi, I have a feeling MS may not have access to it.  Sony is rumored to be working pretty closely with AMD on Navi.  I kinda doubt they would want all of their input to go into their competition's machine.  I would imagine Sony is going to have console exclusivity on Navi, at least for the beginning of the gen.  I think Radeon VII, most likely customized, is the way MS is going to go.  We have over a year for them to drop prices, which, like you pointed out, aren't the prices MS pays, anyway.  It would give them a numbers win, most likely, in terms of Tflops.  Of course, it won't be that large of a win, will cause it to be ~$499 vs a ~$399 PS5, and have fewer of the new technologies found in Navi.  In the end, MS is going to make sure they can tout the most powerful system next gen, but I think it will mainly be on paper.  Sony's 1st parties are going to show just what next gen can do.



shikamaru317 said:
derpysquirtle64 said:

The price difference won't be the same as in retail. Not to say that the console GPUs will only be based on desktop counterparts, not be the exact same thing. Console manufacturers never pay retail prices for their chips. Otherwise we would never have seen a 400-500$ consoles. I also hope Microsoft won't go with Radeon VII for Scarlett. Choosing Navi even if it will be slightly less powerful would be a wiser choice as this GPU will have more new technologies that won't be present in Radeon VII

True, and they have about a year to get costs down before Xbox Scarlett Anaconda actually enters production. Still, I would hope they use a Navi based design instead since Navi should have additional architectural improvements that aren't present on the Radeon 7. Navi is worth it over Radeon 7 for TDP alone, RX 3080 is rumored to have a 150 watt TDP, half of the 300 watt TDP on Radeon 7, lower power usage is essential for a console if you don't want it to run hot and loud like PS4 Pro. Ideally it would be cool to see MS order a custom Navi based chip that actually has more CU's than the RX 3080.  

I would bet anything that RX 3000 rumor is bollocks. It isn't going to nearly double 7 nm Vega in  efficiency. AMD would be shouting to the market with years to spare if they had anything good; Zen was less impressive than that and that's what happened. Navi is just another GCN architecture. Thus, it's shit at this day and age. The best thing you can expect from shit is a pretty morning mushroom to sprout from it, and nothing more. Otherwise, it's just another step in RTG's staircase of disappointment.