It was enabled since 17.2. It is confirmed in endnotes in AMD presentation slides.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The Vega RX Thread (Rumors and Info)
- Thread starter fendersrule
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It was enabled since 17.2. It is confirmed in endnotes in AMD presentation slides.
AMD engineers are claiming absolutely something different
.And if we look at TileBased Rasterization test done by PCPer, where there was no tiling - it further solidifies that AMD engineers are telling the truth.
However I will not be stubborn here. I think I know why there might be confusion here. But I need to dig a little.
Oh lord. It appears that gamers will not get those GPUs.
https://videocardz.com/71591/rumor-amd-radeon-rx-vega-64-to-be-great-for-mining
70-100 MH in mining :O.
Last edited:
Vega has 40 new ISA instructions. Just 6 of them are related to cryptocurrency. Rest 34 are related to Graphics pipeline and capabilities, and compute features, that are related to memory paging system.
Vega focus is on graphics side, just like I have written in first, wall of text post in this thread. If none of the instructions and none of graphics features were available in Vega FE, no wonder why it behaved worse per clock than Fiji in graphics tasks.
One more thing: AMD is still binning the Nano GPU, to settle up with its boost clocks, and stabilize the power consumption. That is why it is being released later than the rest of Vega stack.
As a bonus for those who love this stuff.
Vega focus is on graphics side, just like I have written in first, wall of text post in this thread. If none of the instructions and none of graphics features were available in Vega FE, no wonder why it behaved worse per clock than Fiji in graphics tasks.
One more thing: AMD is still binning the Nano GPU, to settle up with its boost clocks, and stabilize the power consumption. That is why it is being released later than the rest of Vega stack.
As a bonus for those who love this stuff
.
Bull crap rumour.
11-13 tflops would be equivalent to about 55MHs. Same like 295x2.
But Vega FE was only managing 31MHs.
And that last Radeon driver update screwed up mining.
And because Ethereum difficulty doubles every 4-5 weeks, even large megahash numbers don't mean anything now and even less every passing month.
Here's the calculator
https://etherscan.io/ether-mining-calculator
Here's the crazy difficulty chart
https://etherscan.io/chart/difficulty
A NEW investment in mining hardware is like suicide. Only for the most stupid investor. Everyone smart just buys the tokens and trades them for profit.
[doublepost=1501800632][/doublepost]I did the calculations.
But let's say it does 100MHs. Let's use a mining calculator to see how much one card will earn in Ether.
https://etherscan.io/ether-mining-calculator
Currently 100MHs will earn 0.80 Ether a month.
The RX Vega is shipping in August. In a month when the difficulty increases even more either the next epoch, 100MHs will earn about 0.50 Ether in that month.
In September the difficulty will rise again. That 100MHs will earn about 0.30 that month.
In October it will be miniscule.
That means in the next three months 100MHs will earn a total of 1 to 1.5 Ether. If the Ether price stays at $225 you will have earned $337. After electrical costs you have $187. You are still at a loss and won't make back the cost of the card or break even unless Ethereum rises to $400.
But if you buy 2-3 Ether from an exchange now, you can avoid the mining costs and have a better chance of breaking even or making profit.
Last edited:
The Vega train wreck continues....
I wonder how long it will be before ATI can actually ship a chip that can do a theoretical 11 TFLOPs in the power envelope of the Imac Pro. December seems rather risky.
Unless of course the "theoretical" 11 TFLOPs turns out to be an actual 6 TFLOPs, and the sycophants blame immature software and drivers, not a failed hardware architecture.
Last edited:
I actually can understand where the rumor comes from.
Currently, all of cryptocurrency mining relies completely on throughput of the cores, and on memory bandwidth.
Vega has cryptocurrency mining specific Instructions in its ISA, which turn the architecture into somewhat SOC dedicated for mining. If those ISA instructions were not available in drivers - that is possibly why the mining performance of Vega FE was so low. Or in line with its theoretical core count figures, and memory bandwidth figures.
On Anandtech forums you would be banned for 10 days, because of this post, for two reasons.
Plain trolling.
Plain stupidity of the post.
You should thank that you are not there, because your career on that forum would end, after few of this type of posts.
Last edited:
Wouldn't matter what it has because as the charts and calculator shows, 100MHs will generate close to zero Eth per month from October. That hash rate is equivalent to 3 x GTX 1070 or 4 x GTX 580.
It's more profitable to work part time for McDonald's for only one hour a month. That's how useless it is to invest in mining now.
The only miners who can make profit are those who started long time ago and already made their investment back.
What I was talking about was the difference in mining performance of Vega architecture, than how much it will make you
.
Yeah I know but AMD adding such extensions now is not only very late but also dishonest to the public. If they were honest they would release a press letter to say that mining is no long profitable.What I was talking about was the difference in mining performance of Vega architecture, than how much it will make you
Even at a very early stage, it was always more profitable to buy Eth than to mine it. If you bought $8000 of Eth in January it would be worth $225,000 today.
If you invested in $8000 of mining rigs in January, you would have only made maximum $15,000 worth of Eth by now. Subtract the hardware cost and electricity. It's only $4500 in 7 months. A street beggar can make that much in a few weeks.
Honesty? In business? Yeah, right...
Mining is one of ways AMD earns money. Saying that it is no longer profitable would be shooting themselves into the foot.
Back to topic. It appears that right now Shader Intrinsics are available for DX11.
The only games I am interested implementing this are Blizzard games: Heroes of the Storm, and Overwatch.
What I meant is that giving out to customers features, that can increase sales of GPU is very good for AMD business.
Do you think AMD was unhappy that their cards were sold out, because of mining craze? Creating a product that can give you "feel" of worth only will make even more possibilities for sales.
I think it was scammy for AMD and Nvidia to come out with mining editions at this time without letting potential customers understand they won't make one cent back.
Yep
. But hey. Its business. GPUs sold to customers equals MONEYZ! for the companies.
Is it not valid to wonder whether the long lead times on the iMac Pro and mMP are related to a wait for a more efficient GPU?
The specs for the GPUs are already released. I am having hard time imagining that such person like you would not be able to count out what is required for Vega to be in iMac.
But let me make it plain for you.
Vega Radeon Pro 64 is 11 TFLOPs GPU.
It has 4096 GCN cores, so to get 11 TFLOPs it has to have 1.35 GHz core clock. The GPU in question also has 800 MHz HBM2 memory. RX Vega 64 has 484 GB/s memory bandwidth, from 945 MHz HBM2, 1546 MHz core clock, and 4096 GCN cores. The TDP is 295W.
Vega 56 is 210W GPU, it has 1471 MHz core clock, and 800 MHz HBM2. In essence, Radeon Pro 64 will have lower TDP, than RX Vega 56. I have predicted it will have 175W TDP, but It might have 150W actually. There is zero need for waiting for "more efficient" GPU, from AMD.
Partially yes, but AMD also wanted to have enough supply of GPUs to feed the need for them.
That is correct.
The mining has become biggest problem actually in recent months, for every tech enthusiast, and builders.
A 295 watt GPU, plus an 18 core Xeon, plus RAM, plus 10 GbE, plus monitor, plus fans, plus audio, plus T-Bolt, plus USB, plus... isn't going to fit into a 500 watt power envelope without serious throttling.
It appears you have zero clue what is being talked there. If you cannot comprehend basic technicalities about hardware, please stop commenting it.
The Radeon Pro 64 from iMac Pro will have around 150-175W TDP.
Im actually more worried about the power consumption and thermal output of 18 core Xeon, than about Radeon Pro 64.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/11690...2-memory?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social
Small technical point of Vega HBM2. It costs 2.5 times more than HBM. AMD is using HBM2 from Samsung.
Last edited:
It shouldn't be too bad. Gamers Nexus review of the Vega Frontier Edition draws 425 W max from the wall and thats using a an older, relatively power hungry Intel Haswell-EP 6 core processor. Obviously we still need to account for the screen's power draw but that should be less than 50 W or so. I am sure some binning and undervolting like Apple normally does with their GPUs will get them there. My bet is we are looking at something like a 225 W power envelope for the GPU in the iMac Pro.