The Vega RX Thread (Rumors and Info)

[cube]

Arguing that it is OK to call Kaby Lake G "Vega" because Raven Ridge has no HBCC is a fallacy.

Raven Ridge has no HBCC because it has no VRAM. It is an integrated GPU.

DX 12_1, on the other hand is a visible feature that seems to be missing on Kaby Lake G. This is the kind of thing that differentiates architectures.

Similarly, it could be argued that lack of HBCC would not make for a discrete Vega chip. But if it had it (feature-wise) and used GDDR6 instead of HBM2 it could still be called Vega.

 

[cube]

Samsung added FreeSync to their 2018 QLED TVs via firmware update.

Why not the older ones?

 

[cube]

Could AMD choose 12FDX for budget GPUs?

 

[cube]

DX12 again:

 

[MisterAndrew]

Forza is AMD optimized.

 

[cube]

It seems the AMD driver was not optimized for Forza 4 when the video was made. Nor NVIDIA's.

But I don't know if DX12 drivers can get game specific optimizations.

 

[h9826790]

It seems the AMD driver was not optimized for Forza 4 when the video was made. Nor NVIDIA's.

But I don't know if DX12 drivers can get game specific optimizations.

Forza was built for Xbox, definitely optimised for AMD and DX12 by default.

 

[SoyCapitanSoyCapitan]

Forza was built for Xbox, definitely optimised for AMD and DX12 by default.

Custom Jaguar chip in Xbox

 

[throAU]

Custom Jaguar chip in Xbox

Its still GCN based though.

 

[cube]

Forza was built for Xbox, definitely optimised for AMD and DX12 by default.

It seems AMD-oriented games usually run well on NVIDIA. The reverse apparently does not hold.

DX12 on NVIDIA is reportedly not excellent (at least before Volta).

 

[h9826790]

It seems AMD-oriented games usually run well on NVIDIA. The reverse apparently does not hold.

DX12 on NVIDIA is reportedly not excellent (at least before Volta).

There is no doubt Nvidia is a better choice for gaming in general.

 

[cube]

There is no doubt Nvidia is a better choice for gaming in general.

Many times artificially, by using proprietary tools.

And AMD is in normal times better at price/performance.

 

[AlexMaximus]

It may be strong, it may be fast, but holy crap is it hungry.

AMD spec sheet lists vega 56 at 210 watts "Typical board power.

http://products.amd.com/en-us/searc.../Radeon™-RX-Vega-Series/Radeon™-RX-Vega-56/92

AMD lists typical board power of vega 64 at 295 watts

http://products.amd.com/en-us/searc.../Radeon™-RX-Vega-Series/Radeon™-RX-Vega-64/93

Vega 64 liquid cooled 345 watts

http://products.amd.com/en-us/searc...ga-Series/Radeon™-RX-Vega-64-Liquid-Cooled/91

Vega frontier edition 300 watts

http://products.amd.com/en-us/searc...on™-Vega-Frontier-Edition/Frontier-Edition/90

Thank you so much, I was looking for that information.

One question to all the blog members here. Somehow it used to be easier to use GPU cards that have been used in iMacs on Mac Pro's. What I don't understand is this. The iMac Pro comes with both Vega cards, the 56 and the 64. So that means Apple has Apple EFI drivers or original driver packages for those machines, usually embedded in the OSMac. Why is it just not a Plug & Play issue for us Mac Pro 4.1/5.1 users? The drivers should be all there, or not, and I mean with boot screens? I am just wondering, - for sure Apple made this one intentionally difficult again, didn't they?
Who gives a rats &%$ abotu the 580, I want a Vega 64 with boot screens in my 5.1. Since Apple goes throug so much trouble to give us one more round on Mojave, why just not give us the original iMac Pro driver for the Vega GPU's? I just don't get it..

 

[goMac]

The iMac Pro comes with both Vega cards, the 56 and the 64. So that means Apple has Apple EFI drivers or original driver packages for those machines, usually embedded in the OSMac.

The 2010 Mac Pro uses a different kind of EFI. The Vega 64/56 actually already come with EFI ROMs. The problem is the Mac Pro EFI is older and not compatible.

 

[koyoot]

I know how it will sound but Forza Horizon 4 is genuinely one of best games of 2018.

 

[cube]

It seems Vega 56 is beating the 1080 at FH4 even with the new drivers.

 

[SoyCapitanSoyCapitan]

Thank you so much, I was looking for that information.

One question to all the blog members here. Somehow it used to be easier to use GPU cards that have been used in iMacs on Mac Pro's. What I don't understand is this. The iMac Pro comes with both Vega cards, the 56 and the 64. So that means Apple has Apple EFI drivers or original driver packages for those machines, usually embedded in the OSMac. Why is it just not a Plug & Play issue for us Mac Pro 4.1/5.1 users? The drivers should be all there, or not, and I mean with boot screens? I am just wondering, - for sure Apple made this one intentionally difficult again, didn't they?
Who gives a rats &%$ abotu the 580, I want a Vega 64 with boot screens in my 5.1. Since Apple goes throug so much trouble to give us one more round on Mojave, why just not give us the original iMac Pro driver for the Vega GPU's? I just don't get it..

Boot screen on new Macs are on the logic board. On the old Macs the boot screen was on the graphics card firmware.

You don’t really need this boot screen thing tbh. People just want to get that idea into your head to sell you stuff. You can switch OS from control panels since the 80s

 

[Asgorath]

Boot screen on new Macs are on the logic board. On the old Macs the boot screen was on the graphics card firmware.

You don’t really need this boot screen thing tbh. People just want to get that idea into your head to sell you stuff. You can switch OS from control panels since the 80s

That's all well and good until literally anything goes wrong during the boot process and you can no longer boot to the OS.

 

[throAU]

This would be why you would keep your old card, for popping in to diagnose when that happens.