Radeon RX Vega On Linux: High-Performance GPUs & Open-Source No Longer An Oxymoron

[jrch2k8]

Certainly there is something very wrong in Vega chips but I'm not sure if driver or hardware side, from a raw power perspective it should be a lot faster(at least on windows) in most games.

So my guess is either the graphics part of the chip cannot keep feeding the shader cores fast enough or the driver have a helluva bunch of optimizations turned off(or at least require explicit game code support) hence reaching those FPS per Watt on pure brute force with a Fiji ish driver for launch.

For linux is great but more and more the chip seem capped somehow vs its raw compute power, I guess with time will improve a freaking lot, for now I need to start saving for an 1920x or 1900x and an rx56

[eltomito]

He's literally telling people to go to other sites to get information, if I was an AMD PR manager reading that I'd be like why bother sending something to Phoronix when they're just going to ignore the literature I've sent out and tell people to go to other sites

Unfortunately if sites want to get free stuff they have to be pretty friendly with the company's PR department and play the game - I'm not saying it's right - I'd love to have seen Phoronix with a 290X and a FuryX along with the other cards that are routinely benchmarked here

The amount of bitching I've seen posted in articles in the past when he doesn't get samples I just can't fathom why he doesn't go through the motions like all the other sites

MIchael shows honesty. I like that in a site that does benchmarks (y)

[Marc Driftmeyer]

Unless you are interested in FP16 packed bits and the intracies of the new architectures you won't fully grasp just how much Game engines and their game developers can truly benefit, even with the maturing OpenCL stack.

[vein]

*sigh*
Worked all day and just got home. Looked at the benchmarks and thought: "It is a good card with oss drivers. I'll buy one". Opened my fav. Store page... And then the next one and the next one...
And it seems I am too late...sold out everywhere..

[Veerappan]

*sigh*
Worked all day and just got home. Looked at the benchmarks and thought: "It is a good card with oss drivers. I'll buy one". Opened my fav. Store page... And then the next one and the next one...
And it seems I am too late...sold out everywhere..

The Vega 56 doesn't go on sale for 2 more weeks, from what I've heard. You've got another change then...

[arakan94]

As usual I am right and the fanbois are crying in a corner being knocked out by a real man: an almost 2 year old nvidia card shits on the latest amd card. It is what it is. Bow down fanbois I told you not to be idiots and believe in amd.

Also it consumes a shitload more power.... that should tell enough of the quality of their engineers. 2 years too late, power hungry. Failure. Dead on arrival! As I said!

Only idiots would buy this. OpenCL? Researchers use CUDA. nVidia wins again. Ryzen sucks. Vega sucks. amd is a joke.

If AMD is such a "joke" why are ALL AMD GPUs starting with RX 570 and including Vega 64 sold out? Even if large part of buyers are miners, it's clearly better offering than competition..

Rest of your post is a joke.. Only utter fool can say that Ryzen sucks. In most areas, it's considerably better then Intel's offering!

[theriddick]

What I get from this is that Vega is only marginally better then Fury cards (I have the X so even less), mostly due to its extra memory availability. Really not a exciting card, if I were to upgrade I'd go for the 1080Ti for 4k support. I'm sure Vega will be a good card this time next year but many people are not interested in the waiting game. I'd be ok with coin mining crowd buying up all these cards tbo! pave the way for potentially better Navi cards...

PS. The windows results look very similar IMO, some games do great with vega, but MANY are sitting around 1070 level of performance, and not shy off FuryX results. Maybe Navi will come close to 1080ti performance in gaming, but probably too late by then.

[Marc Driftmeyer]

What I get from this is that Vega is only marginally better then Fury cards (I have the X so even less), mostly due to its extra memory availability. Really not a exciting card, if I were to upgrade I'd go for the 1080Ti for 4k support. I'm sure Vega will be a good card this time next year but many people are not interested in the waiting game. I'd be ok with coin mining crowd buying up all these cards tbo! pave the way for potentially better Navi cards...

PS. The windows results look very similar IMO, some games do great with vega, but MANY are sitting around 1070 level of performance, and not shy off FuryX results.

I think you should reserve judgement until the architecture is incorporated into application space [games, and applied sciences], and also in crossfire where the backplane is far more suited to scale than anything Fury could manage.

[Apopas]

What puzzles me is the speed of RX 580. In previous benchmarks it seemed to generally outperform GTX 1060 but not so much here.

[theriddick]

I think you should reserve judgement until the architecture is incorporated...

I can only get a Vega NANO card due to limited space, once that comes out I will check things out again but I don't expect Vega to double in performance anytime soon, it took ages for the Fury cards to get decent, and like I said I aren't really going to keep waiting year after year for better drivers or the next card.

The only thing stopping me from getting a 1080ti Mini card is the fact locally they are still $1100AUD (about 800USD) which is WAY too high, once they get to 800AUD I will be seriously considering one but that could take quite some time.


PS. Crossfire and SLI is dead to me, FOREVER. Been there done that, is shit sandwich, no thanks.