I bet miners will appreciate that memory speed with their wallets 😉

There must be a new 7 nm Vega gaming card, because even without much improvements into the design, it would be cheaper for AMD to manufacture Vega chips.

Is that P score?

Hmm 3% combined increase. Is it really worth making this product? Isn't an overclocked Vega 10 card in this area of performance already? I'm confused why AMD is putting all this effort in to an blah Gpu instead of using their resources for a new series? Is this their attempt at a Vega TI?

sverek:

You could say the same about Zen+. It's optimization, hopefully for same price. Maybe to safe money on production and give consumers more options.

Yes I get Zen+ 10 percent increase plus in performance. But you couldn't push Zen to the Zen+ level of performance along with memory performance increase. This Vega 20 seems really redundant with performance not better at base level than an overclocked Vega 10. And who knows what the price will be. 🙂

NewTRUMP Order:

Hmm 3% combined increase. Is it really worth making this product? Isn't an overclocked Vega 10 card in this area of performance already? I'm confused why AMD is putting all this effort in to an blah Gpu instead of using their resources for a new series? Is this their attempt at a Vega TI?

NewTRUMP Order:

Yes I get Zen+ 10 percent increase plus in performance. But you couldn't push Zen to the Zen+ level of performance along with memory performance increase. This Vega 20 seems really redundant with performance not better at base level than an overclocked Vega 10. And who knows what the price will be. 🙂

Depends on die size and power. If Vega 20 is only ~350mm2 and ~180w for similar performance then I think it's worth it. AMD doesn't have the money to continuously spit out massive architecture changes anymore - they are probably dumping the majority of their GPU R&D funds into Navi. I think this release will be more akin to polaris, trying to reach the larger market with a product that comes in at a good price/performance ratio and giving up some of the higher end stuff to Nvidia again.

Is it me or is that saying 32GB RAM? And 1GHz core clock, engineering sample?

Mid-range GPUs are where the money is made. I hope they have the volume. NAVI should be interesting.

I thought it was for compute not gaming....well at least till they put rx in front of it still not much to see here

NewTRUMP Order:

Hmm 3% combined increase. Is it really worth making this product? Isn't an overclocked Vega 10 card in this area of performance already? I'm confused why AMD is putting all this effort in to an blah Gpu instead of using their resources for a new series? Is this their attempt at a Vega TI?

If I'm reading that screenshot correctly it's actually a performing a combined 3% worse but at ~2/3 the clockspeed of the Vega 64.

NewTRUMP Order:

Hmm 3% combined increase. Is it really worth making this product? Isn't an overclocked Vega 10 card in this area of performance already? I'm confused why AMD is putting all this effort in to an blah Gpu instead of using their resources for a new series? Is this their attempt at a Vega TI?

It performs around the same as a overclocked Vega GPU yeah but it seems to be primarily intended as a work GPU for deep learning and compute work and the benchmark might not report the speeds correctly but hardware wise it appears to be very similar to Vega10 but with a die shrink and possibly tweaks to voltage and clock speeds as a result. 🙂 For a desktop card for gaming if that's all there is then 5 - 10% gains on average perhaps similar to overclocking the current models unless there's some other tweaks here to the architecture which we'll see I guess, on the positive side of things it might be able to use even less voltage which would be pretty excellent. * * Seriously AMD often goes for higher voltages and clock speeds but Vega and the third party models in particular are on a whole new level though they are also very interesting under-volt and over-clock achievers. 🙂 (Fury doing -50mv to -96mv on some models was pretty good, Vega going for -200mv is really impressive though it varies from GPU to GPU how well it can clock or under-volt of course, same as always.) Up to 1.2v core voltage for some models but it can be reduced as far as 1.0v or even 0.95v while still achieving it's core clock speeds or higher (1550+ Mhz under full load.) though Wattman doesn't allow for altering HBM2 voltages directly but bios flashing takes it from 1.2v to 1.35v I think it is (Compatible Vega64 air bios.) but then it's chance if you end up with the Samsung HBM2 modules which can reach 1200Mhz or if it's Hynix which vary between 1000 to 1100 I think it was for these at best, have to do more reading and there's not too many reviews for these custom Vega GPU's either and the new Nano PCB variants of them. (Which are doing really well but heat is a concern.)

Still won't compete with the 1080Ti for the performance crown of course if these numbers hold up, they're around 20 - 25% faster if not more I think (And then overclocks can take them even higher.) and if Vega 20 here improves memory performance even further and increase compute performance too then mining is going to a prime target for these so bye to any sane pricing for quite some time assuming mining doesn't somehow just crash which well I don't think that's happening any time soon. EDIT: But we'll see I suppose, if AMD announces desktop variants of Vega20 for late 2018 or early 2019 before Navi those might have some tweaks taking them a bit closer to the competition. (Still has pricing a core concern though, depending on how the situation unfolds.) 1600 to 1800Mhz core clock and 1200Mhz HBM2 clock wouldn't be bad and then well voltage is going to be AMD ++ as always I suppose, should put them a little bit above Vega 10 even for the better overclock results but we'll have to see what AMD announces I suppose, just speculating a bit here. 🙂 Higher quality binned HBM2 modules wouldn't be cheap either whether it's 16 GB or full on 32 for workstation which I guess might not see desktop card usage, I think AMD planned 1000 Mhz for Vega but then dropped down to 800 with overclocking now possible to push it a little bit higher so if they can get 1000 for Vega 20 that's a pretty good boost too. Or 1200 depending on how accurate the results are for the above benchmark which might differ between engineer samples and the final product. (4096 bus width instead of 2048 could do something too but I don't think this is a bottleneck area in itself.)

I don't think AMD needs to pump out a brand new architecture. There is plenty good about Vega, it just needs refinement. But, if this is really just nothing more than a die shrink with better memory, this is looking very bleak. AMD had plenty of time and money to fine-tune Vega. The miners were a saving grace to them, and so far it looks like they're not taking advantage of that. They can't afford making another product that's mediocre to the gaming community (I personally think Vega is great, for non-gaming purposes). The way I see it, whatever Vega 20 comes out to be would still be less than what people were expecting Vega 10 should've been. I sincerely hope Vega 20 is more interesting than we think.

Nice, so a Vega 20 @1GHz is almost as fast as a Vega 10 @+1.6GHz and using the power of a Polaris GPU. Bring it on!

Some progress , nonetheless good news !

Might PCIe 4 bring something new as well? Maybe this is running on an older spec Mobo and it needs PCIe 4 to really shine. We don't know because we haven't yet seen PCIe 4 in action.

schmidtbag:

I don't think AMD needs to pump out a brand new architecture. There is plenty good about Vega, it just needs refinement. But, if this is really just nothing more than a die shrink with better memory, this is looking very bleak. AMD had plenty of time and money to fine-tune Vega. The miners were a saving grace to them, and so far it looks like they're not taking advantage of that. They can't afford making another product that's mediocre to the gaming community (I personally think Vega is great, for non-gaming purposes). The way I see it, whatever Vega 20 comes out to be would still be less than what people were expecting Vega 10 should've been. I sincerely hope Vega 20 is more interesting than we think.

i think your reasoning is generally spot-on. however, this is such an early stage that the Process may be ready, but not the new architecture. so this just might be a smokescreen.

It's an engineering sample. The Vega20 part is the scores on the RIGHT, not the left. The clock speeds could be read incorrectly, or set low on purpose due to being an engineering sample, or there may be some frequency boost that readings aren't picking up on, so take those numbers with a grain of salt. I'm excited for 4096bit bus width on top of the higher clock speed on HBM. The core could just be more of the same though, just with lower power usage (AMD projects 150W)

It seems kind of doubtful they would get results like that at 1000MHz and then up the clocks to, say, 1700MHz for the released products, creating a huge difference. But if that was really the case, it would be quite a card.

AMDfan:

If true that it also supports PCIe4 than it is a little low in performance.....

PCI-E 4.0 will not affect GPU performance, not for a long, long while. In fact, PCI-E 1.1, though does lower performance, only lowers it generally by a few FPS, maybe 10, if that. So i don't understand your statement about it potentially using PCI-E 4.0 and somehow that would be why you think it's a little low in performance? Example: http://www.guru3d.com/index.php?ct=articles&action=file&id=14861&admin=0a8fcaad6b03da6a6895d1ada2e171002a287bc1 http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/pci-express-scaling-game-performance-analysis-review,1.html