this is what i found on the net, concerning vega performance (not very convincing/positive)

quoted from notebookcheck:
" CEO Lisa Su, however, held a press demonstration to reveal the new 16-core Ryzen Threadripper processor with support for 64 PCIe lanes set to launch this Summer. She also showed off a PC equipped with Threadripper and two unnamed Vega GPUs in Crossfire running Prey in 4K resolution at a locked 60 FPS. According to our own benchmarks, a single GTX 1080 already averages around 71 FPS in Prey when on the same 4K resolution, so the fact that AMD chose to use two Vega GPUs to achieve roughly the same ballpark results isn't very telling of what a single Vega GPU can bring to the table. "

If AMD picked the best benchmark (i.e. the benchmark where they got the best result), then vega is already in deep trouble if crossfired cards cannot achieve the same performance as one GTX 1080.

side note
i couldn't get any result googling for RX580 in CF mode doing Prey for 4k resolution, for reference

thanks... interesting read. but it does not do anything to dispel any doubts, eh... maybe by design? i mean, maybe they want to keep us in doubt for now?

anyway, the demo by AMD CEO quoted by notebookcheck was apparently "locked at 60 fps." if this is indeed true, it doesn't really mean that it was the limit for the setup. however, locking the fps just fail (to me, at least) to demonstrate the potential that threadripper has, or even the vega Xfire setup.

just wondering, if the demo was "locked at 60 fps" and the setup did not manage to produce at least 60 fps, would it exhibit in tearing or stuttering? or something else?

admittedly, i have no experience in Xfire or SLI, and never played any game on locked fps setting.

true that. however, i don't think we know for sure how the card can perform... but official eviews should be coming soon, right?

Well, I guess that makes Vega a bad solution (considering the competition)... NVidia will move on and the gap will widen...

Similarly

Ryzen may be good now, but once Intel updates their cpu, we can expect the gap will also grow...but that's for another thread...

This post has been edited by abu.shofwan: Jul 31 2017, 02:27 PM

don't worry, you're not the only one... i'm still stuck at 1080p display... non free-sync / g-sync some more...

I like your statement there... I have the same principle as well, not really worth the money unless I get 50% improvement... and with my budget, that means I need to wait till Volta, at least, for the XX70 equivalent part... (from GTX 970 3.5GB, by the way)

Which Vega is that? 64 or 56, I wonder... Maybe even the liquid cooled version? Or the FE with 16 GB ram...

Those numbers are for full system power draw, right?

How much does a 1080 and 1080ti draw at the wall?

Errr... Given its gaming performance not better than 1080,maybe I should also ask for 1070 power draw eh?

How does the RPM thing come into play? Will it impact gaming performance?

Just read this piece and was wondering the above

https://www.notebookcheck.net/PS4-Pro-could...s.241410.0.html

Naaa

I have never had my hopes up on AMD, on both fronts. Yes, I am always skeptical when it comes to any claims on AMD performance. Almost bitter, even.

Tom's already have Vega 64 review out, includes one page on mining performance at stock (no optimization and all that)...
Spoiler alert!!
Not the best mining performance at stock, according to Tom

dang...

AMD seems to be the underdog on both fronts... while things look good (or at least, okay) for Ryzen, Intel will strike back soon with Gen-8 and 9... Nvidia will do the same with Volta. the delay in Volta will probably just improve it even more.

probably should re-split Radeon from AMD so that they each can concentrate building their own products.

Incoming fire sale of second hand cards

Yeah, I believe it would be a gamble
We can never be sure of the operating conditions... Not everyone can afford a well conditioned atmosphere / room to run 24/7...