Friday, June 16th 2017

AMD Radeon Pro Vega Frontier Edition TDP and Pricing Revealed

AMD Radeon Pro Vega Frontier Edition goes on sale later this month (26 June). It is designed to provide a "gateway" to the "Vega" GPU architecture for graphics professionals and game developers alike, with the consumer graphics product, the Radeon RX Vega, is bound for late-July/early-August. Radeon Pro Vega Frontier Edition, being a somewhat "enterprise-segment" product, was expected to have slightly lower TDP than its consumer-graphics sibling, since enterprise-segment implementations of popular GPUs tend to have slightly restrained clock speeds. Apparently, AMD either didn't clock the Radeon Pro Vega Frontier Edition low, or the chip has extremely high TDP.

According to specifications put out by EXXACT, a retailer which deals with enterprise hardware, the air-cooled variant of the Radeon Pro Vega Frontier Edition has a TDP rated at 300W, while its liquid-cooled variant has its TDP rated as high as 375W. To put this in perspective, the consumer-segment TITAN Xp by NVIDIA has its TDP rated at 275W. EXXACT is claiming big performance advantages in certain enterprise benchmarks such as SPECVIEWPERF and Cinebench. In other news, the air-cooled Radeon Pro Vega Frontier Edition is reportedly priced at USD $1,199; while the liquid-cooled variant is priced at $1,799. Based on the 14 nm "Vega 10" silicon, the Pro Vega Frontier Edition features 4,096 stream processors and 16 GB of HBM2 memory across a 2048-bit memory interface.
Add your own comment

123 Comments on AMD Radeon Pro Vega Frontier Edition TDP and Pricing Revealed

#1
uuuaaaaaa
If those TDP numbers are real this is looking like R600 (HD 2900 XTX) all over again... I hope that the performance is at least monstrous...
Posted on Reply
#2
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
Whyyyyyy not use that colour scheme for your consumer cards, AMD? That blue they use is so very nice and the gold one is rad.
Posted on Reply
#3
_Flare
if the RX Vega is much slower than 1080Ti i wouldn´t buy one with more than a single 8-pin or 2x 6-pin
because a TDP over 225 Watts will be highly inefficient given the performance the 1080 non-Ti has with much lower TDP
Posted on Reply
#4
Liviu Cojocaru
Yep, this is a power hungry monster, let's hope it delivers. We have to wait for the consumer edition and see what TDP that has. Let the vega hype resume ;))
Posted on Reply
#5
Aldain
This is not the power consumption of the card itself , it is the MAXIMUM BOARD POWER
Posted on Reply
#6
P4-630
The Way It's Meant to be Played
300 Watts....

Performance must be really great, otherwise: :shadedshu:
Posted on Reply
#7
champsilva
Aldain said:
This is not the power consumption of the card itself , it is the MAXIMUM BOARD POWER
Meaning is freaking hot, even hotter then TTXP, thats why they use WC in their cards.
Posted on Reply
#8
HTC
Just a question: why are they comparing an "enterprise segment" card (Vega Frontier edition) to a gaming card (Titan Xp)?
Posted on Reply
#9
Fluffmeister
HTC said:
Just a question: why are they comparing an "enterprise segment" card (Vega Frontier edition) to a gaming card (Titan Xp)?
Because the AMD Advantage column would also say "--". :oops:
Posted on Reply
#10
Aldain
champsilva said:
Meaning is freaking hot, even hotter then TTXP, thats why they use WC in their cards.
Nope , it means 1x8 pin + 1x6pin + MB = 300W and 2x8pin + MB = 375W simple logic, the card itself wont be sucking up 375 watts of power that would be ludicrous
Posted on Reply
#11
I No
$1200 USD for air cooling $1800 for water. That's one hell of a water cooler for $600 extra. And to think I thought nVidia AIBs were charging extra for gimmicks... o_O
Posted on Reply
#12
bogami
That the results of these tests are better consumption and TPD as well as a simple solution by increasing frequency. It has some really new solutions and the time invested is expected 100% over the current generation of advantages. Price is again a serious jump!
With 100% higher prices AMD showed its true face ,and the matter will be burned to the real tests ! Again will be sell for 700€ max. In whole thing's price is usurious ! Volta of the already knocking at the door .
With such delays and the prices will earn little .
Posted on Reply
#13
Hugh Mungus
P4-630 said:
300 Watts....

Performance must be really great, otherwise: :shadedshu:
Rge performance those numbers in that chart are based on are feon the air cooled version which can't cool itself very well. Even titan XP/1080 ti fe should be cooler, so a decent increase in performance can be expected from a) the gaming version, b) AIB's and it already outperforms a 1080 ti/titan XP apparently in synthetic benchmarks! If games are well-optimized and it runs great in dx12/vulkan, it's gonna be even better than I expected!

I No said:
$1200 USD for air cooling $1800 for water. That's one hell of a water cooler for $600 extra. And to think I thought nVidia AIBs were charging extra for gimmicks... o_O
Also higher speeds and less throttling.
Posted on Reply
#14
Nokiron
Hugh Mungus said:
Rge performance those numbers in that chart are based on are feon the air cooled version which can't cool itself very well. Even titan XP/1080 ti fe should be cooler, so a decent increase in performance can be expected from a) the gaming version, b) AIB's and it already outperforms a 1080 ti/titan XP apparently in synthetic benchmarks! If games are well-optimized and it runs great in dx12/vulkan, it's gonna be even better than I expected!
Just an FYI, a cut down GP104 based Quadro P4000 performs similiar to this Vega FE in Specviewperf.

Titan XP also does have gimped perfomance in these application with the lack of workstation drivers.

So the benchmarks themselves makes little to no sense.
Posted on Reply
#15
jabbadap
Well it has lots of fp16 power, that nvidia has only with P100 teslas or Quadro GP100 and they are not cheap.
To put this in perspective, the consumer-segment TITAN Xp by NVIDIA has its TDP rated at 275W.
Nvidia gives graphics card power, which is 250W for titan xp. Where did you get that 275W tdp figure?
Posted on Reply
#16
bug
Aldain said:
This is not the power consumption of the card itself , it is the MAXIMUM BOARD POWER
It sure doesn't mean it will be a 150W card either.
Posted on Reply
#17
Hugh Mungus
Nokiron said:
Just an FYI, a cut down GP104 based Quadro P4000 performs similiar to this Vega FE in Specviewperf.

Titan XP also does have gimped perfomance in these application with the lack of workstation drivers.

So the benchmarks themselves makes little to no sense.
What resolution though and what resolution is used here?
Posted on Reply
#18
I No
Hugh Mungus said:
Also higher speeds and less throttling.
Last time I checked getting a GPU under water would cost you WAY less than $600 ... still something doesn't add up. Also if Apple wants to stick these into their nice efficient Macs... well .... you get the picture. Furthermore it's like the article says if this is aimed at the prosumer market the gaming ones should be more aggressive with clockspeeds and whatnot, let's just hope these things deliver, if they prove to be slower than nVidia's offerings RTG has some serious trouble.
Posted on Reply
#19
_Flare
the exact spect of the Mainboard-Slot say 5.5A for 12 Volts means 66 Watts, the remaining 9 Watts are for 3.3V etc.
The PCIe-12V connectors rely mainly on what yout PSU and its cables are.
Specs: 6-pin 6.25A/75W, 8-pin 12.5A/150W
good PSU can handle +10% on Amps

spec-conform combinations 12V-only [Amperes] are:
66W - Slot only [5.5A]
75W - 1x 6-pin [6.25A]
141W - Slot + 6-pin [11.75A]
150W - 2x 6-pin or 1x 8-pin [12.5A]
216W - Slot + 2x 6-pin or 1x 8-pin [18A]
225W - 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin [18.75A]
291W - Slot + 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin [24.25A]
300W - 2x 8-pin [25A]
366W - Slot + 2x 8-pin [30.5A]
Posted on Reply
#20
Hugh Mungus
I No said:
Last time I checked getting a GPU under water would cost you WAY less than $600 ... still something doesn't add up. Also if Apple wants to stick these into their nice efficient Macs... well .... you get the picture. Furthermore it's like the article says if this is aimed at the prosumer market the gaming ones should be more aggressive with clockspeeds and whatnot, let's just hope these things deliver, if they prove to be slower than nVidia's offerings RTG has some serious trouble.
So sceptical. Apple gets "special" gpu's and has a huge bulge on its imac pro, it's a pro card, so 600 dollars for a certain overclock and lower temps is normal and vega will deliver a lot, we just don't know quite how much.
Posted on Reply
#21
Nokiron
Hugh Mungus said:
What resolution though and what resolution is used here?
Specviewperf is a standardized benchmark, there are no settings to change.
Posted on Reply
#23
rainzor
Aldain said:
Nope , it means 1x8 pin + 1x6pin + MB = 300W and 2x8pin + MB = 375W simple logic, the card itself wont be sucking up 375 watts of power that would be ludicrous
Where do you see a six pin tho? Both cards seem to have 2x8pin according to those pictures. There was a a 6+8 pin card that Raja had during some presentation but afaik he said it was only eng. sample and the production cards will have 2x8pin.
Posted on Reply
#24
I No
Hugh Mungus said:
So sceptical. Apple gets "special" gpu's and has a huge bulge on its imac pro, it's a pro card, so 600 dollars for a certain overclock and lower temps is normal and vega will deliver a lot, we just don't know quite how much.
After the major cock-up they pulled @ Computex? How can one not be a sceptic regarding this. Also charging $600 on cooling I'm sorry to say it, justifies jack-all. Furthermore how do we know that this will deliver? So far everything is in Limbo with a paper lunch on the way.
Posted on Reply
#25
bug
I No said:
Last time I checked getting a GPU under water would cost you WAY less than $600 ... still something doesn't add up. Also if Apple wants to stick these into their nice efficient Macs... well .... you get the picture. Furthermore it's like the article says if this is aimed at the prosumer market the gaming ones should be more aggressive with clockspeeds and whatnot, let's just hope these things deliver, if they prove to be slower than nVidia's offerings RTG has some serious trouble.
AMD is probably binning higher clocking chips for water cooling.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment