Wednesday, August 2nd 2017

AMD Says Vega Delays Necessary to Increase Stock for Gamers

In an interview, AMD's Chris Hook justified Vega's delayed release due to a wish to increase available stock for gamers who want to purchase the new high-performance architecture by AMD. In an interview with HardOCP, Chris Hook had this to say:

"Part of the reason it's taken us a little longer to launch Vega - and I'll be honest about that - is that we wanted to make sure we were launching with good volume. (...) Obviously we've got to compensate for things like coin-miners, they're going to want to get their hands on these. We believe we're launching with a volume that will ensure that gamers can get their hands on them, and that's what's important to us."

It appears that AMD tried their best to increase production and stock volumes so as to mitigate price fluctuations upon Vega's entry to the market due to above normal demand from cryptocurrency miners. The jury is still out on whether Vega will be an option for mining due to its exquisite architecture, however. Still, this sounds as good a reason as any to delay Vega for as long as it has been already. Just a few more days until we see what AMD managed with this one, folks. Check the video after the break.

Source: HardOCP YouTube Channel
Add your own comment

105 Comments on AMD Says Vega Delays Necessary to Increase Stock for Gamers

#26
ntk95
30-33 MH/s with $499 RX Vega 64 Cards, I can't belive gamers can buy RX Vega easily....
Posted on Reply
#27
Airbrushkid
There high wattage may keep miners from wanting them. Miners don't want to lose money because power cost. The average miner will use 1050 ti, 1060 3gb an 1060 6gb, 1070's. 1080's and 1080 ti's use to much power.
Posted on Reply
#28
acperience7
As long as I can get a card when it comes out without an inflated price like the 580/480 in recent times I can wait little while longer. It’s already been an eternity anyway…
Posted on Reply
#29
rtwjunkie
PC Gaming Enthusiast
acperience7As long as I can get a card when it comes out without an inflated price like the 580/480 in recent times I can wait little while longer. It’s already been an eternity anyway…
The 480 was very cheap. And 580 after that, selling for just a slight increase. Or are you talking about the mining demands raising the prices in the last couple months?
Posted on Reply
#30
jabbadap
silentbogoTGP is "Total GPU Power draw", e.g. combined maximum it pulls from PSU and PCIe slot.
TDP is the maximum generated heat output.
TDP should be lower than TGP, and not vice versa (science!).

For some reason people always confuse these two.
Uhm TDP should be cooler design power limit(thermal design power). AMD uses TBP aka Total Board Power and TGP Total Graphics Power. TBP is whole card with inefficiencies so the power which it pulls from psu and which are measurable. TGP is the power which memory and gpu takes and you can't really measure it.
Posted on Reply
#31
acperience7
rtwjunkieThe 480 was very cheap. And 580 after that, selling for just a slight increase. Or are you talking about the mining demands raising the prices in the last couple months?
Yeah, I should have specified; I meant the recent inflation and shortages caused by miners. As you said the pricing for the cards (MSRP) was good.
Posted on Reply
#32
silentbogo
jabbadapUhm TDP should be cooler design power limit(thermal design power).
That's exactly what I said.
jabbadapAMD uses TBP aka Total Board Power and TGP Total Graphics Power. TBP is whole card with inefficiencies so the power which it pulls from psu and which are measurable. TGP is the power which memory and gpu takes and you can't really measure it.
Haven't heard of TBP being used in this context. I always thought TBP is Typical Board Power, e.g. the number that AMD/Nvidia/Intel wants you to believe their part normally consumes.
E.g. reference RX480 is 150W TBP, but under stress uses 165W+, and so on.

TGP should already include things like losses in VRMs etc., because it reflects the entire graphics subsystem (at least that's what I get from vague descriptions on AMD and NVidia websites). Maybe they do not count 5-7W from fans, and LEDs, but other than that everything should be accounted for.
Posted on Reply
#33
semitope
silentbogoLol. It's only a week after Lisa Su said "we didn't have cryptocurrency in our forecast, and we're not looking at it as a long-term growth driver".

At $399 starting price I doubt miners will jump the Vega bandwagon right away (especially if current "leaked" benchmarks and power consumption are taken into consideration).
Even if you give Vega56 a generous 30-32MH/s, and you put together 5 of them, it will take you more than 8 month to get your money back just for cards, not including an additional investment into a 1500W PSU and a freezer cabinet, since even RX480 farm does not require that much upkeep.
I'm still not mining... just saying...

I think they are full of $h1t and simply can't satisfy stock even for enthusiast market. Even less so for mainstream PC gamers. Not sure whether it's because of HBM2 shortage, or because AMD started the hype way too early, but in either case mining scare has nothing to do with delays.
vega 56 is just 220W tdp (165W for GPU+HBM2, rest for pcb compnents). with a ton of tflops. and apparently vega has instructions for mining. It could end up a must have for miners once the software is fixed for it (if possible).
silentbogoThat's exactly what I said.


Haven't heard of TBP being used in this context. I always thought TBP is Typical Board Power, e.g. the number that AMD/Nvidia/Intel wants you to believe their part normally consumes.
E.g. reference RX480 is 150W TBP, but under stress uses 165W+, and so on.

TGP should already include things like losses in VRMs etc., because it reflects the entire graphics subsystem (at least that's what I get from vague descriptions on AMD and NVidia websites). Maybe they do not count 5-7W from fans, and LEDs, but other than that everything should be accounted for.
tgp doesnt include that. What else would be causing the increase from TGP to TDP if not all the components on the PCB. The reason its so high is likely over-engineering on the reference boards by AMD. tons of phases etc. I'm guessing TGP is a term that came about because of the interposer HBM setup. That is treated as a single unit. before it would just be GPU in that package.

So vega 56 at 165W TGP actually means the GPU itself is even lower. not bad as far as architecture efficiency, but can't ignore the HBM and board components that are necessary.
Posted on Reply
#34
bug
They prepared this launch so carefully they didn't even manage to draw the Lyra constellation right in that second picture. They just went with a bunch of lines and dots. So yeah, I'll trust the rest of the marketing surrounding Vega is spot on :rolleyes:
Posted on Reply
#35
trparky
Are there any benchmarks yet?
Posted on Reply
#36
bug
trparkyAre there any benchmarks yet?
Is there a point to your question? These SKUs are still under NDA, all we have is Vega FE benchmarks so far.
Posted on Reply
#37
EarthDog
bugIs there a point to your question? These SKUs are still under NDA, all we have is Vega FE benchmarks so far.
Be nice...

The only thing we have is some 3dmark stuff....if it is even legit (bug's point through the snark) and amds subjective testing in doom with freesync/gsync fps limited (also useless).
Posted on Reply
#38
coolernoob
silentbogoLol. It's only a week after Lisa Su said "we didn't have cryptocurrency in our forecast, and we're not looking at it as a long-term growth driver".

At $399 starting price I doubt miners will jump the Vega bandwagon right away (especially if current "leaked" benchmarks and power consumption are taken into consideration).
Even if you give Vega56 a generous 30-32MH/s, and you put together 5 of them, it will take you more than 8 month to get your money back just for cards, not including an additional investment into a 1500W PSU and a freezer cabinet, since even RX480 farm does not require that much upkeep.
I'm still not mining... just saying...

I think they are full of $h1t and simply can't satisfy stock even for enthusiast market. Even less so for mainstream PC gamers. Not sure whether it's because of HBM2 shortage, or because AMD started the hype way too early, but in either case mining scare has nothing to do with delays.
miners are buying rx 580 for 500$+ (now at 450$ sold listings at ebay - used or new does not matter), so if Vega will be on par with RX 580 - it will be sold out at day one even at 500$
Posted on Reply
#39
jabbadap
silentbogoThat's exactly what I said.


Haven't heard of TBP being used in this context. I always thought TBP is Typical Board Power, e.g. the number that AMD/Nvidia/Intel wants you to believe their part normally consumes.
E.g. reference RX480 is 150W TBP, but under stress uses 165W+, and so on.

TGP should already include things like losses in VRMs etc., because it reflects the entire graphics subsystem (at least that's what I get from vague descriptions on AMD and NVidia websites). Maybe they do not count 5-7W from fans, and LEDs, but other than that everything should be accounted for.
Oh heck. Yes you are right, it's typical board not total board, my bad.
EarthDogBe nice...

The only thing we have is some 3dmark stuff....if it is even legit (bug's point through the snark) and amds subjective testing in doom with freesync/gsync fps limited (also useless).
Well they did give RX VEGA 64 Doom performance numbers for 3440x1440 here:
Posted on Reply
#40
silentbogo
jabbadapOh heck. Yes you are right, it's typical board not total board, my bad.
Not your bad. We have NVidia and AMD to blame :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#41
Vayra86
silentbogoThat's exactly what I said.


Haven't heard of TBP being used in this context. I always thought TBP is Typical Board Power, e.g. the number that AMD/Nvidia/Intel wants you to believe their part normally consumes.
E.g. reference RX480 is 150W TBP, but under stress uses 165W+, and so on.

TGP should already include things like losses in VRMs etc., because it reflects the entire graphics subsystem (at least that's what I get from vague descriptions on AMD and NVidia websites). Maybe they do not count 5-7W from fans, and LEDs, but other than that everything should be accounted for.
Let's just drop all the lingo and call it out for what it is because TBP/TGP/TDP don't serve ANY purpose whatsoever, because the cooling solutions are already pre-installed on these products.

The only reason we're now discussing this is because AMD has done a feeble attempt at hiding 345W TDP a little bit behind some silly terminology. The bottom line is you pick the high number and scale your case cooling on that if you're wise, so practically, that's all that really matters here. And also in any comparison you'd pick the total typical power draw. I really could give a rat's ass what every little component on the board pulls.
Posted on Reply
#42
bug
EarthDogBe nice...

The only thing we have is some 3dmark stuff....if it is even legit (bug's point through the snark) and amds subjective testing in doom with freesync/gsync fps limited (also useless).
I only meant that whatever we know is out in the open. Hence the question did make sense to me.
Posted on Reply
#43
Sir Alex Ice
Some distris actually do care about gamers, because of reasons like:
- miners buy in bulk and want cheaper price for qty, meaning less profit
- miners will break the cards and return them when the currency crashes
- gamers will buy 1 card at higher price with more profit and less return chance
Posted on Reply
#44
Vayra86
Sir Alex IceSome distris actually do care about gamers, because of reasons like:
- miners buy in bulk and want cheaper price for qty, meaning less profit
- miners will break the cards and return them when the currency crashes
- gamers will buy 1 card at higher price with more profit and less return chance
And market saturation is a big issue too. High peaks of demand are hard to produce against, and at the same time these miners will sell the cards cheap when they're done mining, so basically they're overtaking the vendors for a good while. You saw this a lot when all those 280x's and 290s flooded the second hand market. By the time they sell the cards, they were relegated to mid range equivalents which is where the real sales numbers are.
Posted on Reply
#45
John Pombrio
With this huge power draw? No way is this going to sell to miners.
Posted on Reply
#46
jabbadap
Hmh aint ethereum use memory bandwidth more than anything else from gpu? So underclock&undervolt core and oc memory, which is what miners are already doing with any graphics card.
Posted on Reply
#47
trparky
I didn't know that these were still under NDA. I thought that they were in the hands of tech reviewers.
Posted on Reply
#48
EarthDog
Its still more...seemingly a lot more, which is the point. You can undervolt the other teams cards too. ;)
Posted on Reply
#49
bug
jabbadapHmh aint ethereum use memory bandwidth more than anything else from gpu? So underclock&undervolt core and oc memory, which is what miners are already doing with any graphics card.
If that was the case, Fury has more memory bandwidth ;)
Posted on Reply
#50
FrustratedGarrett
I don't buy this one bit. Where was it we read that a couple of 4GB HBM2 chips from Hynix cost somewhere around $150? They don't have enough HBM chips in stock and they can't afford to spend much money on buying these chips. They don't even want to release Vega, because it won't make any money. Vega was intended to be sold for +/$600, but that's not happening because Vega is not good enough, not even close.
That nobody that heads their graphics division and their foreign design teams have failed, miserably.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
May 9th, 2024 21:58 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts