MasEnha, 29 Jun 2017Very sad.. I guess U can't taste PS4 or XBOX One also. AMD gaining it's trust since Athlon 64,... moreI have never owned a console cause I have always had PC.
Whats the point of these consoles if I already have power house for gaming ?
Consoles games cost more then PC games for one. For second you need to pay monthly fee for online gaming that is retarded sorry. I don't care about the free games and what that monthly fee give you. I just hate that you need to buy a game for 60 euro and then you cant play it online cause your device needs online tax. I buy games from kinguin.net and I get full AAA games for 50-60 euro with season pass.
AMD have never been cooler then intel. Maybe now they get close to being as cool as Intel, but still. More powerful is different story. So far none of my games that I play have had issues cause of the CPU I have or GPU I have.
Kangal, 29 Jun 2017Wow, ignorance much? It's mostly your fault, you have to be responsible with your money and d... moreI didn't read your comment but I do my research more then average person. It was the best thing I could find at that time, but every part failed in it and I just don't trust AMD anymore. That's no ignorance and intel with NVidia have never failed me once.
Kangal, 29 Jun 2017Wow, ignorance much?
It's mostly your fault, you have to be responsible with your money and d... moreQuite nice info to read, thanks btw.
Indeed AMD getting better and better compared to Intel. I'm using AMD since Athlon 64 and it's never failed, never hang even when I push it quite hard. I have worse experience with some Intel devices.
The real competitors to AMD is not Intel nowadays, but Qualcomm, Samsung and other SoC makers. It's not quite there, but soon, we'll see.
pl2rts, 28 Jun 2017I have no trust on AMD so I will go with intel versus NVidia any day.
I have been burned by A... moreWow, ignorance much?
It's mostly your fault, you have to be responsible with your money and do your due diligence to research which product is right for you.
AMD were the leaders back in the era of Windows XP, with their 64-bit Processors... Intel couldn't touch them with either Pentium 3 or Pentium 4's. It was such an embarrassment to Intel by AMD, because it forced Intel to go and release the "Extreme Edition", or what many called the Emergency/Expensive ripoff Edition. And then AMD buried Intel straight after again by offering their Athlon 64-bit processors in a Dual-Core configuration that was much much better than Intel's Pentium D. Despite that, Intel assassinated AMD by getting 80% of OEMs to do illegal trade-acts where Intel would give away processors away for free, or even pay the OEMs (HP, ASUS, etc) to use Intel exclusively, essentially cutting out competition for AMD. Afterall, Intel was a household name and AMD at this point wasn't... and Intel had deep pockets to pull an illegal stunt like this without any financial problems.
Intel's Core 2 Duo processors came out and they were better than AMD's DualCore processors in terms of performance and efficiency. And the illegal trade deals put AMD on the brink of bankruptcy. Shortly after Intel Core 2 Duo's came out in Quad setups, and these were acceptable chips, but not really good, yet they were still better than AMD's Quad Chips. Next generation Intel rolled out their first "Core i" chips which were a slight improvement on their Core 2 Duo/Core 2 Quad chips, and were using an updated lithography... whereas AMD was trying to license a fab to produce wafers as cheap as possible because they ran out of funds.
So Intel's new first-gen "Core i" chips were only a modest upgrade in efficiency and performance, but they looked like beasts next to AMD's aging old architecture and lithography Quad Core chips. Now Intel was found to be doing illegal trade deals, they paid the fine, but the damage was done to AMD. No consumer wanted to buy AMD, so no OEM wanted to use AMD parts, and AMD didn't have the cash to pay for good wafers, good engineers, nor a marketing to boost their reputation.
The next-gen came, and now Intel used a much improved and more modern architecture (Sandy Bridge) and efficient lithography. Meanwhile, AMD had survived, and had done restructuring... and they were doing some pretty impressive things with their chips... but the implementation wasn't good (because not enough high salary engineers), the drivers weren't polished (again $$$), and they were stuck in their contract to buy wafers on an old/outdated lithography so they couldn't compete with Intel from 2011 -> 2017. During these years, Intel has steadily increased their chips efficiency, performance... but at a rate that was slower than the increase in Market Price.
However now, AMD has restructured their company. They've survived bankruptcy, and they have a clearer vision on how the market works. They've completed their outdated contracts. They hired/leased some top engineers to design Zen microarchitecture, and have built it on wafers that are competitive to Intel. AMD is back! In fact, they caused Intel to get anxious enough to release the "Intel Xtreme" platform... hilariously a throw-back to the day Pentium 4-EE was caught with its pants down.
Sure, a R5 1500X may not compete against Intel's Core i7-7700k that well... but the efficiency and performance is there, and AMD is now offering much more chip for much less money that informed consumers are taking notice. Which means until Intel can come up with their next-gen microarchitecture built on 7nm lithography... AMD will actually surpass them in efficiency, performance, and price (a trifecta!).
Claudiu.Lucian, 29 Jun 2017Sincerely, I won't buy a AMD CPU or GPU unless it will be more efficient and powerful than the... moreSerious? Then U need to switch right away, since now AMD offer lower TDP for processor and graphics compared to either Intel or NVIDIA for comparable product's segment.
pl2rts, 28 Jun 2017I have no trust on AMD so I will go with intel versus NVidia any day. I have been burned by A... moreSincerely, I won't buy a AMD CPU or GPU unless it will be more efficient and powerful than the competition(which won't be, just cheaper), but this is great news even for Intel+Nvidia users because AMD pushes them to do better stuff and stop being lazy.
Obi Wan Kenobi, 28 Jun 2017"The Radeon Vega Frontier Edition is meant to compete against the NVIDIA Titan Xp.... OK, p... moreYeah actually vega fe edition is better than nvidia s 8000 dollar p100 card.
They should just release liquid cooling.
I hate blowers.. the dust and heat they collect over the years.
I agree this should not be compared to the Titan XP because this is meant to be a profesional card. I will skip this one and wait for the coming consumer Vega Cards.
pl2rts, 28 Jun 2017I have no trust on AMD so I will go with intel versus NVidia any day.
I have been burned by A... moreVery sad.. I guess U can't taste PS4 or XBOX One also. AMD gaining it's trust since Athlon 64, cooler and powerful. I believe that Intel good on some points, but not superior. My AMDs never fails and heat much (except for my cheap AMD's laptop which using APU, it heats but NEVER hang).
I do believe NVIDIA better on bringing graphics alive; I didn't know which shader effect make it better. Whilst AMD graphics have more attractive price/performance.
Well, I have both then no offense for both products.
The Captains is here
AMD has maintained from the start that the Radeon Vega Frontier Edition is not aimed at gamers, but rather at Â“data scientists, immersion engineers, and product designers.Â” What that translates to is a card that, in theory, gives professionals more performance for the money than the pricey Nvidia Quadro competition.
*HereÂ’s the disruptive thing*
That brings us to the disruptive part of AMDÂ’s push: Although powerful, Titan Xp is limited to consumer drivers. To approach the performance of the Radeon Vega Frontier Edition with an Nvidia product, youÂ’d have to step up to at least a $2,000 Quadro P5000. A P6000 card, which is kind of the professional equivalent of a Titan Xp, is nearly $6,000.
AMD blames these high prices for driving many prosumers to order workstation-class systems with lower-end professional cards so they can replace them with faster consumer GPUs. AMD believes the Frontier Edition can end this madness and give the company a triumphant return to the professional workstation card game.
Claudiu.Lucian, 28 Jun 2017Nvidia already trembles when it thinks that after years and years of market dominance AMD coul... moreI have no trust on AMD so I will go with intel versus NVidia any day.
I have been burned by AMD and it was way to long time ago, but well it was enough for me to lose trust on them. I had high class business computer from AMD and it was in guarantee service more then it was in my home.
Next PC I had was intel with NVidia combo and I had no problems over 7 years till I upgraded it a bit and then sold it. I have now 3-4 years old i5 4570 with GTX970
I don't see the point to upgrade it to, as new games are all broken and I have lost interest on gaming thanks to that. Buy a full game but get 60% of it and it's not even finished when released. Next 20% is the DLC and 20% what is left will be 10% of expansion and 10% for new title in that series. (The Crew 2 is perfect example)
And I know this AMD card isn't prioritized to be gaming card.
But tbh AMD should do a card just for mining and same with NVidia And leave out gaming series.
prasad-gsma, 28 Jun 2017Not really. Both the Radeon Vega Frontier Edition and the Titan Xp are, sort of, budget comput... moreHmmm. Thanks for replying, Mr. Prasad. I wasn't pointing fingers at GSMArena btw. AMD themselves are comparing the Vega FE to the Titan Xp, but I am not alone in thinking that it should have been the Quadro instead.
And also, FirePro is a discontinued line-up.
It's replacement is the Radeon Pro series, which is exactly where the Vega FE falls in. Cheers!
Obi Wan Kenobi, 28 Jun 2017"The Radeon Vega Frontier Edition is meant to compete against the NVIDIA Titan Xp.... OK, p... moreNot really. Both the Radeon Vega Frontier Edition and the Titan Xp are, sort of, budget compute cards. Even the Xp isn't particularly targeted at gaming as the Titan series has been a segue between consumer and enterprise cards. Both AMD and NVIDIA have more expensive, full fledged enterprise offerings, namely FirePro and Quadro, respectively. Besides, AMD itself compares the Vega FE with the Titan Xp in all its marketing material.
Californium252, 28 Jun 2017Your PC would be GODLIKE in the early 2000's :P.Rip apart Unreal Tournament and Quake!
This article is sure to throw the floodgates open on the NVIDIA vs AMD battle.
Meanwhile, here I am, feeling inferior with a NVIDIA GPU capable of "only" 1.17 TFlops! :\