As I always understood it (since Navi was first mentioned a long time ago), RX Vega was the "place holder". Just a better Polaris -- to hold folks until Navi.

Since they startted talking about it, Navi has been portrayed as a "new way" do do GPU architecture -- one that would stress low cost per shader, and have the possibility of virtually unlimited shader count (in the same sense as a Threadripper CPU pushes core count). Given the cost per shader, Navi could be game changer. Still, Nvidia knows what I know, so I assume they have already have their answer in the pipeline. Competition is good smile

Meantime, it was the Press that built up RX Vega expectations and the unexpected delay of HBM2 development (not AMD's fault) that delayed Vega. Then, cryptocurrency miners pushed up the prices -- no more "bang per buck". So, RX Vega has not been the "gaming success" it might have been. Heck, even I won't pay the price. Had they sold on time (nearly a year earlier) at the expected prices, they would have been very competitive "bang per buck". As I always mention, Nvidia's top card will ALWAYS win FPS at a price -- AMD is aiming for competitive performance in a "complete" GPU at bang per buck.

I'm hoping the 12nm RX Vega is priced more reasonably next spring (requires a fall off in cryptocurrency demand). I may yet buy one.


Sapphire Pulse RX7900XTX, 3 monitors = 23P (1080p) + SAMSUNG 32" Odyssey Neo G7 1000R curve (4K/2160p) + 23P (1080p), AMD R9-7950X (ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 420), 64GB RAM@6.0GHz, Gigabyte X670E AORUS MASTER MB, (4x M.2 SSD + 2xSSD + 2xHD) = ~52TB storage, EVGA 1600W PSU, Phanteks Enthoo Pro Full Tower, ASUS RT-AX89X 6000Mbps WiFi router, VKB Gladiator WW2 Stick, Pedals, G.Skill RGB KB, AORUS Thunder M7 Mouse, W11 Pro