Allen
Hotshot
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 8,839
Ohio USA
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
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.