Here Be AMD RX Vega Model's Codenames: Vega XTX, Vega XT, Vega XL

[EarthDog]

Ehh...........water or air, you are still dissipating the same amount of heat dude.

 

[RejZoR]

Yeah, well, I have to run AC anyway and even OC'ed 5820K and GTX 980 make things pretty warm already. What's extra 100 or 200 watts

 

[efikkan]

Why is power consumption an issue for something that is only geared towards enthusiasts???

Many of us care because it matters for stability, lifespan and noise levels.

It's funny how important energy consumption is when it favors AMD, but is irrelevant otherwise. It seems to matter a lot when talking about Ryzen, but doesn't matter when talking about Vega. A few years ago there were a lot of hysteria about Fermi's consumption, even though it was negligible compared to what Vega is doing now.

Regarding lifespan, it's not like most gamers buy a new card every two years. Many may think buying the card with the best performance per price is the best investment, but it really depends on the expected life cycle and increase in performance requirements. For the last few generations, the higher models(not Titan) have proven to be good investments for ~5 year cycles.

 

[ratirt]

Ehh...........water or air, you are still dissipating the same amount of heat dude.

and still i have bitch ass big aricon so it really doesn't matter. water cooling is just an info that i'm planning to get one.

 

[Deleted member 67555]

Eh...
Well to those who are actually purchasing this GFX, would you kindly explain how much this issue will effect that purchase?

I'm not going to buy it but if I did the only thing I'd care about is that it's the next evolution of an ATI GPU.....

I wouldn't give a shit about the heat or the noise or the wattage...

I've had just about every single product line since the beginning... literally

I own and have owned Nvidia as well...
I have 2 Intel rigs and 2 AMD rigs...

I've had 160w CPUs and ungodly loud hot noisy as hell GPU'S and I'm suddenly supposed to think that 375w is suddenly to much???

Doesn't anyone else remember needing 750+w PSU?

Again I really don't think the people that are buying this card are even going to consider the wattage or the heat except for making sure their PSU can power the multiple water loops and the rest of the system...

I think it's only an issue for people that are brand loyal and are never going to buy it.

 

[EarthDog]

Eh...
Well to those who are actually purchasing this GFX, would you kindly explain how much this issue will effect that purchase?

I'm not going to buy it but if I did the only thing I'd care about is that it's the next evolution of an ATI GPU.....

I wouldn't give a shit about the heat or the noise or the wattage...

I've had just about every single product line since the beginning... literally

I own and have owned Nvidia as well...
I have 2 Intel rigs and 2 AMD rigs...

I've had 160w CPUs and ungodly loud hot noisy as hell GPU'S and I'm suddenly supposed to think that 375w is suddenly to much???

Doesn't anyone else remember needing 750+w PSU?

Again I really don't think the people that are buying this card are even going to consider the wattage or the heat except for making sure their PSU can power the multiple water loops and the rest of the system...

I think it's only an issue for people that are brand loyal and are never going to buy it.

Too much is in the eye of the beholder. That said, i dont care if it was amd or nvidia, 375W card is a lot.

No. I dont ever recall NEEDING a 750W psu. Well, one time when i has r9 295x2 (500w DUAL gpu) and 5820k. But never ever with a single card. Most people over buy on the psu.

I dont think brand loyalty has much to do with it. 375W...stock... is a lot for any gpu....particularly when its (rumored) performance falls double digit % behind a card that has 125W less, literally 50% more than, the 1080ti.

I do see a lot of whats good for the goose isnt good for the gander here though... someone nailed it by saying people on ALL sides were praising Ryzen for its performamce /w but now that the shoe is on the other foot, its importamce seems to go down...

 

[Vayra86]

Eh...
Well to those who are actually purchasing this GFX, would you kindly explain how much this issue will effect that purchase?

I'm not going to buy it but if I did the only thing I'd care about is that it's the next evolution of an ATI GPU.....

I wouldn't give a shit about the heat or the noise or the wattage...

I've had just about every single product line since the beginning... literally

I own and have owned Nvidia as well...
I have 2 Intel rigs and 2 AMD rigs...

I've had 160w CPUs and ungodly loud hot noisy as hell GPU'S and I'm suddenly supposed to think that 375w is suddenly to much???

Doesn't anyone else remember needing 750+w PSU?

Again I really don't think the people that are buying this card are even going to consider the wattage or the heat except for making sure their PSU can power the multiple water loops and the rest of the system...

I think it's only an issue for people that are brand loyal and are never going to buy it.

This is a really weird train of thought IMO

'To vega or not' is not about brand loyalty at all. Its about a marketplace where the competitor has a GPU that simply uses 30% less power for similar, or most likely, even better performance. With power comes heat and noise which are two things that have been remarkably reduced in the past few years. Lower noise levels are very much a sought after selling point for GPUs and PC components in general. And cooler components in the case have a positive effect on the overall temperatures of the entire system, too.

Also, the hotter a component the shorter its lifespan. Explain to me, why is it sensible to buy a high-end product that has a lower projected lifespan and makes more noise simply by comparing specs to its closest competitor? In addition, AMD is not paying you back for the added energy usage over time either.

The only conclusion I can draw here is that you have a brand loyalty issue here, and not the person avoiding a noisy, hot GPU.

 

[ratirt]

here power specs for Vega Cards.
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-vega-gpu-leak,35000.html

is it really that much more than 1080 TI ? I wouldn't say so.
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Zotac/GeForce_GTX_1080_Ti_Amp_Extreme/29.html

 

[EarthDog]

*SIGH* Are we comparing stock versus a massively overclocked 1080Ti again??????? We went over this already people.

375W STOCK for the XTX water vs 267W on an overclocked card.

Id say 100W more is a lot more.

 

[ratirt]

What the what? Are we comparing stock versus a massively overclocked 1080Ti again???????

Well no you got a comparison of the 1080 TI Founders edition which is included there as well. I didn't say to look at the 1080 Ti overclocked one but it gives full spectrum of the stock products and OC'ed products. All in one so relax.

 

[EarthDog]

Still............its ~100W difference... over 36%. How is that not much more? Its performance is said to rest between a 1080 and 1080Ti too. I guess it will hang its hat on price/performance ratio.

EDIT: If you go by straight up board power its 50% (250W vs 375W).

 

[ratirt]

Still............its ~100W difference... over 36%. How is that not much more? Its performance is said to rest between a 1080 and 1080Ti too. I guess it will hang its hat on price/performance ratio.

EDIT: If you go by straight up board power its 50% (250W vs 375W).

Sure it is. That's what it is called a comparison. You wanna compare Vega to a top notch NV counterpart. I know that Vega may not be as fast as 1080 TI but that's also important to perf/watt scenario right? That's what this is all about.
Also keep in mind that Vega XTX (375W) is water cooled so there's also cooling power involved here which is a bit higher than air cooled. Also XTX will probably be higher clocked than air cooled? Well I don't know exactly but I think it will since the Watts draw is greater.
Air cooled Vega is 285W and 1080 Ti 250 W as you mentioned. If you compare 1080 TI stock with air-blower cooler compare it to Vega air cooled not water. 1080 Ti when OC'ed and with water block you know can draw way more then it's 250W. So be objective here.

 

[EarthDog]

Yes, seems like vega will lose out significantly in performance /w ratio.

Indeed. The pump may add 10-15w at most...its not an mcp vario at 25w, lol.

I am being objective. Im comparing the fastest nvidia gpu with the fastest amd gpu. I can compare a 1070 with the xl, maybe a 1080 with the xt? Point here is there exisits one 1080ti with board partners adding their flavor. With amd, there are seemingly three cards, and aibs can put their spin on all of those. So i compared their flagship with nvidias....who, by the way, doesnt seem to change the tdp for any water cooled offerings.

Im sorry amd seems to need to put water cooling on it and jack up the board power nearly 100w. It is what it is though.

 

[Vayra86]

Vega XTX
(OC)
CUs 64
Water Cooling
375W
300W
Air Cooling
285W
220W

In other words, water cooled XTX gets a (significant?) clock bump and the air cooled XTX will be its cheaper and marginally slower little brother, both fully enabled chips. XT will be a fully enabled chip with crappier binning, and XL is the poor man's Vega and probably the 1070 equivalent.

I cannot see how AMD is covering a segment of 60%-65% performance variation (GTX 1070 > 1080ti) with this offering. It seems likely the whole Vega lineup is no more than 30-40% apart top to bottom. That makes it extremely interesting to see a bench from the XL, because that will be bottom of stack. If they convincingly crush a 1070 with the XL, Vega might offer a compelling option.

 

[EarthDog]

There’ll be three Vega models called XTX, XT and XL. The specs are as follows:

• XTX: Water or air cooling, 64 compute units, 375W TDP
• XT: Air cooling, 64 compute units, 285W TDP
• XL: Air cooling, 56 compute units, 285W TDP

Read more at http://www.trustedreviews.com/news/...date-technology-explained#ydfWlQExu7ecXYAd.99

ASSUMING what we have seen is the XTX on water, it falls between a 1080 and 1080Ti. A 90W difference in performance might as well be another card lower on the ladder (how do we have "significant" clock increases but "marginally slower" with that much difference? I'd imagine 10% between the two. Then the XL is cut down more after that. I believe the difference between the XL and XTX water cooled will be close to 30%. That is at least 2 SKUs worth of difference there IMO.

The 1070 is a 165W card, versus 285W XL. 120W/57% difference in power use. It won't win any green awards, just likely priceerformance.

 

[efikkan]

It's a good chance the XL TDP is a typo.

 

[nemesis.ie]

Is it maybe that "board power" is what the VRMs can supply (e.g. when OCing or running compute jobs) and the ASIC value is the expected consumption of the GPU + HBM2 under regular (out of box) Gaming use?

 

[Slizzo]

It's a good chance the XL TDP is a typo.

Wouldn't be so sure, but it's certainly possible.

 

[R34P3RK1NG]

375W ?? Jeeeezus!!!

thank goodness i bought a titatinum 800w psu for my vega/ryzen mATX

 

[EarthDog]

Cooling might be fun in a matx case...yikes!

 

[R34P3RK1NG]

Cooling might be fun in a matx case...yikes!

5 fans, a 240mm radiator and a 120mm radiator with no plans to overclock, im not too worried about it.