Friday, February 22nd 2019
AMD Partners Cut Pricing of Radeon RX Vega 56 to Preempt GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
AMD cut pricing of the Radeon RX Vega 56 in select markets to preempt the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti, and help the market digest inventory. The card can be had for as little as €269 (including VAT) for an MSI RX Vega 56 Air Boost, which is a close-to-reference product. The GTX 1660 Ti reportedly has a starting price of $279.99 (excluding taxes). This development is significant given that the GTX 1660 Ti is rumored to perform on-par with the GTX 1070, which the RX Vega 56 outperforms. The RX Vega series is still very much a part of AMD's product stack, and AMD continues to release new game optimizations for the card. NVIDIA is expected to launch the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti within February. Although based on the "Turing" architecture, it lacks real-time raytracing and AI acceleration features, yet retains the increased IPC of CUDA cores from the new generation.
120 Comments on AMD Partners Cut Pricing of Radeon RX Vega 56 to Preempt GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
Why someone would recommend people to buy 8600k over 2700x just to save 50$ dollars then would recommend gsync over Freesync despite it is the same but 200$ more expensive?
Only a true bandwagon fan would do that.
But on fundamental level, it's just a matter of price vs demand - it's not really important whether the "replacing" product is made by you or the competition.
IMO this is a move against Turing like the title suggests.
It seems Navi is still a fairly distant future if we think about actual availability.
However, if AMD decided to repeat the Ryzen hype, i.e. flood us with very favourable benchmark leaks, a Vega sale would make sense even as early.
I mean: if they announce that a card coming within a year matches Nvidia lineup (maybe even in features like tensor cores), they would kill the sales of current products.
rx590 probab;y sold like crap anyway.
now they'll be forced to cut the price on this too and it'll sell better.
ALL G-sync monitors start their adaptive sync range from the lowest supported hz up to its maximum refresh rate aka 30hz and up. 95% of the G-Sync monitors are high refresh rate monitors too so you get a great implimentation of adaptive sync.
Good luck finding a Freesync monitor with a 30-165hz adaptive sync range.
www.displayninja.com/freesync-monitor-list/
Ps: my 1440p 165hz G-Sync monitor costs around 300$
If you have a game that swings from 30 fps to 165+, you have bigger problems than the range your Freesync monitors has. The matter of the fact is these things have been invented to be used when the hardware can't quite push enough frames as to be fully synchronized with the display not for when it can barley push playable framerates several times below the maximum refresh rate and where the frame times are very high anyway. This whole range thing has been beaten to death when in reality it matters little in real world use.
But what can I say I guess you will have a better 30fps cinematic experience on your G-sync monitor that most Freesync user do. I can't deny the validity of that claim.
I mean the fluidity/ game experience is bad at that range no matter what monitor you've got.
And difference between 40h and 30hz is just like the difference between 120 and 144hz or between 144 and 165 Hz monitor. Doesn't make difference at all
Whenever your fps dips below the minimum supported refresh, VRR won't work, you'll get regular vsync instead. (edit: you get LFC if you're on FreeSync2)
Undervolting is not smart, it sacrifices reliability, and it's not something you can even guarantee will work.
an absolute must for playing with ulmb since keeping constant 120 fps is mostly unreal on any hardware.
Spending 100-200$ on GFX and getting a Freesync monitor with 165-40hz range is smarter than paying 100-200$ more to get a Gsync monitor with 165-30hz range instead.
if you'd like ulmb and can pay for that feature then freesync monitors don't have that.
Then there's Freesync monitors, with the most common adaptive sync range of 48-75hz. Great if you can keep your fps between 48 and 75 fps, anything outside of that and there goes your adaptive sync unless you cap it of course.