AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 8 GB

[mastershake575]

So its basically the same price/performance as the 1070 while having more noise/power consumption ?

We waited a year for them to basically offer nothing new/exciting to the market ? (solid work AMD !!!)

 

[5DVX0130]

And 29W for 27-28% improved rate? At the end of the day, plenty will buy them if available, if only because many of the already established mining cards are sold out or in short supply.

Plenty are already buying them. Well, at least they are trying to.
Not that easy though. Most sites are out of stock/sold out, and prices are already on their way to the Moon.

Amazon: Best Sellers in Computer Graphics Cards
#1 XFX Radeon Rx Vega 64

 

[Shatun_Bear]

So its basically the same price/performance as the 1070 while having more noise/power consumption ?

We waited a year for them to basically offer nothing new/exciting to the market ? (solid work AMD !!!)

I bet you hoped it would be 'basically the same' performance as a 1070 but it in reality it's clearly faster on day 1 drivers, especially at 1440p and 4k, where it leaves the 1070 in the dust. I think you missed the performance summary.

Anyway, a custom 56 is my next card.

 

[GoldenX]

Now we know Zen APUs are going to have good IGP performance.

 

[Shatun_Bear]

Now we know Zen APUs are going to have good IGP performance.

Yes it should have been expected that Vega operating at the much lower frequencies to fit inside an APU would be vastly more power-efficient than these desktop cards. APUs with Vega + Ryzen cores are going to be amazing.

 

[Footman]

I'm torn TBH. I have a fantastic 27in IPS 2560x1440 Freesync monitor and an RX480 trying to keep up. I have a custom loop, so noise and heat are not much of an issue, especially as EK have already released a waterblock for the stock 56 and 64.... I'd rather buy the vanilla 64, but it's not likely that I will find it at $499, but the high power requirements are pushing me to the vanilla 56 now. With water I should be able to get a stable boosted clock that brings me close to the stock 64. As the 56 wont be available to buy for a couple of weeks I guess I can wait. Perhaps by this time some of the AIB's will be talking about their custom 64 designs... According the Gamer Nexus the VRM design of the Vega cards is top notch for vanilla stock cards, however it looks like the 56 is limited to 300W total power delivery which will limit its overclocking ability compared to the 64....

 

[Th3pwn3r]

So far across everything I've seen Vega56=MAYBE, Vega64=DEFINITELY NOT.

This is my current opinion, there will very likely be performance increases but I just feel like we'll be polishing a turd(Vega64). Unless some miracles happen, Vega64 is crap like a lot of the Nvidia fanboys were shouting. Vega56 definitely looks to be the Vega to get if I had to choose between the two, however, Vega56 would be my backup card or for my 5 year old daughter's computer if I don't opt for a 1070 or 1080.

 

[ViperXTR]

The better option vs Vega 64, finally something that challenges my over a year old GTX 1070 :V, and i could only think that it will only get better along the way. With the mining craze, i was tempted to sell my 1070 and get a Vega 64 (i have a freesync monitor) or GTX 1080 but i also thought that i barely play games these days and might not be worth it. (also The savings i had getting a freesync monitor would be nulled with that power draw though, had to replace my ancient PSU if i am to get a vega gpu)

 

[Th3pwn3r]

The better option vs Vega 64, finally something that challenges my over a year old GTX 1070 :V, and i could only think that it will only get better along the way. With the mining craze, i was tempted to sell my 1070 and get a Vega 64 (i have a freesync monitor) or GTX 1080 but i also thought that i barely play games these days and might not be worth it. (also The savings i had getting a freesync monitor would be nulled with that power draw though, had to replace my ancient PSU if i am to get a vega gpu)

At least you can get a more efficient psu as well.

 

[ViperXTR]

At least you can get a more efficient psu as well.

Not enough reason now though, my gaming sched has been reduced and my 1070 is barely getting taxed these days.

 

[mnemo_05]

maybe a bit OT, but where can i find a gtx 1070 that sells for $350 as mentioned on the table on the first page?

going back to the topic though, nice to see amd getting back to the game. these cards may not push the gpu technology forward as for their performance, but it may force nvidia to lower their price a little. i myself is in the market for either a 1080 or a 1080ti =)

saddens me to see my 980ti getting old faster that i anticipated

 

[mastershake575]

I bet you hoped it would be 'basically the same' performance as a 1070 but it in reality it's clearly faster on day 1 drivers, especially at 1440p and 4k, where it leaves the 1070 in the dust. I think you missed the performance summary.

Most reviews have the vega 56 as 4 to 5 % faster at 1440p. Lmao at "leaving it in the dust". I guarantee you when its all said and done, these cards will be "basically the same performance" just like they are now ( especially since the 3rd party 1070s are monster overclockers )

AMD was 14 months late to the party and offered absolutely nothing new or exciting to this segment (hell it won't even force the smallest of a price drop). You can't come this late and be this medicore (at least Ryzen was a success).

 

[Shatun_Bear]

Most reviews have the vega 56 as 4 to 5 % faster at 1440p. Lmao at "leaving it in the dust". I guarantee you when its all said and done, these cards will be "basically the same performance" just like they are now ( especially since the 3rd party 1070s are monster overclockers )

AMD was 14 months late to the party and offered absolutely nothing new or exciting to this segment (hell it won't even force the smallest of a price drop). You can't come this late and be this medicore (at least Ryzen was a success).

I was talking about 4k. So let's break this down for everyone - you think a 6% performance deficit at 1440p and 9% performance deficit at 4K is 'basically the same performance'?

Even more baffling,what does 'when its all said and done' mean?? Are you expecting a magic driver from Nvidia to increase performance by 10% when historically improvements have come from the other side? It was this site that at launch showed the RX 480 9% slower than a 1060 but now the gap is around 4%.

'Basically the same'

 

[Tatty_Two]

maybe a bit OT, but where can i find a gtx 1070 that sells for $350 as mentioned on the table on the first page?

going back to the topic though, nice to see amd getting back to the game. these cards may not push the gpu technology forward as for their performance, but it may force nvidia to lower their price a little. i myself is in the market for either a 1080 or a 1080ti =)

saddens me to see my 980ti getting old faster that i anticipated

Probably the same place you can get one of these for RRP, otherwise newegg has a mini 1070 for 346 or a full sized for 361

 

[sutyi]

So its basically the same price/performance as the 1070 while having more noise/power consumption ?

We waited a year for them to basically offer nothing new/exciting to the market ? (solid work AMD !!!)

Mind you lot of features are still dormant in the Vega arch till Q4 late October / early November time frame when interesting stuff gets enabled in the drivers. How much extra performance will that be is still a question tho.

So this is a hard launch with a not feature complete driver package sadly.

 

[EarthDog]

Mind you lot of features are still dormant in the Vega arch till Q4 late October / early November time frame when interesting stuff gets enabled in the drivers. How much extra performance will that be is still a question tho.

So this is a hard launch with a not feature complete driver package sadly.

oh???? What features are those? Links please!

 

[Th3pwn3r]

So this is a hard launch with a not feature complete driver package sadly.

Is it? They've had plenty of time to get drivers completed.

 

[Frick]

oh???? What features are those? Links please!

It has slots for memristors. Yes, single slots for single memristors.

 

[sutyi]

oh???? What features are those? Links please!

Take a gander at Beyond3D forums mostly, also ComputerBase at ze germans have reported this.

HBCC is in, disabld by default tho. So probably not all kinks ironed out. You can turn it on tho.
DBSR in inactive supposedly, as is Primitive Shaders.

AMD themselves noted that there is a "Radeon Software Crimson ReLive Redux" package in the works, and that is supposed to arrive sometime in Q4. Being optimistic about I hope it ain't early December...

 

[EarthDog]

Forums... heh. So just a bunch of people speculating?

You brought it up.. dont make us look for it...

 

[sutyi]

Forums... heh. So just a bunch of people speculating?

You brought it up.. dont make us look for it...

I just noted. Primitive Shaders are disabled for fact, first driver batch that has a Preview version enabled in it is 17.320.

As for the rest these are rumors and speculation as you have stated. But you know rumors being rumors, you don't have to believe it from me or from any one else. So take it with a grain of salt or just glide over it.

Also I'm sorry, but I don't have the urge to flip trough some 30+ pages on other forums for others convenience.

 

[EarthDog]

You had the urge a took the time to post it somewhere else... it would just be nice to support it.

Part of the issue with primitive shaders are getting the programmers behind it and supporting it.amd is great at bringing bleeding edge technology to the table. The problem comes when its rarely used and little buy in.. think mantle... Vulkan so far... hbm/hbm2... etc.

HBCC is a 4K thing as well, according to PCPer. Not to mention, being as fast as a 1080, is it really a good 4K card??

 

[sutyi]

You had the urge a took the time to post it somewhere else... it would just be nice to support it.

Part of the issue with primitive shaders are getting tbe programmers behind it and suporrting it.amd is great at bringing vleeding edge technology to the table. The problem comes when its rarely used and little buy in.. think mantle... vulkan so far... hbm/hbm2... etc.

Supposedly (again you know with grain of that NaCL) Primitive Shaders will be a driver level function so no additional work on the game developers as it currently stands.

Last 3-4 pages here: https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/...-vega-20-rumors-and-discussion.59649/page-179
Conclusion here: https://www.computerbase.de/2017-08/radeon-rx-vega-64-56-test/8/

Also there was some GamerNexus stuff on this whole DBSR / HBCC / Primitive Shaders stuff somewhere from our Hairdo Overlord, Steve. Can't remember it I had read it or if it was mentioned in the video review tho.

Side note: Mantle was the catalyst (no pun intended) that brought close to metal APIs on PC. Without that there would be no DX12 or Vulkan today.

 

[Footman]

I invested in Freesync monitor and now need something better than my current RX 580 to power it. I will likely just buy the Vega 56 once the custom designs come to market, or buy stock version and waterblock, assuming I can find one at $399 USD. People are using the increased power requirements as a major showstopper for not buying Vega. Lets say that if you buy Vega and find out that there is a change in full load power requirements from your old card to Vega of 85W, the cost in additional power is minimal, based on my power costs here in Nevada. If I play 20 hours of gaming a week, I end up paying an additional 20 cents per week (12c per kwh in Nevada) based on calculation wattage x hours used ÷ 1000 x price per kWh= cost of electricity
If I refer to gaming load results at Anandtech, during BF1 gaming, there is a difference of 51W between the RX 580 and the Vega 56 and 142W between the RX 580 and Vega 64, so if I use the example above for calculating additional power costs then the swap to a Vega 56 will cost an additional 12 cents per week and swap to Vega 64 will cost an additional 34 cents per week.

Perhaps my math is wrong? While the talk of increased TDP and power requirements are initially alarming, the additional costs look to be minimal. These increased power requirements won't stop me from buying Vega.

Having said this the additional cost will hurt miners who are using their computers 24/7 to mine.....

 

[Th3pwn3r]

I was talking about 4k. So let's break this down for everyone - you think a 6% performance deficit at 1440p and 9% performance deficit at 4K is 'basically the same performance'?

Even more baffling,what does 'when its all said and done' mean?? Are you expecting a magic driver from Nvidia to increase performance by 10% when historically improvements have come from the other side? It was this site that at launch showed the RX 480 9% slower than a 1060 but now the gap is around 4%.

'Basically the same'

No reason to discuss Vega 56 and 4K, the frames are too low for a great experience per benchmarks.