AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 8 GB

[ERazer]

It'll be just your luck if they release Volta in 1 month

but.... going on the Vega 64 performance, I think we can all wait till Summer/Autumn 2018 for the next high end Nvidia GPU.

pretty sure whom ever bought 1080ti will be waiting for the next voltaTi to upgrade

 

[Deleted member 50521]

It'll be just your luck if they release Volta in 1 month

but.... going on the Vega 64 performance, I think we can all wait till Summer/Autumn 2018 for the next high end Nvidia GPU.

Going green next round. Ya know, higher efficiency for a better planet.

 

[Mr.Newss]

Most of these Cons can be fixed with non-reference models. for me, that model of the card will be a solid 9.5/10.

 

[MrMilli]

I see everybody's bashing Vega's power inefficiency but are you guys seeing the same review as I am?

Vega64 PwrSave <2% slower than GTX1080 while consuming 48W more.
This is huge progress from AMD. Nobody's forcing you to use the obvious ridiculous Turbo mode or even std mode.

Considering these are first release drivers, things can only get better from here on.

 

[EarthDog]

I see everybody's bashing Vega's power inefficiency but are you guys seeing the same review as I am?

Vega64 PwrSave <2% slower than GTX1080 while consuming 48W more.
This is huge progress from AMD. Nobody's forcing you to use the obvious ridiculous Turbo mode or even std mode.

Considering these are first release drivers, things can only get better from here on.

Sure... but stock its still much worse performance /watt.

 

[Fluffmeister]

AMD are in quite a privileged position really, people are prepared to wait 15 months for the same performance as a GTX 1080, accept the need for different bios profiles to reign in power consumption AND after all the waiting equally accept the drivers probably aren't up to speed yet either...

They literally can not fail.

 

[MrMilli]

Sure... but stock its still much worse performance /watt.

And why is that important? If someone cares about the power consumption, the option to lower it is right there and easy to change. It's like two clicks.
If someone doesn't care then nothing.

 

[the54thvoid]

Spoiler: :)

I'm not disagreeing with the post as such but (and I may be wrong) I think the demo done at Capsawhatchamacallit limited video ram to 2GB or something to show how HBCC would work in a memory limited environment So in that case what was demo'ed was valid. HOWEVER, when it is used on a card with 8GB of HBM2 it is an absolute waste of time.

 

[EarthDog]

And why is that important? If someone cares about the power consumption, the option to lower it is right there and easy to change. It's like two clicks.
If someone doesn't care then nothing.

The important part of my post is that you are FORCED to lower performance (Std mode is default, right?), for more reasonable power consumption. I think that's asinine... two clicks or not, It's two clicks I don't have to worry about using different cards. Its lowering performance to fit in a power envelope... no thanks.

So, I have to slow my card down, which then puts its 2% slower while still using what, 30% more power than a 1080? Naa....

 

[the54thvoid]

The important part of my post is that you are FORCED to lower performance for more reasonable power consumption. I think that's asinine.

Yeah, I can run at 60fps v-sync on BF1 and use like <50% power.......

 

[MrMilli]

The important part of my post is that you are FORCED to lower performance for more reasonable power consumption. I think that's asinine... two clicks or not, Its two clicks I don't have to worry about using different cards.

Not disagreeing with you there. AMD went way beyond the sweet spot of the silicon for 2% extra performance. But at least they give you the option to run the card at its right setting without too many loopholes. No BIOS editing, Rivatuner, .... And at its right setting, it's hell of a card.

 

[EarthDog]

We definitely part ways on the "huge progress" from AMD sentiment though.

 

[neatfeatguy]

So another meh graphics card from AMD that only matches the performance of the year old GTX 1080 with lots of power draw and noise, especially irritating coil whine. I'll pass. Also, dunno why they bother with that expensive HBM, when GDDR5X does just fine.

Let's hope AMD can finally leapfrog NVIDIA sometime not too long in the future and give us some competition.

If they had these cards 1-2 years prior, that would have been a hell of a game changer and really pushed competition. The Vega 56 is mostly on par with a 1070, but draws more power. I could really push the OC On my 980Ti and not be far behind the Vega 56 (even the Fury X isn't far behind) and my card is already 2 years old. It looks like AMD appears to be almost 2 years behind Nvidia.

It's good to see AMD keeping in there, but unless they have something up their sleeves in the next year or so, Nvidia might really put the hurt on them. Navi is rumored to be out 2019, but will that be fast enough to keep up with Nvidia? They don't have anything to answer the 1080Ti right now. Volta most likely won't be around till mid 2018 based on rumors that production of consumer cards won't start until the end of this year (if we're lucky), but if all this holds true, Nvidia will have that 6+ month jump on AMD with the next generation. I wonder when AMD will truly catch up to Nvidia, right now that seems like a long way off.

 

[EarthDog]

After intense consideration after 3 hours of fiddling with stores, prices and shit I've decided to pull the trigger on AORUS GTX 1080Ti. Reason? RX Vega 64 Liquid costs the same as this beefed up air cooled one (and I've specifically taken this one because it actually has tons of thermal pads underneath backplate and VRM is connected to actual heatsink, not some crappy little alu heatsink screwed on top of VRM, proper air cooling).
RX Vega 56 is actually by far the best deal, but it won't cost 400€ in Europe for sure and quite frankly, I'm sick and tired of endless waiting for aftermarket cooled ones to arrive god knows when in autumn 2017. The reference one is crap, just like all blower style cards so I'm certainly not buying that either.

Everyone can call me AMD fanboy for being optimistic about RX Vega, but in the end, I'm not stupid. For someone who wsn't waiting endlessly and just happens to change stuff now, I guess it's still viable, but for me, this is it.

I'll laugh because you said you were going to buy it no matter what though (right?)....

 

[MrMilli]

We definitely part ways on the "huge progress" from AMD sentiment though.

I see you edited your post. No problem.
I didn't think two clicks was such a hassle for a tweaker but it seems so.
Anyhow, let's not forget that this card is cheaper that a GTX1080 while still being as fast in PwrSave mode.
I'm pretty sure 99% of the world doesn't care about 48W which is less than a normal light bulb.

Just because you see it negatively, doesn't mean we all do. I'm sure there are more that share my opinion.

 

[RejZoR]

I'll laugh because you said you were going to buy it no matter what though (right?)....

I said I MIGHT buy it no matter what. Out of that "MIGHT" I've decided not to. Deal with it.

 

[EarthDog]

I said I MIGHT buy it no matter what. Out of that "MIGHT" I've decided not to. Deal with it.

 

[Captain_Tom]

We definitely part ways on the "huge progress" from AMD sentiment though.

I have to agree with you as well. Now look, I suspect Vega will be receiving several large performance increases from drivers/game optimizations over the course of the next year.

Having said that, right now Vega is not at all impressive for gaming from a technology demonstration perspective. It's good for the price given how ridiculous the market is right now, and for professional uses it's somewhat disruptive. However this is not some big stepping stone for Radeon gaming, not even CLOSE. Big Polaris would have probably beaten or met this while being cheaper to produce (And launching a year ago lol).

 

[Manu_PT]

Wondering why are you only thinking about the power consumption part of the GPUs. Why not thinking about Sync monitors, why not thinking about the Radeon Packs? So biased "review" from you.



Hehe, yeah sure. Pretty little liar.



Yeah sure, this is the time when power consumption is important. What about Intel's X CPUs?

Intel X CPU? I don´t care about them and I think who does, actually makes money from using it with all those threads (editing, design, render, etc). Irrelevant to this debate about piece of hardware to play videogames.

Power consumption is always important, maybe for US users it isn´t. In my country the electricity is expensive, Vega 64 consumes almost as much as a GTX 1080 SLI, that´s not acceptable in 2017. I don´t want that crap on my machine just to play videogames. Deal with it.

 

[Agony]

So... the big news are .... Summer vacations VS OC = Vacations WIN

 

[laszlo]

quite good cards both of them; good pricing also

who want new tech/upgrade/need to have latest stuff will buy it of course if available on stock...those who don't like it or hate red will stick with green

one small request... don't start the useless war .... nothing to win no giveaway announced but if i recall correctly @Tatty_One has a lot of free holiday passes....

 

[EarthDog]

I see you edited your post. No problem.
I didn't think two clicks was such a hassle for a tweaker but it seems so.
Anyhow, let's not forget that this card is cheaper that a GTX1080 while still being as fast in PwrSave mode.
I'm pretty sure 99% of the world doesn't care about 48W which is less than a normal light bulb.

Just because you see it negatively, doesn't mean we all do. I'm sure there are more that share my opinion.

I can pick up an aftermarket 1080 for $510 (a giga reference blower for $500). While the air cooled version with reference blower RX V64 is $500+ (one is $500 the rest are gouged at $599).

The point, as I said, isn't that two clicks is a problem, it is that some are forced to do it. Big deal or not (not). The fact that it has to lower performance from default to accomplish that is the issue. Users who do that are not getting what they paid for. I don't find that to be an acceptable option when they can get the same performance with less power, less cost, less noise, WITHOUT touching a thing.

That is 48W with power savings enabled. What is the difference out of the box, where people normally run the cards (default). Not a huge deal either, but, all ingredients make up the pie...

 

[Bjorn_Of_Iceland]

... And at its right setting, it's hell of a card.

I see what you did there.

 

[efikkan]

Now look, I suspect Vega will be receiving several large performance increases from drivers/game optimizations over the course of the next year.

And there we have a winner! Don't worry, the drivers will come and fix this product…
This product is already three months late; most driver optimizations are already baked in. These promises of future driver improvements never pan out.

Having said that, right now Vega is not at all impressive for gaming from a technology demonstration perspective. It's good for the price given how ridiculous the market is right now, and for professional uses it's somewhat disruptive. However this is not some big stepping stone for Radeon gaming, not even CLOSE. Big Polaris would have probably beaten or met this while being cheaper to produce (And launching a year ago lol).

Vega looks pretty bad considering it has a node shrink and so many more transistors and higher clock than Fiji.

 

[v12dock]

MAYBE AIB cards will be interesting if they can hold 1.7+ clocks and a year of driver updates. Otherwise its time for AMD to try something new next gen.