QOTW: AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 or Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 Ti?

[Percy1983]

Easily the V56 for me, I can't help thinking back to the 970 vs 290x and the early bench marks and how they perform now.

Glad I went for the 290x.

With that Freesync vs G Sync is enough for me as many monitors now support Freesync at no or little premium.

[Iota]

Vega 56, assuming that it'll come with more driver improvements over time, plus the ecosystem is cheaper.

If Nvidia had a free implementation of Gsync so their monitors were cheaper, then I'd possibly reconsider and go purely on benchmarks. I'm not going to notice the difference between 140fps and 120fps and I'm getting too old to care.

[spolsh]

Not interested in either of these ones. 1070Ti seems a really late to the party card (as were the Vegas).

[SHSPVR]

To me the GTX 1070 Ti lost out for min reason one has to do with G Sync at it premium high cost and now that the Vega 56 is at MSRP $400 that what I got over 1070 Ti

[Potbellieddwarf]

As I already own more than 1 G-Sync monitor it would be the 1070Ti.

I have used several AMD gpu's in the past and just prefer NVidia ones myself.

But the main deciding factor if I actually wanted either is the fact I already have the G-Sync monitors.

[philehidiot]

I think that the 1070 is a more matuire platform but that does mean that it's at the peak of software enhancements whereas Vega may have more to be squeezed out of it in future dirver updates. AMD have never impressed with stability for me but that's going back to the K62 400 and cheapo RAM. It's a imprint which has never left me. That aside my other concern is that AMD has really had to push that TDP to get extra oomph out of the higher end card. This means I'm struggling to see the value proposition when it comes to overclocking towards the end of the card's life. My current card cost me £575 (GTX 780) around 4 or 5 years ago and I established it had overclocking potential (like with my CPU) towards the beginning of my ownership which means I know I can push it a little for a few extra FPS when it starts struggling. I don't particularly want to have to push the voltage to the extreme to get more performance. Interestingly my GTX 780 is now playing COD WW2 at 1440P with high settings and not struggling at all - really justified my purchase of an expensive flagship with the hope it would last. I think this is due to consoles and PCs coming together slightly - a console is now more a PC with standardised hardware and optimised software and the PC is moving more towards the console in the sense that they're coding for the larger console market and as a result the bleeding edge PC graphics (see: Crysis series) just aren't happening and so the PC components last longer. Why code and create textures for something with such a small user base that the supermarkets don't sell for them? I honestly thought COD WW2 would be a graphics tour de force but it's actually not a step up from "Advanced Warfare" subjectively. Granted my card doesn't support HDR and that might make a difference but texture quality actually seems relatively low and I can only put this down to a slowing of development rate in this area due to ageing console hardware.

</ramble>

[Presto86]

I would go for the RX Vega 56 because if you want a monitor as well, AMD FreeSync is cheaper than G-Sync so overall you should save some money.

[Katar]

I'm actually in the market for a graphics card right now. If there were decent cooler RX Vega 56 on the market I'd snap one up, but if I had to chose one or the other right now it would be the GTX 1070 Ti. I just can't stand having such a noisy reference cooler.

Of course what I am probably going to buy is a GTX 1070 which has been cut in price since the GTX 1070 Ti launched.

[Friesiansam]

I would choose nVidia over AMD for quietness and efficiency but, a reference 1070ti offers far too little over a 1070 for the extra money and an upgraded 1070ti costs as much as some 1080s with an oveclock and a better cooler. Therefore, I would buy neither a Vega 56 or a 1070ti.

[loccothan]

Vega + Freesync 1440p
Vega is King of "Smooth as butter" Gaming for me

But personally im waiting for new XFX Vega 64.
Now im on Fury-X & FS 1440p 70Hz 10Bit from Iiyama

[globalwarning]

Neither. The price point between this and other "tiers" doesn't make any sense... I'd just get a 1080 GTX, especially with the prices the way they are.

Why? It's more expensive than V64, and slower - the only card price that really doesn't make sense right now is the 1080, the rest make sense relative to each other.

I'm not sure why you think the 1080 GTX is slower than Vega 64. http://www.overclock.net/t/502403/graphics-card-ranking I'm also not sure why you think it's more expensive than a V64. If anything, they go toe to toe in price, with the cheapest ones at around $500, which means the aftermarket cooler varients of the 1070TI are nipping at their heals in the high $400s, $469, $479, etc. The 20 extra dollars is worth it. Wait another week, save the $20 on starbucks or some beer, and get a "full fat" card, not the paired down, probably binned cards that 1070TI's are.

[DanceswithUnix]

Vega, the open source Linux drivers are a big win for me.

[anselhelm]

Neither. I have an XFX R9 Fury under a Morpheus II cooler, which is currently doing everything I need silky smooth in high detail.

[Xlucine]

I'm not sure why you think the 1080 GTX is slower than Vega 64. http://www.overclock.net/t/502403/graphics-card-ranking I'm also not sure why you think it's more expensive than a V64. If anything, they go toe to toe in price, with the cheapest ones at around $500, which means the aftermarket cooler varients of the 1070TI are nipping at their heals in the high $400s, $469, $479, etc. The 20 extra dollars is worth it. Wait another week, save the $20 on starbucks or some beer, and get a "full fat" card, not the paired down, probably binned cards that 1070TI's are.

A forum post is not a benchmark:

http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphi...ti-x3/?page=11
3% slower. V64 has gone up in price since last week, but right now the cheapest V64 on scan is £468 while the cheapest 1080 is £489. That isn't as big a price gap as it was when I made that post, but you're still paying £20 more for a slower card. Fancy 1070ti's are pointless anyway - they run at the same speeds as cheaper cards, and there are some very good coolers available at the bottom end.

[globalwarning]

I'm not sure why you think the 1080 GTX is slower than Vega 64. http://www.overclock.net/t/502403/graphics-card-ranking I'm also not sure why you think it's more expensive than a V64. If anything, they go toe to toe in price, with the cheapest ones at around $500, which means the aftermarket cooler varients of the 1070TI are nipping at their heals in the high $400s, $469, $479, etc. The 20 extra dollars is worth it. Wait another week, save the $20 on starbucks or some beer, and get a "full fat" card, not the paired down, probably binned cards that 1070TI's are.

A forum post is not a benchmark:

http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphi...ti-x3/?page=11
3% slower. V64 has gone up in price since last week, but right now the cheapest V64 on scan is £468 while the cheapest 1080 is £489. That isn't as big a price gap as it was when I made that post, but you're still paying £20 more for a slower card. Fancy 1070ti's are pointless anyway - they run at the same speeds as cheaper cards, and there are some very good coolers available at the bottom end.

A single benchmark isn't remotely representative of a device's relative performance. I linked to that because it's, by far, the most comprehensive clearing house for looking at the relative performance of GPUs based on a evidence from reviews across the web. "If you want a cards rank changed you must provide benchmarks or other evidence to back it up." It's updated regularly, with ongoing dialogue. Go back and look at the list in the forum, educate yourself, and then try replying.

Regardless, you seem to have confused the main point of my post, which is that the small price difference between (in particular aftermarket) 1070 Ti's and GTX 1080 (or V64's if you'd like) means it doesn't make sense to get a 1070 Ti instead of one of those, in most cases. The question was, 1070 Ti or Vega 56.

[alsmith]

BIG -1 to Parm Mann
Fan the flames of the AMD/Intel debate and produce another easy way for the journalists to do no work. Ask a question but don't do anything more.