Read more.Quote:
The benchmarks you've been waiting for.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
The benchmarks you've been waiting for.
AMD today announced its RX Vega graphics cards are available at e-tail outlets around the world starting today.
RX VEGA 64 Black Standalone UK GBP 449.99
RX VEGA 64 Silver & Black (Black Pack - inc 2x FREE Games) UK GBP 549
RX VEGA 64 Liquid (Aqua Pack - inc 2x FREE Games) UK GBP 639
I wonder if you actually read the reviews - the Vega56 is faster than a GTX1070,but consuming the same power as an AIB RX580??Quote:
Originally Posted by Biscuit
You can't honestly be saying that you're not disappointed with this release?Quote:
Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
Hmm. Seems that the hype doesn't quite match the results. Ultimately it's a like for like showdown between the 56 and the 1070, however with 14 months of development, how long before Nvidia release something new?
While not particularly batting for either team, as someone who could do with a new card to replace my 'aging' R7-2**, I'm not sure I'll actually be bothering with this generation.
Looks like a couple of cracking cards, can't wait to see what the watercooled / aftermarket varieties can do. Looking like a cracking bang-for-buck card.
Shame about the apples and oranges comparison to an non-reference overclocked 1080 card.
they jack up the price by $100 buck
Power CONSUMPTION!!!! okay what is happening with the VEGA architecture? that thing is thirsty, can someone please explain to me why the architecture is so power hungry compared to a way faster Nvidia card.
AFAIK because NVidia Geforce cards have as much circuitry stripped out as possible while still performing their function as gaming cards. They have no FP16, FP64 compute capability, no async, etc., so less power is required. Also, AMD push voltage up higher to support higher clocks in stock configuration than the cards would really be "efficient" with. Look at the vast chasm of power difference between power saving and "Turbo".Quote:
Originally Posted by lumireleon
GeForce cards essentially come running in power saving mode and have their equivalent of "Turbo" locked since even when you overclock, they refuse to go past a certain voltage value.
If I'm wrong anywhere, someone please clarify..
People are acting like we haven't seen what Vega would be like before,so I didn't hype it after that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biscuit
The fact is I am not sure why you are so negative about Vega56??
It draws the same power as an RX580 but is considerably faster,and is faster than a GTX1070.
Look at the last RX570 4GB review - its basically an RX470. The RX470 4GB was getting beaten by a GTX1060 6GB comprehensively,now a year later that review showed an RX570 matching a GTX1060 6GB.
Once you add the lower cost of FreeSync monitors,and the fact we know AMD cards seem to show decent improvements over time,why are you telling me we should hype the GTX1070 instead??
I have zero interest in the Vega64 since a GTX1080 seems a far better package,but Vega56 looks fine for what it is.
Unless the realworld price is like £400+,if AMD keeps them under £400,its OK.
Plus even Nvidia have confirmed Volta is out next year,so for probably for the immediate future most people will be looking at either a GTX1070 or a Vega56 if they want a fast GPU.
Nvidia will still have the uber performance bracket with the GTX1080TI and I think its been quite obvious by now AMD would not touch that,especially due to the dual use nature of AMD GPUs,and Nvidia's move to separate lines for commercial and gaming GPUs.
Edit!!
If you have been following the Vega saga - most of the delays seem to be clustered around SK Hynix having issues with their HBM2 roundmap and to such an extent AMD is also now using Samsung.
So my viewpoint is Vega64 is probably held back by bandwidth to a degree,as a Fury X has more bandwidth with a slower core. Nvidia is just more efficient with bandwidth usage.
I suspect AMD expected a two stack design with HBM2 might have been able to produce more bandwidth than the 4 stack HBM1 used on the Fury X.
Wonder what it would be alike when drivers is actually optimized though
I wonder if tile-based rendering is working now or not...Quote:
Originally Posted by QuorTek
Dunno,but AMD always do this and sadly for them first impressions count. I just hope for their sake Vega56 is sub £400 otherwise its not going to look pretty.Quote:
Originally Posted by scaryjim
Obviously you wouldn't upgrade to a Vega56 if you have a 1070, but for users jumping new to this level of performance, the Vega56 plus a Freesync monitor looks much more attractive than a 1070. I have a 1070 now, and I'm not sure when or if I'm going to stump up for a G-Sync monitor!
Well after a quick browse, the cheapest I'm seeing the 64 is for ~£550. Not looked for the 56 though, but at those prices on launch, I'm much more inclined to get the 1080Ti which is more matured (and is only costing ~£100 more).
AMD needs to bring down the real world pricing of these if they want people to buy them, they can gimmick all they like with "packs" and "free games" (neither of which I'm remotely interested in), base price needs to be spot on and currently it doesn't look like that.