• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Radeon RX Vega thread

dr_rus said:
This isn't saying a lot as most AMD sponsored DX12 games tend to actually hurt NV's performance. In most cases NV remains in the lead if benched in DX11 against AMD's DX12.
Click to expand...

The data for HardOCP's analysis does not support that with the Nvidia Pascal cards. The games where the sampled performance was tangibly faster (8-10%)on Vega 64 in DX12 (with the exception of Doom), Vega 64 was also faster in DX11.
 
Over a year of hype for to just perform on par with over a year old high end card from competition.

I believe that is the first time a new launch didn't top the fastest high-end cards?
 
Vega 56 looks like it might be a decent option if the price falls to around where the 1070 is sitting, although for that money you might as well step up to the 1080 instead.

Vega 64, on the other hand, looks kinda DOA.
 
Well, I think I'm out. Between the power consumption, unremarkable gaming performance and the availability shenanigans right out of the gate, I'm turned off these cards for my new build. I'm also confused as to why Newegg is selling the Vega 64 cards for $599 - isn't MSRP $499?

Looking forward, I'm either going to have to go Nvidia for the first time in 3+ builds and grab a 1080 or take my HD7970 from my current rig and buy my wife a cheap card to replace it when I give her my older pc. I'll then pick up a new high end GPU when the market settles a bit. Any recommendations for a cheap card (for the old rig) that will play nice with Photoshop CC and Lightroom CC?
 
Just read the portions of the Anandtech review I normally read (that they have up anyway.)

Vega 56 seems like the star of the show so far. From a compute stand point, this card looks even better. For development or video production purposes, the load power should not be a problem (even on the 64 model.) These cards (Nvidia/AMD) don't come close to their max draws or typical gaming loads during those work loads (they're are mostly idle too.) I'd like one if I was in need of a card.

That said, I can't help but think of people who were salivating at the Tesla P100s. It was clear those were not gaming cards and I'd feel we would have something similar if Nvidia attempted to pass them off as such. I think big Polaris is what was needed...
 
This thing was massively over hyped and way too late. It's good that there's an alternative out, but AMD still hasn't learned I guess.
 
Vega's performance isn't bad, and the 56 seems like it will be a big hit. FreeSync is the real selling point for these IMO. FreeSync + pretty good price/performance ratio. It's still disappointing that AMD doesn't have a competitor to the Titan and 1080 Ti, however.

I may drop one of these in my desktop to replace my 980 Ti and pair it with a Samsung FreeSync monitor. It'll be an increase in performance @1440p and I will recover some of the cost by selling my old card plus monitor.
 
I'm a bit disappointed in RX Vega 64's power consumption, performance seems just ok for the price.

But this is interesting:
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/amd-vega-rx-56-with-triple-fans-surfaces.html
index.php


It's like a Nano sized Vega, with triple fans. I could imagine this being pretty neat for air flow of Cross fire setups he he

8+6pin too.
 
MarsMartin said:
Just finished HardOCP's review.

  • Takes DX12 or Vulkan to bring up to 1080GTX level or slightly better
  • SSAA or MSAA hurt Vega's performance
  • Shader Based AA works better for Vega
  • Vega performance falls down to 1070 levels on Fallout/Watch Dogs which rely heavily on texture performance
  • Vega 64 playable settings match up to 1080GTX which has been out for a year.

Overall not bad and now you have an AMD option. I'm sure some driver updates will fix the issues hurting performance, just can't do much against the criticism that this performance was available a year ago.

Curious how the liquid cooled one runs.
Click to expand...

I'm eager to see the FOC cards compete, which I think the majority of sales come from. My EVGA 1080 SC gets an average FPS of 103-105 in Gears 4 and 90-95 in Tomb Raider DX12 (the only 2 games I have on the Hardocp list) I would expect the same approx 15 FPS increase in most games and from most FOC cards for Nvidia and the card is at 68 degree max with 50% fans. It will be interesting to see how well Vega OCs, just a quick google shows that OCing the memory has some pretty decent gains.
 
609€ for the limited or normal edition in Germany. If they priced the standard one somewhere below 550€ I would have bought one.
As of now I'm seriously considering buying Nvidia although I own a freesync monitor.
It´s really not easy with AMD's GPUs these days...
 
FoxT said:
609€ for the limited or normal edition in Germany. If they priced the standard one somewhere below 550€ I would have bought one.
As of now I'm seriously considering buying Nvidia although I own a freesync monitor.
It´s really not easy with AMD's GPUs these days...
Click to expand...

I also have a freesync monitor and only bought a 1080 because of a great deal (399€ for a Gainward Phoenix)
My original plan was to wait for Vega but I would have waited for nothing
Sucks that I'm limited to using it @60Hz instead of 48-75Hz but what do you want..
 
mrklaw said:
I more fear for PS5/XB2. AMD might give them good business deals but a hot, big, not exactly efficient GPU is not what you want in a small, limited cooling console

But then Nvidia burned all their bridges with Sony and MS I guess
Click to expand...
Assuming the ps5/xb2 release in 2020 or later. How likely would it be to have cards with similar/equal performance while producing/consuming less heat/power?
 
Durante said:
All the cards except for the 1060 seem to operate at the CPU limit in that scenario. NV's DX11 driver is much better. (Which used to be something you couldn't say without people jumping at you, hah!)


Really?
You get basically the same performance:

with ~70 Watt more power consumption:
Click to expand...

Toss up between whos benches you use. I was looking at TPU's 1440p performabce summary.
 
Comparable performance to the GTX 1080 and GTX 1070, at significantly more power consumption and heat. The difference in die size are staggering excluding the HBM memory. It's either Nvidia is deploying some kind of magic with Pascal, or AMD is very incompetent. Either way, Vega is here too late. Volta refresh is coming in a few months and it will kick even more ass in efficiency. If Navi doesn't ditch the aging GCN architecture I am afraid we will see another disappointment coming.
 
Vega 56 is your only decent option if you're desperate to get some use out of a 1440p FreeSync monitor. GTX 1070-level performance as long as you can put up with the heat and power draw.

Vega 64 is DOA. Slower and less efficient than a 1080.
 
Zefah said:
Product pages have been going up if you check Nowinstock, but I don't think any of them have been made available for purchase.

https://www.nowinstock.net/computers/videocards/amd/rxvega64/

Word is that Amazon is the only place that will sell for MSRP, so they will go fast. I will buy a 64 if I can get it for $499, but I can't really justify any higher considering these benchmarks.
Click to expand...

Hmm frustrating to say the least. I don't mind paying above $499 because I want one of the Silver ones.
 
Glad I didn't wait on AMD. I had a 290 and wanted a new AMD card. Instead bought a 1070 in early July last year.

I guess it's good they have something out but unless it's considerably cheaper why would you buy these cards over nvidia? These cards have crazy power draw and will run very hot.

Now Nvidia will put out Volta soon and AMD will be back playing catch up. They did a good job with Ryzen but they just can't keep up with Nvidia. I wish they would do better.
 
E-Cat said:
Two words: "Poor Volta."
Click to expand...

Exactly. That video was monumentally stupid. Really disappointing to see the lack of competition. Spin it however you want these Vega cards are real poor showings. Here's hoping the success of Zen will bring the much needed R&D funds for RTG.

I'll easily skip these (easy decisions as console exclusives are keeping me busy with gaming).

If next year brings some great HDMI 2.1 HDR OLED TVs, and Vive2.. then I'll think about upgrading my video card. What are the chances of nVidia supporting HDMI 2.1 and that adaptive sync? That would guarantee a Volta purchase. Cause AMD/RTG won't have anything until Navi in late 2018 or (realistically late) 2019... And by their track record, no one should expect anything worthwhile there.
 
I'm happy with the performance, but that power draw...

I was hoping to fit 4 of these babies in my rig. Already sweating just thinking about the heat...getting flashbacks to the time I crossfired 3 7970s lol
 
sirap said:
I'm happy with the performance, but that power draw...

I was hoping to fit 4 of these babies in my rig. Already sweating just thinking about the heat...getting flashbacks to the time I crossfired 3 7970s lol
Click to expand...
Loool but why? seems I bit excessive given you almost never get more performance past 2.
 
Kayant said:
Loool but why? seems I bit excessive given you almost never get more performance past 2.
Click to expand...

GPU rendering. I don't work in VFX anymore but I still like to mess around with it.

To be honest I'm better off with Nvidia (more renderers support CUDA than OpenCL) but I like to support AMD in any way I can.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Radeon RX 9060 XT review thread
41
14K
SolidQ replied
RX 7900 XTX vs RX 9070 XT March 2026 - Comparison with Newest Drivers
9
1K
HerpDerpstreit replied
Rumor: SF6 year 4 DLC potentially leaked. Gouken, Haggar, Vega, and…. Tifa
2 3
109
2K
Knight of the Round replied
Radeon RX 9060 XT features 2048 cores, boost clock of 3.2 GHz
Hardware  2 3
119
12K
roosnam1980 replied
[VideoCardz] GeForce RTX 5060 Ti appears on Steam Hardware Survey list before Radeon RX 9070 series
News Hardware 
27
2K
Unknown Soldier replied
Top Bottom