Sir Abacus
Member
I stand corrected.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Radeon RX Vega thread
- Thread starter PFD
- Start date
I stand corrected.
Burgess_101
Member
The Samsung lc34f791wquxen.
Coming from a 144hz 1440p ASUS PG279Q which was fantastic a high refresh rate was important to me, not even for gaming but just the general windows experience is so much better with a high refresh rate.
So this Samsung is one of the few 3440x1440 monitors with 100hz refresh rate so I picked it. Has freesync as well.
Got it for £650 due to Amazon fucking up twice with my orders so I haven't actually the chance to use it. It will be here tomorrow though thankfully. I can say that aesthetically at least it's beautiful from the one I received without a power cable.
Aztechnology
Member
Is this the same monitor that's part of the Vega deal?
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01M1D7JVO/?tag=neogaf0e-20
Looks to be, but with different model number for UK (Assuming you're UK? I feel like yes, as I know we've had a discussion like this before lol)
Burgess_101
Member
Aztechnology
Member
Yes it's that exact one but with the EU model number.
I am from the UK yes
Nice, definitely give your feedback after you've had the chance to play around a bit. I have a Samsung KS8000 TV (KS9000 in UK) so I've been really impressed with their VA panels, and color production. A Quantum dot monitor will definitely be nice and that's a really nice price on a monitor like that. As soon as there's a good HDR/HDMI 2.1 monitor or TV that supports PC at 100hz+ I'll probably sell my TV off and upgrade to that. Assuming it's not $2000-3000. Then I'll just wait for an OLED instead lol.
Depends on the rest of your system. The 64's are rated between 300-350w depending on the model. So you could run into problems depending on what you're running. I'd check out something like this
https://outervision.com/power-supply-calculator
My suggestion would be to look into a deal on a 750w though. Thermaltake has a 750w semi modular gold for like $50 after rebate.
Delusibeta
Banned
Probably, but it would be cutting it a bit fine for my tastes, particularly if you're running a power hungry CPU and multiple mechanical drives.
Rushersauce
Banned
Did they increase the performance over time? Yes. Case closed.
P.S: It's actually "dilute", my native language is Spanish and I was thinking of "diluir". But thanks, I guess?
I'm running a 4690K, an SSD, and a SSD/HDD Firecuda hybrid. Would be a bummer if I had to add a PSU as an extra expense but I guess it's better to be safe.
kirankara78
Member
So you're going to claim a one off event is the standard then?
On that basis every you can claim pretty anything you like without any need to consider any evidence which is contrary to your claim.
Nvidia also have fine wine then as they released drivers that improved performance once.
Developers release games with fine wine in mind when games have performance issues. Let's celebrate games with crap performance and patches that fix that later.
Aztechnology
Member
Nothing we haven't really discussed here. But I've always like Adored, even though people here often called him a shill (I always thought he was pretty grounded in his observations) he just put out his video on the Vega release. Seems about right.
https://youtu.be/d7VH2DprHMk
Except for the last bit about price and value. I don't agree. First it won't stay at $399-499 for long. At all, especially if it's good for mining. And second, the power usage needs to be factored in. Against the 1070 though, it seems like a good card.
https://youtu.be/d7VH2DprHMk
Except for the last bit about price and value. I don't agree. First it won't stay at $399-499 for long. At all, especially if it's good for mining. And second, the power usage needs to be factored in. Against the 1070 though, it seems like a good card.
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
You're in denial. Look at 480 performance gap with 1060 around launch on TechPowerUp. Now look at it now. Would get you the links but I can't be arsed.
Locuza
Member
Radeon Instinct news from AMD confirm HBM2 from Samsung:
https://instinct.radeon.com/en-us/p47-announcement/
would be cool if legit benches end up showing similar results.
Beautiful Ninja
Member
The Vega FE is closer to GTX 1070 in performance than GTX 1080, at least on the air cooler. A water cooled Vega FE was pretty close to a 1080, but at the prices you'd pay for a water cooled Vega FE or RX Vega, you can buy a GTX 1080 Ti that destroys the Vega.
The G-Sync tax is also a bit overstated, it exists but nowadays it's closer to 100-150 bucks as more companies have released high end G-Sync monitors. The likes of Viewsonic have got in the game and their monitors are 2- 300 bucks cheaper than the Acer/Asus ones that were taking the piss on cost.
Insane Metal
Member
That seems waaay too good to be true.
ethomaz
Banned
This looks so good that makes Vega 64 obsolete before release
It really doesn't, all those games favour AMD over NVIDIA. If you look at a review of 580vs1060 you'll see that AMD beats NVIDIA in all those titles by a decent margin, especially if they used the DX12 rendered in BF1. In fact I'd say the results are worse than they should be for Vega 56 to convincingly being the better performer over a 1070 (admittedly drivers should improve performance by a few % pretty soon after release) .
If true, I'm going to start saving right now
Aztechnology
Member
It's only going to take you one or two weeks to save up for this? Because good luck getting one for a few months at least after launch. And that's assuming Crypto doesn't have another crazy climb.
Three of those four games have historically favored AMD GPUs (BF1, CoD: IW, Doom). Going to need a bigger range of games before any final judgments from me.
That BF1 lead is quite large though. Hmm.
Probably using the (which at least used to be broken in mp) DX12 renderer and it probably makes the 1070 lose performance.
Unknown Soldier
Banned
It's WTF Tech lol
I'm surprised some people are so desperate they are actually linking to WTF Tech now for any possible scraps of positive news
edit: It's actually Tweaktown but they are actually just as questionable as WCCFTech so my point applies still, maybe doubly so. Know your sources.
icecold1983
Member
no i just provided the link and made sure to bold and underline the rumored word because of posters like you
It doesn't say if it was DX 11 or 12. But I looked up some 1070 bf1 benchmarks at 1440p and most sites show average fps of 90-105. 91 from gamernx and 105 from PCgamer, that's DX11. DX12 is 78.8 from a gamernx bench. So I don't know how they ran their test to get 72 lol
Unknown Soldier
Banned
If people listened to posters like me they would have bought a 1070 or 1080 more than a year ago or a 1080 Ti months ago and enjoyed gaming with the settings and resolution they like instead of waiting a futile year for Vega
icecold1983
Member
if people listened to posters like you they would think async compute has something to do with cpu multithreading
Unknown Soldier
Banned
I see, you're going to try to change the subject. Well have fun with that then
In all honesty you try too hard for no real reason in my book. Let people enjoy what they want. If they felt like waiting for Vega was the better option as they want a cheaper solution, then I say go for it. If they still want to buy Vega, then I say great, AMD can use the funds.
All in all, this whole ordeal and the pricing of Vega makes me think they believe it will be eaten up very quickly (by miners and gamers). If that is the case, I can see why they didn't choose better pricing.
Welp, the wait for Navi and Volta is next. I am not seeing 1080ti as worth it (already have 980ti, I will just wait) especially since I read their next cards will be close to or outdo it. 1180ti, show me what you got.
DemonCleaner
Member
if your PSU is decent, you have more than enough headroom with said CPU.
DemonCleaner
Member
Unknown Soldier is bored Jensen Huang's internet account.
ISee
Member
30% faster than a stock 1070 FE in Battlefield 1 (DX12) is reasonable imo:
1.) A highly overclocked GTX 1070 (2050 MHz) is about 20% faster than a 1070 running at stock speeds.
2.) As I already said on the last page; Vega 56 @ 1600 MHz could be as fast as a highly overclocked 1070 running at 2050 MHz, in the first place.
3.)BF1 @ DX12 runs ~10% faster on amd than on nvidia cards. (note: a GTX 1060 @ DX11 is as fast as a RX480 @DX12)
In the end we have a card that outperforms a stock 1070 by 20% on it's own. Add the 10% advantage from running both the bega 56 and 1070 @ DX12 and you get the ~30% gain.
(Note: the gap between the vega 56 and a stock 1070 would probably be just 10% in dx 11 btw, because AMD gpus run ~ 10% worse on BF1 @ dx11 than their nvidia counterparts)
1.) A highly overclocked GTX 1070 (2050 MHz) is about 20% faster than a 1070 running at stock speeds.
2.) As I already said on the last page; Vega 56 @ 1600 MHz could be as fast as a highly overclocked 1070 running at 2050 MHz, in the first place.
3.)BF1 @ DX12 runs ~10% faster on amd than on nvidia cards. (note: a GTX 1060 @ DX11 is as fast as a RX480 @DX12)
In the end we have a card that outperforms a stock 1070 by 20% on it's own. Add the 10% advantage from running both the bega 56 and 1070 @ DX12 and you get the ~30% gain.
(Note: the gap between the vega 56 and a stock 1070 would probably be just 10% in dx 11 btw, because AMD gpus run ~ 10% worse on BF1 @ dx11 than their nvidia counterparts)
dgrdsv
Member
It can:
https://devblogs.nvidia.com/parallelforall/mixed-precision-programming-cuda-8/
The GP100 chip can't but GP102, 104, 106 and maybe 107 can process Int8 with 4x speed.
Both of you are correct though as DP4A/DP2A instruction is available only in CUDA at the moment and as such it cannot be used on Pascals in gaming APIs like DX/VK/OGL. Same is true for Pascal's native FP16 support btw. Gaming Pascal is uniformly FP32.
Judging from the telling selection of benchmarks and the actual fps given I'm going to assume that these numbers are taken from another weird AMD presentation, this time - on Vega 56. Would not pay much attention to them.
Four or four actually. Such BF1 lead as well as Civ6 lead are easy to get on DX12 renderer which are simply FUBAR on NV's h/w in both of these games.
It all depends on what is tested and how. There's zero reason to use DX12 on NV h/w in all of the games listed in this rumor and I bet that this is exactly what was used there.
icecold1983
Member
apparently me sharing a link to rumors is a sign of my massive AMD desperation. hes absurd
Maybe he will get a tag akin to that of Crossing Eden one day.
icecold1983
Member
not putting stock in anything, just sharing the link i came across. Vega is a massive failure
lucebuce12
Member
When will we start to see official benchmarks for Vega?
The 14th, though I'm sure a site or two will jump the gun.
ItalianJoe83
Member
Reading the title I thought it was a Street Fighter V related thread lol
D
Deleted member 325805
Unconfirmed Member
I really hope the 56v is good. I haven't used an AMD card since the 5850, how are their drivers these days? Nvidia is really good at getting game ready drivers out early and I never really have any issues with them.
dgrdsv
Member
Why would it suck? Judging from the flops comparison it should be a little bit above 1070 while being a little bit pricier as well. If for some reason you don't want to buy a 1070 then it will likely be a valid alternative which should probably overclock better than Vega 64 too.
llien
Banned
Drivers have improved a lot, adding missing features (ReLive vs Shadowplay) and even more features (Radeon Chill allows to seriously reduce power consumption).
I think on gaf consensus was that last 2 years AMD drivers have been ahead of nvidia's.
No, tweaktown leaked it.
Going from a GTX 765m to a RX 480, I get way less crashing and BSODs than on my last card, especially compared against the end of the older card's life.
llien
Banned
Their OpenGL drivers are still terrible if that matters to you. If you plan on using PCSX2 for PS2 emulation I'd steer away from AMD as they seem laser focused on OpenGL for accurate emulation.