Radeon 64 now on sale at the Egg

griff30

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 15, 2000
Messages
6,995
LOL at the miners who are not getting the hashrate they expected for the price and wattage.

I won't buy one used either, let them eat crow.
 

Raendor

Gawd
Joined
Sep 21, 2015
Messages
845
Plot twist, its all part of AMD's plan, make the card suck so much power that miners don't buy them. :cautious:

The downside, gamers won't buy them either lol.

Amdtards will. They're still claiming vega is a win and that it beats 10 series cards. Fanatics are blind as always.
 

_l_

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 27, 2016
Messages
1,151
games bundles with cards works ok I guess, if you want the game that's bundled (for me it hasn't happened to date). Just drop the eye candy research and use the savings to lower card prices ... that's my three cents
 

Archaea

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
11,691
So they sold all 5 cards they had on the shelf?
Hey hey hey

Just in Kansas City Microcenter alone they had four whole cards! Well, only two could be purchased --- the other two were on hold according to management. So two cards for over a million people. I can see where AMD thought that would be sufficient. There's plenty to go around.

It sure was a good thing AMD delayed this launch six months to make sure everyone got one who wanted one.

/s
 
Last edited:

atp1916

[H]ard|DCoTM x1
Joined
Jun 18, 2004
Messages
4,850
Definitely looks like the 1070 is still king of the perf/hash mining hill.
 

Gulvan

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 7, 2016
Messages
131
This is completely hilarious. It's like the people who actually want it to play games aren't going to see it so they go for their alternative.

Feel sorry for those people. Hyped for a card, never get it.
 

buttons

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 12, 2011
Messages
2,164
I can't decide. Should i get an RX 560 for $109 or a geforce 1080ti for $660 doesnt seem to be anything in between :)
 

Boil

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 19, 2015
Messages
1,439
I can't decide. Should i get an RX 560 for $109 or a geforce 1080ti for $660 doesnt seem to be anything in between :)

You should wait & try to get a RX Vega 56 for (hopefully) 400 bucks in a few weeks... ;^p
 

Araxie

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 11, 2013
Messages
6,456
I can't decide. Should i get an RX 560 for $109 or a geforce 1080ti for $660 doesnt seem to be anything in between :)

go with the 1080Ti, nothing more to wait.. the early you buy high-end GPU the best value you receive for it overtime.

You should wait & try to get a RX Vega 56 for (hopefully) 400 bucks in a few weeks... ;^p

not gona happen until mining crash.. and that is not gona happen anytime soon..
 

Araxie

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 11, 2013
Messages
6,456
RX Vega 56 does not drop until the 28th, there is a chance to get one on Day One...

the mining horde it's already in full task force waiting for that card, they are even paying retailers to pick the card one or two days before launch. so good luck with that.
 

raidflex

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
258
AMD really dropped the ball on this one. Why would you not get a 1080/Ti over this? The 1080 is simlar priced, significantly lower power and at least as powerful if not more then all of AMD's offerings. Other then being an "AMD Fan" I see no logical reason to purchase a Vega GPU over the 1070/1080/Ti.

This is disappointing too, because we need more competition like there is now on the CPU side to drive down prices.
 

Archaea

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
11,691
AMD really dropped the ball on this one. Why would you not get a 1080/Ti over this? The 1080 is simlar priced, significantly lower power and at least as powerful if not more then all of AMD's offerings. Other then being an "AMD Fan" I see no logical reason to purchase a Vega GPU over the 1070/1080/Ti.

This is disappointing too, because we need more competition like there is now on the CPU side to drive down prices.

Freesync is the main driving rationale.
 

Shintai

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
5,678
Freesync is the main driving rationale.

So Freesync got people locked into way inferior GPUs? That better be a very expensive Freesync monitor, as in really expensive.

So one bad buying decision should now trigger a second bad buying decision? Love that logic.

I would just use a 1080TI, Freesync or not at that price.
 
Last edited:

dfedders

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 6, 2004
Messages
158
So Freesync got people locked into way inferior GPUs? That better be a very expensive Freesync monitor, as in really expensive.

So one bad buying decision should now trigger a second bad buying decision? Love that logic.

I would just use a 1080TI, Freesync or not at that price.
You have it backwards. G-Sync monitors are a lot more expensive than FreeSync monitors. G-Sync monitors are usually $200+ more than a similar FreeSync monitor, so you're essentially paying an extra $200+ for similar performance (assuming MSRP on the video cards) if you want the G-Sync/FreeSync capabilities.
 

Dahkoht

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 2, 2014
Messages
453
Bought original Titan first week came out years ago , now still on my original Titan Pascal ( didn't see need to go for the updated version)

I work , and have a family. When I want to play games ( my main hobby) my time and enjoyment are far worth it over waiting for months and saving 100 or 500.

I can't imagine going through life giving away enjoyment for a few bucks.
 

Shintai

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
5,678
You have it backwards. G-Sync monitors are a lot more expensive than FreeSync monitors. G-Sync monitors are usually $200+ more than a similar FreeSync monitor, so you're essentially paying an extra $200+ for similar performance (assuming MSRP on the video cards) if you want the G-Sync/FreeSync capabilities.

You are paying 200$ extra for Vega 64 and having 2x the power consumption on top. And then you can sit and look with envy when Volta is released and the #waitfornavi hype train is running wild.

Reality is Freesync, if you must use it, got you locked it with the inferior GPU. So how much did Freesync save you? Nothing, it became a problem.
 

Archaea

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
11,691
You are paying 200$ extra for Vega 64 and having 2x the power consumption on top. And then you can sit and look with envy when Volta is released and the #waitfornavi hype train is running wild.

Reality is Freesync, if you must use it, got you locked it with the inferior GPU. So how much did Freesync save you? Nothing, it became a problem.
These first generation gsync monitors - in contrast - won't forever be the current tech - and so you've just paid $200-$300 extra for a fading tech there as well.

pick your poison.
 

raidflex

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
258
You are paying 200$ extra for Vega 64 and having 2x the power consumption on top. And then you can sit and look with envy when Volta is released and the #waitfornavi hype train is running wild.

Reality is Freesync, if you must use it, got you locked it with the inferior GPU. So how much did Freesync save you? Nothing, it became a problem.

These first generation gsync monitors - in contrast - won't forever be the current tech - and so you've just paid $200-$300 extra for a fading tech there as well.

pick your poison.

Either way this does not change the fact that the Vega product line is basically a flop, Gsync/Freesync has nothing to do with the performance, power, and cost of the GPU itself.
 

Shintai

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
5,678
These first generation gsync monitors - in contrast - won't forever be the current tech - and so you've just paid $200-$300 extra for a fading tech there as well.

pick your poison.

Isnt Freesync 2.0 on the way too, putting all Freesync monitors into the obsolete category?
 

Archaea

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
11,691
Freesync 1.0, if you will, will work just fine with Freesync 2.0 for the frame rate sync function which is all it does now anway. Freesync 2.0 adds LFC, and HDR techs and establishes a minimum range for freesync support. It requires certification - and will probably no longer be free because of the certification aspect --- but no, Freesync 1.0 monitors won't be obsolete when Freesync 2.0 becomes mainstream. The frame synching function - the entirety of Freesync 1.0 will still work by most accounts I've read.

I'd be less confident about the hardware device that is Gsync 1.0 being backwards compatible with Gsync 2.0 -- but then that's just a guess as I've not read anything about 2.0 yet. IF NVidia even chooses to keep supporting it going forward - because right now Freesync is out there over Gsync 5:1 on new monitors (and there's no denying that). It's even such that large panel players like LG have said they won't be making GSync - IIRC.

Now the rules might change if AMD just stops being competitive at all going forward -- in that freesync popularity might dwindle -- but probably not because it's basically free to implement, and it gives lots of life to older/slower cards - so there's no reason to stop putting it in monitors if it doesn't cost the manufacturers anything.

Best case scenario is Nvidia starts supporting Freesync too. It would cost them nothing, and make quite a few of their customers happy. Realistically - they won't though, if only because they wouldn't give AMD the nod. For practical purposes they wouldn't sell as many new monitors if people realized they didn't need 100FPS to feel smooth. So, yeah, -- not much incentive for Nvidia to adopt.
 

Dan

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 23, 2012
Messages
7,989
im just going to quitely weep in my corner trying to get a good AMD card... I would also potentionally sell/trade my 1080 for a fury.
 

pek

prairie dog
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Messages
2,538
I have a freesync monitor (Asus MG279) bought for my R9 295x2. I've discovered that it's better to run my monitor without freesync enabled (120 hz) than limit my frame rates to 30-90 hz. Haven't found an instance with any of my games that using freesync gives a better experience. With the dismal value ratio of amd's so far, will probably get a 1080 ti on black Friday.
 

Archaea

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
11,691
I have a freesync monitor (Asus MG279) bought for my R9 295x2. I've discovered that it's better to run my monitor without freesync enabled (120 hz) than limit my frame rates to 30-90 hz. Haven't found an instance with any of my games that using freesync gives a better experience. With the dismal value ratio of amd's so far, will probably get a 1080 ti on black Friday.

Those two characteristics aren't mutually exclusive.
Something doesn't make sense with your scenario. Your monitor is 144hz - when you enable freesync it won't lower the frame rate -- it'll simply increase the smoothness, eliminate screen tearing and eliminate vsync mouse lag.

Two things for you to try:

Try the AMD windmill demo to very clearly see what freesync does for smoothness, judder, and screentearing.
https://community.amd.com/thread/180553

Then do the vsync test. In Doom (2015) menus - turn on and turn off vsync - move the mouse around in both situations. On my and my friends monitors you can tell by the mouse feel when vsync is on. We did the same thing in Rise of the Tomb Raider.
 

raidflex

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
258
I actually found good combination with my 1080 since my LG 34UM95 does not support Gsync. I enable Vsync in NVIDIA control panel, lock FPS to 60 in game, disable vsync in game and set pre render frames to 1. This gives me very smooth game play with no input lag from vsync and no tearing, especially effective in games like Overwatch.

Edit: This will only work though if you can keep framerates at or above 60.
 
Last edited:

Archaea

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
11,691
I actually found good combination with my 1080 since my LG 34UM95 does not support Gsync. I enable Vsync in NVIDIA control panel, lock FPS to 60 in game, disable vsync in game and set pre render frames to 1. This gives me very smooth game play with no input lag from vsync and no tearing, especially effective in games like Overwatch.

Edit: This will only work though if you can keep framerates at or above 60.
i'll give this a shot. thanks for suggesting.
 

Archaea

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
11,691
I actually found good combination with my 1080 since my LG 34UM95 does not support Gsync. I enable Vsync in NVIDIA control panel, lock FPS to 60 in game, disable vsync in game and set pre render frames to 1. This gives me very smooth game play with no input lag from vsync and no tearing, especially effective in games like Overwatch.

Edit: This will only work though if you can keep framerates at or above 60.
Where are these options? I don't see them in the NVidia control panel?
 

noko

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 14, 2010
Messages
7,037
I just use adaptive sync which seems to do the same thing and works great for me - yes as long as you can maintain 60fps. EVGA Precision has frame limiter option in it, never used it though, so you may have to use an outside program.
 
Top