Vega prices released?!? Looks very enticing for real!

tangoseal

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 18, 2010
Messages
9,743
Pending reviews and the actual performance this looks extremely temping on my part to get two of these cards and return my 1080ti.

Again depends on performance. If performance puts these over 1080 and just under 1080ti I will get two of them in Crossfire for the price of my (1) Asus Poseidon I just bought about 5 days ago.

From wccftech

  • AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Air: $499
  • AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Air Limited Edition: $549
  • AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Liquid : $599
  • AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Liquid Limited Edition : $649 [UPDATED $649/$699]
  • AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 : Pending [UPDATED $399]

http://wccftech.com/amd-rx-vega-64-pricing-clocks-leaked-air-cooled-499-liquid-599/
 
Yeah I'd be happy with those prices and they're a lot better than earlier rumors pegged them at.
 
I want to know wtf the "improvements" to freesync are. Im rocking a freesync monitor with a 1080 FE. I will gladly make the jump if its worth it
 
According to what amd told anandtech, Vega 64 is close to a 1080.

Quote:
"Instead, what we’ve been told is to expect the Vega 64 to “trade blows” with NVIDIA’s GeForce GTX 1080."

Sounds to me like 1080 performance at 1080 prices with higher power consumption.
 
The liquid-cooled bundle actually sounds all right to me; I play on a Dell U3415w with a 390x/290x crossfire setup and like the resolution for gaming, but was definitely interested in moving to freesync. Looks like I could get a new card, games and a discount off a decent monitor at the same resolution. Better performance, less noise/heat, as well as the extra bonus of lower power draw, win win win for me!
 
According to what amd told anandtech, Vega 64 is close to a 1080.

Sounds to me like 1080 performance at 1080 prices with higher power consumption.

That is entirely acceptable to me, as I want the kernel linux driver amd is promising for vega.

I have a Fortress3 case and a AIO cooler on my 5820K, so I can happily deal with the extra TDP.
 
We have already known the performance (VEGA FE). This is going to trade blows with a 1080
 
Yes but I think the days of measuring performance by raw fps is coming to an end and that is where too many people are stuck on thinking.

We need smoothness and transitions from disk to frame buffer without hesitation. We need high min fps even if max fps isnt 5 gazillion fps.

We need frame buffer memory that is exceptionally quick at feeding the GPU data it needs. Etc...

This is where Vega shines apparently with its new cache tech. Again fps being just one meteric I no longer think can hold a gpu to the fire anymore.

Kyles blind test shows that people could discern no difference and in many ways preferred the Vega card. I may buy one try one and if I like it keep it and return my 1080ti. Depends on many factors though. It is going to take ALOT to convince me to return my 1080ti.
 
Who in their right mind would move to a 35 to 40% slower card? If it has better minimums, thats good - but we have nothing that suggests that.
 
Kyles blind test shows that people could discern no difference and in many ways preferred the Vega card. I may buy one try one and if I like it keep it and return my 1080ti. Depends on many factors though. It is going to take ALOT to convince me to return my 1080ti.

The blind test showed that a video card plus adaptive tech in one specific 100+ FPS game was subjectively good enough or better for two out of four people. For those of us who don't play the adaptive tech game it comes down to raw performance with high minimum FPS.
 
The blind test showed that a video card plus adaptive tech in one specific 100+ FPS game was subjectively good enough or better for two out of four people. For those of us who don't play the adaptive tech game it comes down to raw performance with high minimum FPS.

Yeah, it was essentially just a test comparing a VA and IPS panel.
 
According to what amd told anandtech, Vega 64 is close to a 1080.

Quote:
"Instead, what we’ve been told is to expect the Vega 64 to “trade blows” with NVIDIA’s GeForce GTX 1080."

Sounds to me like 1080 performance at 1080 prices with higher power consumption.

+1 This is just like Fury, AMD doesn't get that you can't show up to the party this late and charge the same prices as your established competition.

The 290 and 290x did well because they were on par with the 770 / 780 for less money. This made the extra heat / power usage a decent trade off. I can't see any reason to buy one of these at 1080 prices, and if prices weren't inflated by miners things would look even worse against $329 1070s and $400 1080
 
The blind test showed that a video card plus adaptive tech in one specific 100+ FPS game was subjectively good enough or better for two out of four people. For those of us who don't play the adaptive tech game it comes down to raw performance with high minimum FPS.

As always, the test was a real-world example of what you can expect from a given piece of hardware in terms of the gaming experience it provides. Unfortunately, we only got to test one game. All that we learned is that Vega is great with Doom and Vulkan, but that's only one test.

Yeah, it was essentially just a test comparing a VA and IPS panel.

I didn't think it even indicated FreeSync was better than G-Sync or vice versa. I think anyone drawing that conclusion is being a bit myopic.
 
Last edited:
+1 This is just like Fury, AMD doesn't get that you can't show up to the party this late and charge the same prices as your established competition.

They get it but there's not much they can do. With the size of the chip, adequate power components, and HBM2 this is probably the lowest they can price the cards to break even or make a tiny profit. Any lower and they'll likely sell more of them but lose money on every sale.
 
As always, the test was a real-world example of what you can expect from a TWO given pieces of hardware in terms of the gaming experience it provides. Unfortunately, we only got to test one game. All that we learned is that Vega is great with Doom and Vulkan, but that's only one test.

.

FTFY
 
+1 This is just like Fury, AMD doesn't get that you can't show up to the party this late and charge the same prices as your established competition.

The 290 and 290x did well because they were on par with the 770 / 780 for less money. This made the extra heat / power usage a decent trade off. I can't see any reason to buy one of these at 1080 prices, and if prices weren't inflated by miners things would look even worse against $329 1070s and $400 1080

290 was on par with 770? was this actually a time? AFAIK 7950 > 770

290 is almost as good as a gtx 970 when it came out, it was released as a "titan killer"

My favorite GPU made by amd so far
 
but................................ WHY?


Would you rather game on a 23" monitor with 1080ti or game on a 30-40" Freesync monitor for same price?
Gsync made a huge difference on my 1070, I'm going to not go into all the friggin issues it had and how poor nvidias driver team is, when it works it's damn awesome and I must have FreeSync/Gsync now
 
Would you rather game on a 23" monitor with 1080ti or game on a 30-40" Freesync monitor for same price?
Gsync made a huge difference on my 1070, I'm going to not go into all the friggin issues it had and how poor nvidias driver team is, when it works it's damn awesome and I must have FreeSync/Gsync now

I have a 4k Monitor with with freesync + 1080, i would love to get a card with freesync but that would match it but would I trade it for a rx 580??? Hell naw

Also freesynch on a high FPS game like overwatch or dota on 4k would probably make it unplayable with the insane input lag it can cause, better off playing with tearing on those
 
Pending reviews and the actual performance this looks extremely temping on my part to get two of these cards and return my 1080ti.

Again depends on performance. If performance puts these over 1080 and just under 1080ti I will get two of them in Crossfire for the price of my (1) Asus Poseidon I just bought about 5 days ago.

From wccftech

  • AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Air: $499
  • AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Air Limited Edition: $549
  • AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Liquid : $599
  • AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Liquid Limited Edition : $649 [UPDATED $649/$699]
  • AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 : Pending [UPDATED $399]

http://wccftech.com/amd-rx-vega-64-pricing-clocks-leaked-air-cooled-499-liquid-599/


DUMB. One 1080Ti is better. Only the Vega 64 is comparable to the 1080. 2 of those will be $1000, air cooled. More power usage, require crossfire compatibility, etc.
 
I have a 4k Monitor with with freesync + 1080, i would love to get a card with freesync but that would match it but would I trade it for a rx 580??? Hell naw

Also freesynch on a high FPS game like overwatch or dota on 4k would probably make it unplayable with the insane input lag it can cause, better off playing with tearing on those

"Insane input lag"?

Please verify.
 
I want to know wtf the "improvements" to freesync are. Im rocking a freesync monitor with a 1080 FE. I will gladly make the jump if its worth it

Minimum Frame rates apparently,
raja_koduri_and_scott_herkelman_-_radeon_rx_vega-33.png


Which if true could be pretty enticing, Its better to have a high minimum frame rate than a high maximum frame rate as long as the maximum is over 60.
 
Minimum Frame rates apparently,


Which if true could be pretty enticing, Its better to have a high minimum frame rate than a high maximum frame rate as long as the maximum is over 60.

my 1080 does 4k @ 40fps on the worst titles, which is ok for me, I'd prefer it over 1440p @ 80fps any day...
I will gladly wait and look at your review if freesync can really make those 40s seem like non-freesync 60s?
 
Minimum Frame rates apparently,
raja_koduri_and_scott_herkelman_-_radeon_rx_vega-33.png


Which if true could be pretty enticing, Its better to have a high minimum frame rate than a high maximum frame rate as long as the maximum is over 60.

Whatever you do, don't overlay the G-Sync ranges on this graph...otherwise you'll see that a 980Ti (last gen tech) keeps that same game in range the whole time.
 
Whatever you do, don't overlay the G-Sync ranges on this graph...otherwise you'll see that a 980Ti (last gen tech) keeps that same game in range the whole time.

I seriously doubt a 980ti can do minimum 53 - maximum 76 at 4K resolution. The question is, were the settings maxed out at 4K in those games mentioned on the graph above.
 
Last edited:
but................................ WHY?

Because he drank the coolaid.

Well If I can sell say 1 GTX1080TI and then buy a Vega 64 and a freesync monitor and still get gaming where I can not tell the difference from GTX1080Ti or Vega with freesync,why wouldn't I do it.

Oh by the way,frigging GTX 1080TI can still draw around the same power as a Vega is going to do.Just gave a GTX 1080Ti and overclock and checked the watts.330 avg not bad.

 
Well If I can sell say 1 GTX1080TI and then buy a Vega 64 and a freesync monitor and still get gaming where I can not tell the difference from GTX1080Ti or Vega with freesync,why wouldn't I do it.

Oh by the way,frigging GTX 1080TI can still draw around the same power as a Vega is going to do.Just gave a GTX 1080Ti and overclock and checked the watts.330 avg not bad.


This is what we've come too. Instead of shooting to always run games at your monitor refresh rate, downgrade to a slower card so you can get a monitor to cover up your bad FPS.
 
Well If I can sell say 1 GTX1080TI and then buy a Vega 64 and a freesync monitor and still get gaming where I can not tell the difference from GTX1080Ti or Vega with freesync,why wouldn't I do it.

Oh by the way,frigging GTX 1080TI can still draw around the same power as a Vega is going to do.Just gave a GTX 1080Ti and overclock and checked the watts.330 avg not bad.

Let's say that I have 7700k & 16GB DDR4 @ 3200 Mhz and all I do is play Dota & Overwatch >> I see a slick deal on a used 2600K + Mobo + Ram Combo for 1/3 the price I'd be able to sell my current hardware for.
Wouldn't it be so smart for me to get that kit and save on a month's grocery? There is no way I would ever be able to tell the difference between the two (or even an i5) when they are both paired with a decent SSD.


There is a big flaw in this logic.
 
Pending reviews and the actual performance this looks extremely temping on my part to get two of these cards and return my 1080ti.

Again depends on performance. If performance puts these over 1080 and just under 1080ti I will get two of them in Crossfire for the price of my (1) Asus Poseidon I just bought about 5 days ago.

From wccftech

  • AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Air: $499
  • AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Air Limited Edition: $549
  • AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Liquid : $599
  • AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Liquid Limited Edition : $649 [UPDATED $649/$699]
  • AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 : Pending [UPDATED $399]

http://wccftech.com/amd-rx-vega-64-pricing-clocks-leaked-air-cooled-499-liquid-599/

Zero need to run your heater in the winter! Make sure you have a nuclear reactor for a power supply.
 
Well If I can sell say 1 GTX1080TI and then buy a Vega 64 and a freesync monitor and still get gaming where I can not tell the difference from GTX1080Ti or Vega with freesync,why wouldn't I do it.

Oh by the way,frigging GTX 1080TI can still draw around the same power as a Vega is going to do.Just gave a GTX 1080Ti and overclock and checked the watts.330 avg not bad.


Except an overclocked 1080 TI will be 50% faster.
 
Well If I can sell say 1 GTX1080TI and then buy a Vega 64 and a freesync monitor and still get gaming where I can not tell the difference from GTX1080Ti or Vega with freesync,why wouldn't I do it.

Oh by the way,frigging GTX 1080TI can still draw around the same power as a Vega is going to do.Just gave a GTX 1080Ti and overclock and checked the watts.330 avg not bad.


And we have our first winner to misinterpreting the Vega/1080ti comparison article. As well as how performance/watt works.
 
Vega 56 sounds like it could be a winner at its price point. It's probably the better buy in that price range if it trades blows with a 1070. Can't wait for the reviews.
 
And we have our first winner to misinterpreting the Vega/1080ti comparison article. As well as how performance/watt works.
The 1080Ti is 35%+ gaming performance over the 1080. If Vega 64 is around the 1080 then for long term usage Vega will never catch it (well maybe in certain things it will but in most games not). FreeSync is indeed very worth while, so if someone is buying a new monitor as well I can see the allure for Vega and Freesync. If one is happy with their current non Freesych or Gsych monitor, then the 1080Ti is hard to turn down at $700 over the $699 Vega option. I still think at this time for Enthusiast gaming card - 1080Ti is best long term, viable card for the $.
 
And we have our first winner to misinterpreting the Vega/1080ti comparison article. As well as how performance/watt works.
Also I'd like to add that maxing out the voltage slider often just gives a couple extra MHz at the expense of massive heat, power draw increase and noise.
 
Back
Top