yeah i know what you mean. I did this on my very first gaming rig i built in my teens, I cannot for the life of me remember exactly which card it was the 5600gt is shouting out at me. it was a cut down chip but they tried to compensate with 256mb VRAM im fairly certain that was the card i swapped for a 9600pro which was far superior
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Poll: ** The AMD VEGA Thread **
- Thread starter TNA
- Start date
- Status
yeah i know what you mean. I did this on my very first gaming rig i built in my teens, I cannot for the life of me remember exactly which card it was the 5600gt is shouting out at me. it was a cut down chip but they tried to compensate with 256mb VRAM im fairly certain that was the card i swapped for a 9600pro which was far superior
Permabanned
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 9,221
- Location
- Knowhere
650W here. No chance of getting the full, water-cooled Vega
If everybody in the UK bought Vega, I think we'd crash the national grid
I can't see a 650 watt psu not being enough for a PC with a single Vega, that'd be a travesty, for me at least. I recently replaced my 850 watt psu with a 650 watt model as I'm no longer interested in dual card options.
well amd do recommend a 750w pay for vega, but simply put.
would you run overclocked gtx 1080 sli on a 550w psu? because currently it appears vega is drawing 40w+ more than that
Ive broke just over 300 watt on my 1080ti FE so i don't understand why you would think that.
You have to remember that a PSU is most efficient when running at 50% load. And also that you really don't want to get near 100% load, which will stress the PSU to the max, create more heat and reduce longevity.
If Vega alone will be drawing 400W+ then really an 850W PSU or higher (depending on other components) is recommended. AMD are stating 750W for Vega so that should tell us something... lesser PSUs need not apply.
Yep i've seen the newer tweets since so its average.
About the 1080ti power consumption, i talked about OC'd card. Not much site measures the OC power consumption, they usually do the stock clock power measurement, then go OC it, but only post the performance numbers. Tomshardware measured a max OC 1080Ti power consumption, it was around 340W sustained with 400W spikes:
Yep i've seen the newer tweets since so its average.
About the 1080ti power consumption, i talked about OC'd card. Not much site measures the OC power consumption, they usually do the stock clock power measurement, then go OC it, but only post the performance numbers. Tomshardware measured a max OC 1080Ti power consumption, it was around 340W sustained with 400W spikes:
to be fair anyone with half a clue about overclocking would achieve much better results than that.
currently on my titan Xp I'm running a 1.01mv at 2044mhz and +400 on the memory, so I'm actually undervolted and drawing less than the factory 250w. cranking up the power limit doesn't actually help clocks as much as people think with pascal.
anyway, isn't it better to compare vega to the GTX 1080? since that's it's competitor, and the 1080ti is significantly faster.
No it was an average apparently, and it was consuming more because that was without the pci-e reading. And of course a 120 AIO can cool this well under 60°, you are only taking into account wattage, and not surface area that is actively cooled, that HBM2 could be chewing almost as many watts as the die, but all those watts can still be efficiently cooled because they are spread out.
Care to link the RX Vega reviews that shows it is 1080 performance?
Permabanned
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 9,221
- Location
- Knowhere
That's not good news, To me that seems to be a step backwards. If memory serves both Fiji and Hawaii/Grenada had a 600 watt psu recomendation. One of the big draws for Pascal was the lower power requirements which is why we see the 1080 and lower with a max of an 8 pin power connection in reference form. I suppose the difference is down to AMD not having the money to develop all the potential improvements to their fullest.
I replaced a Corsair TX850 with an EVGA 650watt G2 recently because I wanted to go modular. I didn't even consider Vega's power requirement going up, I presumed that like Pascal it'd go down if anything.
It sounds like I'll have to put my 850 watt back in or get another new one, Actually EVGA released a new model a couple of months ago, The G3, so I might grab one of those after Vega.
The rest of my rig should be able to run off a decent 350/400watt PSU so the additional 350watt that i have should be enough for a vega card. I bloody hope so anyway. I ran xfire 6850's on a basic OCZ PSU for a good while, mixed with an fx8120
A big ask on the PSU and whilst it wouldn't bother me, I can see why it would some. Looking like water or the AIO is a must to be able to remove the heat from the core but after using the Fury X with an AIO, they are decent coolers and did a sterling job. Not sure why AMD are struggling with power though and a bit worrying but 1080 performance and above at 1080 prices or below will see them sell.
I would imagine they are struggling on power due to pushing the card as much as possible, to make it as fast as possible.
This will at least give it a good chance to beat the 1080 in the initial reviews.
Of course I could be wrong and AMD could just be completely incompetent, but I doubt that.
This will at least give it a good chance to beat the 1080 in the initial reviews.
Of course I could be wrong and AMD could just be completely incompetent, but I doubt that.
Apparently a member of German site 3DCenter got his Vega FE to run at 1600MHz on 1.075V from 1.2V
https://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=11428407#post11428407
https://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=11428407#post11428407
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 31,192
Yup, just like the 580 (that consumes as much power as a 1080 at half the speed). Bad times for AMD, hope they can turn it around at some point (and knock that **** fab GloFo on the head, they're doing AMD no favours with their crappy implementations with complex chips!! CPU-wise seem fine, but they're vastly simpler to produce)
Permabanned
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 9,221
- Location
- Knowhere
The equivalent 1070 is £469 today but they've taken a bit of an increase due to miners so calling it £420 is reasonable, I've considered buying a 1070 several times in the last year and don't recall them going under 400, The odd fan blower model might of though, Even if you call it £400 it still means the 970's replacement has increased by £140 or more. On release we got a Founders tax for what was meant to be a superior blower model with promises of aftermarket models being available for cheaper. The only preorder models I recall seeing as cheaper are the EVGA ACX card which did not turn up until long after release and proved to be defective, Plus pricing shot up and then only really dropped back once the ICX was on route and they wanted to get rid of the ACX stock. Hold on this is a Vega thread? To sum up Nvidia suck for what they pulled with Pascal and it's the sort of suckage that'll put Dyson to shame.
- Status