• 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 **

On or off the hype train?

  • (off) Train has derailed

    Votes: 207 39.2%

  • (on) Overcrowding, standing room only

    Votes: 100 18.9%

  • (never ever got on) Chinese escalator

    Votes: 221 41.9%
  • Total voters
    528
Status
Not open for further replies.
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Do some of you actually overclock cards - I think I ended up getting like a 10% increase in framerates with my GTX1080 FE,and it needed me to ramp up the fan,so in the end I just left it on its default profile!! :p
Click to expand...
Yes because 1290 MHz is a stupid number. 1300 MHz sounds much better, especially when it's still undervolted. :p
 
Was this posted already?

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/6n7etd/it_took_me_all_of_5_minutes_to_get_this_with_my/

XJE1VnT.jpg



http://i.imgur.com/XJE1VnT.jpg
 
Rroff said:
Pascal's boost already gets you pretty close to the max the individual card can do (plus Pascal is already getting pretty aggressive clocks out of the 16nm process). Some of my old cards 30% overclock was easy, 40% possible with the balls to turn up the voltage beyond normal levels.
Click to expand...

Yeah,it was kind of cool to run a 2GHZ+ GPU for benchmarking but for what I am running its plenty fast at stock clockspeeds.
 
"1682/1100. GG EZ. Literally not even doing anything other than adjusting sliders in wattman. Temps peaked at 77C with the fan set to a max of 3500. Pretty loud but it's a blower so I don't care.
This graphics score is ~17% below my 1962mhz 1080Ti.. which has a massive over-engineered cooler. Not too shabby"

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/21029282
 
Mtom said:
"1682/1100. GG EZ. Literally not even doing anything other than adjusting sliders in wattman. Temps peaked at 77C with the fan set to a max of 3500. Pretty loud but it's a blower so I don't care.
This graphics score is ~17% below my 1962mhz 1080Ti.. which has a massive over-engineered cooler. Not too shabby"

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/21029282
Click to expand...


24k graphics score is still just overclocked 1080 territory. Overclocked 1080ti's are in the 31-32k zone so it is still 30% off a 1080ti.

He is conveniently using the more flattering "percentage slower" metric as well.

I mean it is a more promising report than some others, but it isn't that great and still means RX Vega has got to find 30% more performance from somewhere to compete at the real top end.
 
Jono8 said:
24k graphics score is still just overclocked 1080 territory. Overclocked 1080ti's are in the 31-32k zone so it is still 30% off a 1080ti.

He is conveniently using the more flattering "percentage slower" metric as well.

I mean it is a more promising report than some others, but it isn't that great and still means RX Vega has got to find 30% more performance from somewhere to compete at the real top end.
Click to expand...
Would be interesting seeing how well the Pascal cards would perform without any driver optimizations. :cool:
 
Jono8 said:
24k graphics score is still just overclocked 1080 territory. Overclocked 1080ti's are in the 31-32k zone so it is still 30% off a 1080ti.

He is conveniently using the more flattering "percentage slower" metric as well.

I mean it is a more promising report than some others, but it isn't that great and still means RX Vega has got to find 30% more performance from somewhere to compete at the real top end.
Click to expand...

The number 1 score for a GTX1080 on the 3DMark website with a Ryzen 7 1800X(which the person on Reddit is using) is around 24K too.
 
Jono8 said:
24k graphics score is still just overclocked 1080 territory. Overclocked 1080ti's are in the 31-32k zone so it is still 30% off a 1080ti.

He is conveniently using the more flattering "percentage slower" metric as well.

I mean it is a more promising report than some others, but it isn't that great and still means RX Vega has got to find 30% more performance from somewhere to compete at the real top end.
Click to expand...

Agree with you we did say this quite a few weeks back. I also said few weeks back, 4096 Vega Fe is hitting the same as Cf Rx470 4096 in firestrike. Which looks about right to me.
https://www.eteknix.com/amd-rx-470-crossfire-graphics-card-review/11/
 
nashathedog said:
Definitely worth waiting.

We don't know where big Vega will sit but good money's on it being the better option if you're considering a Freesync monitor too. Even if it is a few frames behind the ti.
Click to expand...

Another week passes by
Can somebody put a date on that please?

It should happen that at SIGGRAPH all AMD does is provide some vague... available between Q3-Q4.. kind of joke with a t-shirt ofc
 
Angilion said:
Really short summary:

Nobody can tell you if any of the Vega RX cards will be comparable to a 1080Ti because nobody knows. It's probably worth waiting because information should be available late July or very early August.

Short summary:

AMD released the Vega Frontier Edition, which is meant for low-level development and research work. It's not pro kit because it doesn't have the certified drivers that requires, but it's not home kit either. Bit of a niche market, but it is a real market. It has a gaming mode and AMD lightly mentioned it mainly in the context of someone who wants 1 machine to both do game development on and game on.

People bought them and reviewed them for gaming. They were mediocre - between a 1070 and a 1080 but using far more power and generating far more heat, so much noisier and with little or no scope for overclocking. Also, they're over £1000.

AMD have mostly ignored that, but have replied saying (truthfully) that Vega FE isn't really meant for gaming and a different version - Vega RX - will be released soon that is meant for gaming.

There is a lot of speculation about how much difference will exist between Vega FE and Vega RX. A lot of speculation...and almost no information. The GPU will be the same, but it is possible that the FE drivers don't efficiently use it for gaming. Maybe RX will be far better for gaming than FE. Maybe not. Maybe it will be significantly cheaper than nVidia cards with similar performance. Maybe not. Maybe it will use much less power than FE. Maybe not.
Click to expand...

Great summary ..
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom