Associate
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2017
- Posts
- 1,029
its like an IPC comparison.. open to interpretation i would say
btw is there any significant difference in memory bandwidth in above test?
-
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
its like an IPC comparison.. open to interpretation i would say
btw is there any significant difference in memory bandwidth in above test?
interesting perspective - GTX1080 Ti and Vega FE at same clocks..
http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/13254853/fs/13117453
RX Vega should be better than that - bottomline, vega is a better architecture, AMD should switch to TSMC for large chips
How do you come to that conclusion? It is likely the good architecture in Pascal that allows for such high clocks....
Also, it still scores 2000 more in the graphics score (cpu difference makes the overall score look closer there)
What are you talking about.
It's a known fact that pascal had $50 on top of Maxwell.
980Ti - $649.99 1080Ti - $699.99
Same across the range.
He said Kepler to Maxwell. The 670 and 770 were both $399, then the 970 was $329, but then the 1070 went back up to $379.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 23,652
- Location
- London
Short answer yes.
Long answer, I anticipate they will run hotter and louder than AIB cards. Limiting boost speeds and reducing overclocking margins if that's your thing.
My personal preference is spend the extra £50 for an AIB.
Silly comparison and other than gimping a 1080Ti, what is it supposed to show?interesting perspective - GTX1080 Ti and Vega FE at same clocks..
http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/13254853/fs/13117453
RX Vega should be better than that - bottomline, vega is a better architecture, AMD should switch to TSMC for large chips
just getting impatient after looking at box pics
ASUS
Gigabyte
MSI
which one to choose??
Even sapphire has uploaded pics now
http://www.sapphiretech.com/catapage_pd.asp?cataid=338&lang=eng
They're all 100% bone-stock reference cards. It doesn't matter at this point. They're all 1:1, 100% identical. There is no difference what so ever. Just wait for AIB / Aftermarket board partner cards to see "differences between vendors".
Graphics Score
+ 8.7 % 26 135 24 054
Graphics Test 1
+ 10.7 % 126.59 fps 114.33 fps
Graphics Test 2
+ 7.0 % 103.08 fps 96.37 fps
that even at Vega clock speed 1080ti is around 8% faster
It just seems a daft thing to do. Curiosity sake, sure but for real world testing, sillyGraphics Score
+ 8.7 % 26 135 24 054
Graphics Test 1
+ 10.7 % 126.59 fps 114.33 fps
Graphics Test 2
+ 7.0 % 103.08 fps 96.37 fps
that even at Vega clock speed 1080ti is faster
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 12,853
There is headroom for AIBs to clock the air cooled 64 higher as the liquid cooled model has higher clocks. Put a decent cooler on the 64 and we should see a decent improvement for less of the cost of the liquid cooled model, that's where things will get interesting
There is a difference between the water and air cooled Vega 64 and that is 70c and 90c temperature cap before throttling respectively. Not sure why they put 70c on the Water but probs just a safety feature.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 12,853
I mean AIB coolers
IPC is meaningless if you don't take into account clock speed.
The only metric that matters is instructions per second, IPS.
Artificially limiting clock speed is like taking Buggati Veyron and testing it at 50MPH against a Ford Fiesta and claiming both cars are just as fast as each other. It is completely meaningless.
Maxwell was $70 cheaper than Kepler, so.Pascal is still $20 cheaper than Kepler
Maxwell is not a useful comparison, priced were lower because the process node was very mature and much cheaper being a second iteration on 28nm.16nm chips cost nearly twice as much to produce as well.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,222
It's only cheaper if you don't take the FE card as the real RRP. Nvidia marketing at its finest. Boost the price but claim a lower RRP. With the 1070 almost all decent coolers were priced above the FE card which is the stock cooler. Genius again to raise prices on the sly.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Dec 2009
- Posts
- 18,260
- Location
- RG8 9
These have been getting slagged off for months, will continue to do after launch, then in a few months everyone will calm down and agree they are actually pretty good, in fact far better value than Nvidia and will also improve over the next couple of years with new drivers so again are a solid choice.
Same as it always have been with AMD in here.
Same as it always have been with AMD in here.
Been answered a few times in this thread. A PSU is most efficient somewhere around 50% load. If you push your PSU to its max rated output it will get *very* hot and you will reduce its lifespan.
You always want to buy a PSU rated at least 1.5x your max power draw. 850W minimum for Vega 64, 1000W recommended.
- Status