• 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.

Vega RX64, GTX 1080 or wait?

KungFuSpaghetti

KungFuSpaghetti

KungFuSpaghetti

Associate
Joined
7 Apr 2017
Posts
1,762
I know this is probably a rather large can of worms, but I've got my X58 system parts ready to build my rig and I've got a 1050ti in my server which I could use. Plan however is to put something with a bit more meat in there and I'm unsure which card to go for. Prices of the two cards in the title are similar, so which would people go for, our do I wait until next year and use the 1050ti for now?

Games I play are pube g, civ 6 and GTA5 mainly.
 
pubg and GTA both need powerful cards. a 1050ti simply isn't good enough.

I would go for a 1060 6GB for the short term or a 1070ti.

the 1080 isn't worth it as you can overclock the 1070ti to match it for cheaper. you could overclock the 1080 however gains are much smaller. best value for money is the 1070ti or 1060 6gb.
 
Thanks buddy, I think I'll rule out the 1060, purely because it's not high end enough and a lot of money for a stop gap. 1070ti sounds interesting though...

As an aside, the 1050ti does run pubg on my Gen8 microserver with everything 'very low' except for AA (low), textures (medium) and draw distance (ultra) and returns a minimum of 40+ fps in game, averaging high 50's, which isn't too bad. It looks a bit pants compared to some of the vids I watch with people running high end cards, but it's perfectly playable.
 
Unless i had a requirement for Nvidia tech (gsync or a game that runs far better with them) then i would be looking at Vega now, the 64 and especially the 64wc are crap vfm - v56 is where its at.
 
I have no affinity to either manufacturer, I've had AMD and Nvidia cards in the past and all been great, likewise Intel and AMD cpu's. Is there a specific reason why you'd pick the Vega over the Nvidia? I've looked at loads of reviews on the Vega 64 and GTX 1080 and the results seem all over the place. On pube g I've seen videos of the Vega kicking the butt of the 1080, but then seen other videos with the 1080 doing the same... it's a bit of a minefield!
 
Vega is likely going to run new games better, especially Vulkan ones. Just look at the recent titles like Wolfenstine or Battlefront 2 - both are showing good vega performance.
And thats on reference cards.
 
The 1080 is great for gta at 1080p you can run 8xmsaa and everything turned up max.

Just needs the grass turning down to high though if you wanna have 8xmsaa.

I do have reflection msaa at 2x and in the advanced sliders are not quite maxed but does as far as you can see.
 
dont hink you can go far wrong with a 1070/80 vega 56/64, all will do a decent job gaming, the only thing that would sway me is freesync/ gsync and budget
 
You can't go wrong with any of the cards listed really, all great choices. But just a note on the doomsaying about Vega being a digital supernova, it's nonsense, there have been much much worse cards from both AMD and Nvidia in the past. The V64 is about even on heat/power with an aftermarket 980ti and the AIB V64 will prob be on par or slightly worse than an AIB 1080ti, and neither of those are space heaters like some try to make Vega out to be.
 
Vega56 is not power hungry and not hot, more utter crap - 64 and 64 water seem to be though, pushed far to hard for stock.
56 and 64 can also be undervolted to produce really good efficiency, ok Pascal is also great in this regard but its not a vast difference like many rubbish a reviewer makes on it is.

You cannot go wrong on any of them, but if it were me i would be going for the newer architecture.
 
People here are comparing aftermarket 980ti to vegas and saying they're just as hot and power hungry. That might be true, but you're comparing it against a card that is 2.5 years old and totally ignoring the issue of noise. Heat and power isn't a concern for most people, it's being able to control those quietly that most people care about.
 
arby1 said:
People here are comparing aftermarket 980ti to vegas and saying they're just as hot and power hungry.
Click to expand...
I think you misunderstood, I wasn't trying to position being more energy efficient than a two year older Nvidia flagship as a selling point, I was pointing out that everyone was fine with that level of power draw and heat at the time (and are now with the 1080ti), it's only when it has an AMD logo on that it suddenly becomes the end of the world.
 
@OP

VEGA is defo inefficient compared to Pascal. Besides gaming I like to also do f@h and bionic on GPU, both cases it shows it's inefficiency.

My loop gets more of a hit from the V64 than GTX 1080. I have 2x MagiCool G2 Slim 360mm rads.

What VEGA has going for it is that it is newer architecture. So where as Pascal has probably been "maxed" in context of optimisations on driver side, VEGA may improve. Note I said may, I felt Fiji really didn't get much of "AMD FineWine".

Ref blower was not great experience for me. So when a purchaser may equate adding Morpheus 2/water cooling, etc I can see the appeal of nVidia offering. Hopefully AIB VEGA cards don't see nutty pricing.

I also do believe FreeSync has more monitor range, besides no premium vs G-Sync. I also think the AMD driver panel is better than nVidia.

So for few reasons I prefer VEGA to GTX 1080 I had.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom