Radeon RX Vega 64 vs. GeForce RTX 2080, Adrenalin 2019 Edition Driver Update Benchmark Test

TaKeN · 20 Jan 2019 at 18:55

Ian Evey said:
I just changed the setting in nvcp and it’s now always set to 0-255.

But why isn't it set to full by Default? :confused:

Kaapstad · 20 Jan 2019 at 19:08

TaKeN said:
But why isn't it set to full by Default?

Because of compatibility with older hardware.

Good news is it only takes a couple of clicks to change.

4K8KW10 · 20 Jan 2019 at 19:13

Kaapstad said:
Because of compatibility with older hardware.

Good news is it only takes a couple of clicks to change.

Oh, the drivers could be intelligent enough to alone detect the hardware... Hardware clicks are for the enthusiasts and all the ones who know. What about the ones who don't know? Should they pay the ultimate price?

james.miller · 20 Jan 2019 at 19:14

If it was because of compatibility then the cards would default to full range since that's what pc monitors default to. There is no reason to use rgb limited on a monitor so who knows why Nvidia cards do this but it's not for any decent reason. Additionally, this can get reset when upgrading drivers and even sometimes just rebooting.

Really, the answer is use dvi or display port. Doesn't happen then.

Ultimate price 4k8kw10? Bit dramatic

faceman123 · 20 Jan 2019 at 19:27

Brazo said:
To introduce a bottleneck in the same way that ultra presets weren’t always used for graphics to increase the frame rates.

This is of course the problem with end user benchmarks they either don’t know what they are doing or are deliberately trying to skew them one way or another. Meaningless Guff.

The Vega 64 does very well so much so that I’m very tempted to get the Asus one and punt on my 56, but professional benchmarks show it some way off a 2070 let alone a 2080.

Please don't buy the Asus I'm in my second RMA now getting exchanged for a nitro

Kaapstad · 20 Jan 2019 at 19:38

4K8KW10 said:
Oh, the drivers could be intelligent enough to alone detect the hardware... Hardware clicks are for the enthusiasts and all the ones who know. What about the ones who don't know? Should they pay the ultimate price?

So if I have both an old TV and a new monitor attached then what?

Kaapstad · 20 Jan 2019 at 19:40

james.miller said:
If it was because of compatibility then the cards would default to full range since that's what pc monitors default to. There is no reason to use rgb limited on a monitor so who knows why Nvidia cards do this but it's not for any decent reason. Additionally, this can get reset when upgrading drivers and even sometimes just rebooting.

Really, the answer is use dvi or display port. Doesn't happen then.

Ultimate price 4k8kw10? Bit dramatic

You should see all the hoops you have to jump through to use Wattman with 4 GPUs. :eek:

Brazo · 20 Jan 2019 at 20:03

faceman123 said:
Please don't buy the Asus I'm in my second RMA now getting exchanged for a nitro

It’s the looks that are tempting me! It is a great cooler, I’ve had it before on a 1080. I was going to ring ocuk in the morning to get pricing as they have 4 types of Asus vega 64, 2 x oc versions plus b grade versions of both. The pricing is all over the place so I was going to see what they can do... But will check reviews first.

crinkleshoes · 20 Jan 2019 at 20:08

Shouldn’t AMD flagship be compared to Nvidia flagship?

Test is not appropriate to show how far out of the game AMD really are.

Price to price is wrong comparison, Nvidia are only overcharging because AMD are not competitive.

4K8KW10 · 20 Jan 2019 at 20:15

Kaapstad said:
So if I have both an old TV and a new monitor attached then what?

You see the difference on both.
I can't remember what 16-235 RGB means... Does it mean both - limited 8-bit and limited 6-bit colours? And limited 10-bit colours?
How many colours are 16-235 RGB?

shankly1985 · 20 Jan 2019 at 20:27

Kaapstad said:
So if I have both an old TV and a new monitor attached then what?

If its like AMD drivers, I can set each monitor to output there own RGB, can you do that on Nvidia?
AMD drivers are quite something, it amazing how far they have come.

942341296f8dace0ab7e488194e57e11ab73d135a6d4e9e88175186099e40191d7cbbc59.jpg

shankly1985 · 20 Jan 2019 at 20:33

4K8KW10 said:
You see the difference on both.
I can't remember what 16-235 RGB means... Does it mean both - limited 8-bit and limited 6-bit colours? And limited 10-bit colours?
How many colours are 16-235 RGB?

Its not about Colour depth. My two monitors always remain 8bit

RGB limited vs Full is just the range at what point white is white and black is black.

That is why the screen always looks washed out when viewing limited RGB.

CuriousTomCat · 20 Jan 2019 at 20:43

crinkleshoes said:
Shouldn’t AMD flagship be compared to Nvidia flagship?

Test is not appropriate to show how far out of the game AMD really are.

Price to price is wrong comparison, Nvidia are only overcharging because AMD are not competitive.

Yes great idea. Reviewers should compare AMD cards with the most expensive Nvidia card so we can see how underwhelming they are. The same with car reviews - Ford, Volvo, Citroen should be compared with a Bugatti Veyron so we can see how much they underperform and how rubbish they are.

The mid range is the most lucrative because that's all that most people can afford. When I'm buying a new GPU, I like to see the best AMD and Nvidia cards I can buy WITH MY MODEST BUDGET. I dont want to see Nvidia's best card thrown into the review because it's way out of my price range and it's pointless in a review of lower priced AMD cards.

4K8KW10 · 20 Jan 2019 at 20:47

shankly1985 said:
Its not about Colour depth. My two monitors always remain 8bit

RGB limited vs Full is just the range at what point white is white and black is black.

That is why the screen always looks washed out when viewing limited RGB.

I think limited range is less colours - 16-235 RGB or 0-255 RGB is about missing areas from the colours spectrum.
If your red levels are from 0 to 255 but you artificially limit the red to 16 to 235. The same with the blue and green components.

I see less colours on my monitor (in the past, not now, I have no GeForce anymore) when applied limited RGB.

Also, try switching to YCbCr, it is better than your current settings above.

Minstadave · 20 Jan 2019 at 20:48

crinkleshoes said:
Shouldn’t AMD flagship be compared to Nvidia flagship?

Test is not appropriate to show how far out of the game AMD really are.

Price to price is wrong comparison, Nvidia are only overcharging because AMD are not competitive.

Flagship Vs flagship means nothing. Comparisons at the same price point are far more sensible. People want to know what the best card is for their budget, not who has the best halo product they can't afford.

crinkleshoes · 20 Jan 2019 at 20:56

But Nvidia have only elevated their pricing because their mid range matches AMD flagship

shankly1985 · 20 Jan 2019 at 20:57

4K8KW10 said:
I think limited range is less colours - 16-235 RGB or 0-255 RGB is about missing areas from the colours spectrum.
If your red levels are from 0 to 255 but you artificially limit the red to 16 to 235. The same with the blue and green components.

I see less colours on my monitor (in the past, not now, I have no GeForce anymore) when applied limited RGB.

Also, try switching to YCbCr, it is better than your current settings above.

Its not about the colours Red, Green, Blue its the range in what they can display.
The reason colours look worst on limited, is because of the washed out look. All Full RGB does is show Black is Black and White is white.

Full

Limited

4K8KW10 · 20 Jan 2019 at 20:58

shankly1985 said:
Its not about the colours Red, Green, Blue its the range in what they can display.
The reason colours look worst on limited, is because of the washed out look. All Full RGB does is show Black is Black and White is white.

Full

Limited

The top image has brighter colours, the bottom one the colours are like muted.
It is like the difference between IPS and TN panel.

shankly1985 · 20 Jan 2019 at 21:10

4K8KW10 said:
The top image has brighter colours, the bottom one the colours are like muted.
It is like the difference between IPS and TN panel.

Mate Listen!
The colours look better on the top because the full range is displayed from Black to White - The image isn't washed out! So now the colours show correctly. This has nothing to do with Red, Green or Blue!
The Limited black range and white range effects the rest of the image and results in colours looking worst.

And to answer why I shouldn't use YCbCr
Windows by default uses the Full RGB range, its then sent to the GPU and the GPU will display what ever its set to do. So because Windows is already RGB full, you then select YCbCr this can create unwanted colour banding from the conversion.

On Windows you best selecting the native RGB Full that is why its called FULL standard PC RANGE! for a reason.

4K8KW10 · 20 Jan 2019 at 23:08

shankly1985 said:
Mate Listen!
The colours look better on the top because the full range is displayed from Black to White - The image isn't washed out! So now the colours show correctly. This has nothing to do with Red, Green or Blue!
The Limited black range and white range effects the rest of the image and results in colours looking worst.

And to answer why I shouldn't use YCbCr
Windows by default uses the Full RGB range, its then sent to the GPU and the GPU will display what ever its set to do. So because Windows is already RGB full, you then select YCbCr this can create unwanted colour banding from the conversion.

On Windows you best selecting the native RGB Full that is why its called FULL standard PC RANGE! for a reason.

Wrong, wrong and wrong.
I always avoid this "FULL standard PC RANGE!" and for a reason

And reason is that it LOOKS worse.

Have you ever seen an RGB colour selector:

What happens if you delete the values of each component from 0 to 15 and from 236 to 255?
You lose colours