• 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.
Gerard said:

https://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/07/26/blind_test_rx_vega_freesync_vs_gtx_1080_ti_gsync

Lot of varying opinions to say the least.
Click to expand...

Been following Vega for a while, and hopefully will pick one up, if the performance is there. I have a freesync 1440p monitor.

Vulcan was the catch for me there, from what little I do know Vulcan prefers AMD. However it wouldn't have been exciting if this was Vega vs 1080. But against a 1080ti? Impressive. Even though this is subjective.
 
melmac said:
While I do want to see the numbers myself, how it feels is important. I mean isn't that why gamers pay the big money to get a system that feels good while gaming. Isn't that why freesync and gsync have taken off because games "feel" better.
Click to expand...

How it feels is important, when playing yourself.

How it feels to others, means nothing. Plenty of people out there who will insist 30fps "feels" fine and there is no different between it and 60fps. Video is mean meaningless fluff for clicks.
 
prjwebb said:
It was nearly $600 between the monitors. If you read the article he said that AMD didn't mention the RRP of RX Vega so they just went with that $300 as a baseline.
Click to expand...
So Vega is $300 more than 1080ti...

AMD need to be careful with the message they are sending out!
 
D.P. said:
So Vega is $300 more than 1080ti...

AMD need to be careful with the message they are sending out!
Click to expand...

Not quite, believe in the video he said they don't know the price of Vega. So made the $300 up as a baseline. Doubt Vega would be $300 more than a Ti, but if people aren't willing to pay $300 more, they won't pay anything above that...

But yes... it's a bit sloppy.
 
Gerard said:

https://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/07/26/blind_test_rx_vega_freesync_vs_gtx_1080_ti_gsync

Lot of varying opinions to say the least.
Click to expand...

It's just more of the same, A Kop out. I just watched the video and Kyle wasn't even allowed to install the Vega card or the drivers himself, they had an AMD rep to do it and Kyle said the "AMD Rep installed the card and drivers so we know there was no funny business going on" which seems kinda backwards to me, This was as pointless as the shows in the "" World Tour...
 
Armadillo said:
How it feels is important, when playing yourself.

How it feels to others, means nothing. Plenty of people out there who will insist 30fps "feels" fine and there is no different between it and 60fps. Video is mean meaningless fluff for clicks.
Click to expand...

In isolation while at home yes, but, when comparing two systems side by side by 10 people in the industry and 6 people notice no difference and 3 people think the cheaper option is better. That's different. How the game feels is how AMD got slammed years ago. AMD cards getting bigger numbers but "feeling" much worse than Nvidia Systems, then PCPer did the article with Fcat figures. How the game feels became the most important thing and this led to the development of Gsync and freesync.

So the video interested me for that reason.
 
prjwebb said:
It was nearly $600 between the monitors. If you read the article he said that AMD didn't mention the RRP of RX Vega so they just went with that $300 as a baseline.
Click to expand...

It was a 450$ difference in between the monitors used in Hungary and at PDXLAN, the FS was 499 the GS was 949 (well what they were basing their pricing off of anyways), they showed the prices at PDXLAN

https://youtu.be/l35VxvWyCyE?t=163
 
nashathedog said:
It's just more of the same, A Kop out. I just watched the video and Kyle wasn't even allowed to install the Vega card or the drivers himself, they had an AMD rep to do it and Kyle said the "AMD Rep installed the card and drivers so we know there was no funny business going on" which seems kinda backwards to me, This was as pointless as the shows in the "" World Tour...
Click to expand...

He said there was no funny business because he saw the rep doing it more than anything else.
 
Gerard said:

https://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/07/26/blind_test_rx_vega_freesync_vs_gtx_1080_ti_gsync

Lot of varying opinions to say the least.
Click to expand...

There's a dude who said this in the comments :

"So, according to Toms Hardware, a regular 1080 will give you minimum FPS of around 120 at 1440p. This renders this whole experiment utterly useless as a performance comparison between the two cards. Both cards will easily reach the 100fps/hz level but that does mean anything beyond this specific setup. What about 4k/60? What about more demanding games? If you made a 2013 Tomb Raider comparison in 1080p/60 locked between the RX 470 and a 1080 Ti you'd probably also find that the experience is exactly the same. Doesn't change that one of the cards is a whole heck of a lot faster than the other. If anything, this is an experiment evaluating FreeSync vs G-Sync, not the actual GPUs."

I can't say I really disagree with him.
 
WeSbO said:
There's a dude who said this in the comments :

"So, according to Toms Hardware, a regular 1080 will give you minimum FPS of around 120 at 1440p. This renders this whole experiment utterly useless as a performance comparison between the two cards. Both cards will easily reach the 100fps/hz level but that does mean anything beyond this specific setup. What about 4k/60? What about more demanding games? If you made a 2013 Tomb Raider comparison in 1080p/60 locked between the RX 470 and a 1080 Ti you'd probably also find that the experience is exactly the same. Doesn't change that one of the cards is a whole heck of a lot faster than the other. If anything, this is an experiment evaluating FreeSync vs G-Sync, not the actual GPUs."

I can't say I really disagree with him.
Click to expand...

Wait,wut the games were run at qHD?? Both the monitors used have a 3440x1440 resolution.

The FreeSync monitor is a ASUS MX34V with a 151HZ upper limit and the GSync monitor used was the ASUS PG348 has a 100HZ upper limit.

Edit!!

According to TH,not even a GTX1080TI can break 100FPS at 4K:

https://img.purch.com/r/600x450/aHR...vNjU4MDM2L29yaWdpbmFsL2Rvb20tNGstZnBzLnBuZw==
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom