-
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.
- Status
If opinions were in favor of system 1 people here would have declared Vega doa but since second one won Vega will live for one more day
From what they are saying it sounds like there was some difference between the panels rather than the GPU/ecosystem that people were picking up on. From the sound of it one of the panels was either not 100% properly or some of the tricks G-Sync uses to try and boost pixel response didn't work for them or something.
You seriously cannot see it?
No i cannot "see it", if they were scripted they wouldn't have varied so much. People just might be that comfortable speaking on camera, not like they're used to be brought to someones house to try a card out then be interviewed about it.
Soldato
Completely scripted, read from the AMD autocue.
They are both 100Hz panels - the 151 is khz for the horizontal scan.
However there is a telling difference and explains why people are commenting how they are - one is a response time boosted VA panel the other a slower IPS.............. surprise people notice a difference in motion clarity and perceived "smoothness" - which completely invalidates the whole video as far as any real comparison between GPUs goes.
Last edited:
I thought Vega was supposed to be a 4k card...4k this 4k that. So why are they dumbing down the demos to ultra wide 1440? Why not show its performance with the goal posts set at 60 fps in 4k? It is only recently that they started pulling the Freesync "experience" BS.
I would love to see the same test done, only with a Fury vs a Vega. See if their "it feels the same, why pay more?" line still stands up when it is their own products.
I would love to see the same test done, only with a Fury vs a Vega. See if their "it feels the same, why pay more?" line still stands up when it is their own products.
Dunno but we still don;t know what version of vega is being shown, maybe the top end 1 is 4k capable, not so much the mid and low i wouldn't have thought.
Soldato
When the system goes on sale July 27th! Does that mean we will get some Vega news tomorrow then?
To be honest the whole Freesync is cheaper than Gysnc debate is mute as I can find comparable monitors and the difference is more like £60-£70. Hardly a factor.
Soldato
I know it's not directly relevant to Vega in particular, but being that Freesync starts at around £110 (on OcUK) and G-Sync starts at around £380 for the bare minimum of both, I would say that it's absolutely not moot for people who have a budget in mind.
Quite simply, at 4K the 1080ti would take a decent lead and people would then notice a difference.
AMD is using smoke and mirrors to hide the actual performance difference.
Soldato
Never thought I'd say it after the over hyped flop that was FuryX....but it seems we have a card that might be an even bigger over hyped flop...way to roll AMD, standard as usual lmao.
I kid of course, but man they just can't get these things right, so clueless and void of any marketing know how. I see Raja and the clown crew are not mentioning 4k gaming for under $1k anymore.
I kid of course, but man they just can't get these things right, so clueless and void of any marketing know how. I see Raja and the clown crew are not mentioning 4k gaming for under $1k anymore.
Permabanned
Go on then. From what I've seen no G-sync monitor is only 60 or 70 quid more, If it is I'd like to know which and where as the way things are going Vega's a bust.
Soldato
Exactly.
- Status