Yeah the OC'd AIB 56's (with 8+8pins) should be pretty close to the 64 air if Fury pro vs Fury X, 470(570) vs 480(580) is anything to go by.
-
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
Yeah the OC'd AIB 56's (with 8+8pins) should be pretty close to the 64 air if Fury pro vs Fury X, 470(570) vs 480(580) is anything to go by.
This is BS, the Pascal cards are very strong in DX12 and support more DX12 features than Polaris.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,222
I am holding out for the one after Navi actually
Not sure what I am holding out for to be honest. Right now want something that supports Freesync and is cheap and ideally that does not sound like a jet engine. Once the games I want to play start coming out next year, I will decide what I want then.
Yea things were easier back in the day when you knew performance at your price range would be moving forward at a decent rate every year. Now it's performance goes up but only if you want to spend a lot more than you did a few years back. The gpu market is turning into madness.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,222
On paper but not in reality.
But people keep giving the money over, one day people will vote with their wallets and stop buying - or at least stop buying as often as they did.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,218
- Location
- Billericay, UK
Isn’t Navi just an optimised version of Vega built on a smaller process? As I under it the Vega design is meant to be the basis for the next few generations of chips from AMD.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,222
Navi is supposedly smaller Gpu's of upto 4 working as one to give greater performance. A little like Threadripper using infinity fabric to make join i think 4 cpu's together which work as one.
Its a shame they don't have the right kind of DX12 support, Polaris is far more efficient with higher core count CPU's than Pascal.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,222
I am seriously looking at a new build soon but the pricing is really putting me off. I will probably jump this one last time but if things keep going as they are i doubt i will be building another after this one if pricing keeps going the way it is.
A good 1070 is only about 15% slower than a reference 1080. The Vega 64 is about 1080 performance. The Vega 56 is about 20% slower than the Vega 64 based on the clock speeds and core count. .
So no, I expect the 1070 and a Vega 56 to be very close.
Consider waiting for 7nm Ryzen. That is what I will be doing. By then the architecture will be more mature. Around that time Navi will come out also. If AMD do not mess it up I plan on building a full AMD system around 2019.
They do not need to be the best, they just need to be competitive and shake things up by improving price for performance. Which what Ryzen did and Vega seemingly does not IMO
More BS form you. In actual real-world bench-marking they perform exceptionally well in DX12. The difference is they are also very strong in DX111 so there isn't a large difference, which is exactly what you expect forma well designed architecture. Jut because Pasal cards don't bottleneck in DX11 doesn't mean they lack DX12 performance, your logic is entirely backwards.
Looks like the freesync monitor "offer" isn't that good either.
Looks like AMD is bundling Samsung's c34f791 with their Vega purchases. The issue is, that monitor Freesync essentially does not work.
It has 2 modes: 1) 80-100 Freesync range called standard engine 2) 48-100 Freeysnc range called Ultimate engine
The issue is, the Ultimate engine has a ton of flickering, this is not driver related, this is the monitor itself. Freesync flickers like a strobe light disco party in all cutsceenes and menus. In game it flickers the most around 48-52 range. ( My viewsonic xg2401 has none of these problems)
It flickers in most games, the only game I tested that didn't have major flickering was DOOM. (still some light flickering but no big deal).
Why the hell would AMD bundle this monitor to show off Freesync strength if Freesync doesn't work on this monitor (80-100 Freesync range is pointless anyway).
In the coming future, people who will try to move from Nvidia to AMD will flood post boards complaining that Freesync is **** because of this bundle.
This is either gross incompetence or at worst malice.
Sidenote: Other than Freesync issue and major QC issues the monitor is great.
Looks like AMD is bundling Samsung's c34f791 with their Vega purchases. The issue is, that monitor Freesync essentially does not work.
It has 2 modes: 1) 80-100 Freesync range called standard engine 2) 48-100 Freeysnc range called Ultimate engine
The issue is, the Ultimate engine has a ton of flickering, this is not driver related, this is the monitor itself. Freesync flickers like a strobe light disco party in all cutsceenes and menus. In game it flickers the most around 48-52 range. ( My viewsonic xg2401 has none of these problems)
It flickers in most games, the only game I tested that didn't have major flickering was DOOM. (still some light flickering but no big deal).
Why the hell would AMD bundle this monitor to show off Freesync strength if Freesync doesn't work on this monitor (80-100 Freesync range is pointless anyway).
In the coming future, people who will try to move from Nvidia to AMD will flood post boards complaining that Freesync is **** because of this bundle.
This is either gross incompetence or at worst malice.
Sidenote: Other than Freesync issue and major QC issues the monitor is great.
we'll see I guess, I have a feeling the 56 will be the gem of the range if priced under the 1070
I want to understand how AMD could fumble another GPU launch. Vega looks like Fury but with higher clocks & HBM2. Where are the generational improvements of 60-80% like we used to have. This is a 14nm architecture, where are all the power saving features? It`s too bad but maybe AMD needs to let go of their GPU division. Even in their slides, which are best case scenarios as we all know, Fury X still looks good against Vega. I have a GTX 780Ti & was still hoping that I can finally upgrade to an AMD GPU since my last one was the HD5870. I wonder in 2 weeks when we get to see bechmarks how much of a hit will AMD`s stock take. :/
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,063
- Location
- In a house
Well I would be interested in buy anyone's Fury or 390 if anyone is looking to sell to upgrade soon. Got a wanted thread up
@LoadsaMoney - You sure you don't want to sell me one of your Fury Pro's?
Define right kind of DX12 support. Most people don't have high core count CPUs so that really isn't a surprising issue. pascal works well with the CPUs most people own. If Polaris requires a high core count cCPU to realize the full potential of DX12 then that is more of a weakness than a strength. One of the goals behind DX12 was to reduce the CPU dependence, not require ever more powerful CPUs with more cores.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,222
http://www.guru3d.com/index.php?ct=articles&action=file&id=31316
http://www.guru3d.com/index.php?ct=articles&action=file&id=31319
http://www.guru3d.com/index.php?ct=articles&action=file&id=31322
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/powercolor_radeon_rx_580_red_devil_review,13.html
http://www.guru3d.com/index.php?ct=articles&action=file&id=31328
http://www.guru3d.com/index.php?ct=articles&action=file&id=31331
http://www.guru3d.com/index.php?ct=articles&action=file&id=31334
Yep more BS for me. There is not one win for the 1060 in that list even in Tomb Raider there best next gen api game.
Move to dx11 and the 1060 gets some wins.
- Status