Poll: ** The AMD VEGA Thread **

[spikerules]

Yeah, because nobody has a Freesync monitor.

Did you read my original post? The freesync monitor thing is a moot point anyways. If you have the cash to spend £640 plus on a GPU then you have the cash to sell your freesync monitor on eBay and buy a Gsync monitor...

Especially considering you'd be saving overall on power usage.

 

[ubersonic]

Again look at this logically an AIR COOLED Vega64 according to them is consuming almost as much power as a water cooled Vega FE with double the VRAM

Only when the air cooled Vega 64 is clocked to the wall though, the balanced test is lower than the Vega FE.

It does make sense that a highly clocked card would draw more power than a lower clocked version, even if it had more VRAM.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Only when the air cooled Vega 64 is clocked to the wall though, the balanced test is lower than the Vega FE.

Its not the point though - the air cooled Vega64 is most likely hitting lower core clockspeeds than a water cooled RX Vega and the latter has half the VRAM too.

Its basically 50W more for a RX Vega 8GB than a Vega FE with double the VRAM - instead of looking at 3DMark,look at the gaming results.

Look at the air cooled RX Vega and FE Vega.

So please explain to me how a water cooled Vega FE with higher core clockspeeds,and double the VRAM is consuming only 20W more than an air cooled RX Vega??

 

[five8five]

Again look at this logically an AIR COOLED Vega64 according to them is consuming almost as much power as a water cooled Vega FE with double the VRAM,AIO and with higher boost clockspeeds. That is with half the VRAM,unless you think 8GB of HBM2 is magically adding nearly 50W more,instead of using 16GB.

The only reason they leaked the results early is to get a huge number of page hits.

How about we actually wait until all the proper reviews are out to see if this holds,or is some weirdness from that review site??

I'm not really understanding what you're getting at. The 64 Air is a 300W card so 340W at 50% power limit doesn't seem outlandish when you see that the FE water rose from 350W to 440W at 25% power limit?
Also they might be running at 100% fan speed to reduce throttling.

 

[BenJames84]

Did you read my original post? The freesync monitor thing is a moot point anyways. If you have the cash to spend £640 plus on a GPU then you have the cash to sell your freesync monitor on eBay and buy a Gsync monitor...

Especially considering you'd be saving overall on power usage.

Except you said "Vega" which includes a card under £400 (as opposed to VEGA 64 liquid) and I've already bought my Freesync monitor at £100 off for £388 a few weeks ago, so no, I don't have the money to invest in selling the monitor and spending a minimum of £350 more to get into the Gsync ultrawide range and then spend at least the same on a GPU to match (though I could continue sticking it out with my current GTX970 I guess) looking at a minimum of another £750+ on the package assuming I can sell my monitor at a high price, and not factoring in being without a rig for what, weeks?? ... so way to make a clearly and demonstrably heavily biased argument ...

 

[ubersonic]

Its basically 50W more for a RX Vega 8GB than a Vega FE with double the VRAM

Well yeah, higher clocks and higher power limit will do that.

 

[opethdisciple]

Except you said "Vega" which includes a card under £400 (as opposed to VEGA 64 liquid) and I've already bought my Freesync monitor at £100 off for £388 a few weeks ago, so no, I don't have the money to invest in selling the monitor and spending a minimum of $350 more to get into the Gsync ultrawide range and then spend at least the same on a GPU to match (though I could continue sticking it out with my current GTX970 I guess) ... so way to make a clearly and demonstrably heavily biased argument ...

Why did you buy a Freesync monitor before Vega launched? should have waited to keep options open.

 

[Zeed]

Really?? You do realise they contradict every single review of the Vega FE 16GB??

So why is the Vega FE consuming far less power than a RX Vega with 8GB less VRAM??

This is not a few watts - the site is basically saying the air cooled Vega is consuming more than a water cooled Vega FE.

Edit!!

https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graph...-16GB-Liquid-Cooled-Review/Power-Consumption-

There is something very fishy with this review.

EEE You missed that its 50% not 25% power limit ??

 

[spikerules]

Except you said "Vega" which includes a card under £400 (as opposed to VEGA 64 liquid) and I've already bought my Freesync monitor at £100 off for £388 a few weeks ago, so no, I don't have the money to invest in selling the monitor and spending a minimum of $350 more to get into the Gsync ultrawide range and then spend at least the same on a GPU to match (though I could continue sticking it out with my current GTX970 I guess) ... so way to make a clearly and demonstrably heavily biased argument ...

Look my post isn't biased. Even with spending £400 on a gpu you have the money to change your mind. I own a AMD Nano and paid when the Nano was £550, because it had its place and was the best card for the size and could fit into my tight itx water build.

Just because you made a decision to buy a freesync monitor doesn't mean what I said is incorrect. Maybe your purchase was the wrong decision? Ever thought of that? Of course you have that's why you're here trying to justify it

You know you should have waited For reviews before buying a freesync monitor and you know the price to performance of Vega is just not right for anyone.

 

[Ayahuasca]

Why did you buy a Freesync monitor before Vega launched? should have waited to keep options open.

Maybe because he got a further £100 off and realised getting a gsync alternative for anywhere near that price would be impossible.

 

[shankly1985]

Did you read my original post? The freesync monitor thing is a moot point anyways. If you have the cash to spend £640 plus on a GPU then you have the cash to sell your freesync monitor on eBay and buy a Gsync monitor...

Especially considering you'd be saving overall on power usage.

And how much a year does a GPU running 700w cost you? Because heads up it's hardly going to be noticeable.

 

[BenJames84]

Why did you buy a Freesync monitor before Vega launched? should have waited to keep options open.

Because £388 for a 144hz ultrawide IPS with Freesync was way too good to pass up for those of us with budgets.

The cheapest Gsync ultrawide is over £700, and is 3440x1440 which really needs a gtx1080 to power properly, adding another £100 to the GPU entry price.

Edit - these two above are clearly far more rational. Good work Shankly and Ayahuasca.

 

[Watlinguk]

Because £388 for a 144hz ultrawide IPS with Freesync was way too good to pass up for those of us with budgets.

The cheapest Gsync ultrawide is over £700, and is 3440x1440 which really needs a gtx1080 to power properly, adding another £100 to the GPU entry price.

Edit - these two above are clearly far more rational. Good work Shankly and Ayahuasca.

Which monitor did you buy and how did you get it that cheap? :O

 

[Hotwired]

I wouldn't say very far from solid when we've got US RRP pricing and we can do the math on current card prices in the US, even in best case scenarios they're looking overpriced.

I never said it was a definite, AMD quoted a $699 price for the AIO so £640 will be the lowest it could be, Yes the price might go up from that but it won't go under.

So you mean you're quoting these prices?:

RX Vega—AMD's long-awaited followup to the two-year-old Fury and Fury X high-performance graphics cards—launches on August 14 in two core versions: the $499 Radeon RX Vega 64 and the $399 Radeon RX Vega 56 (UK prices TBC).

A limited edition version of RX Vega 64, which features a slick aluminium shroud, costs $599 as part of a bundle that includes discounts on a Freesync monitor, X370 motherboard, and free games. A watercooled version of RX Vega 64, dubbed Radeon RX Vega 64 Liquid Cooled Edition, also comes in a similar bundle pack priced at $699.

...prices which are the bundle prices deliberately overpriced so you get the money back in discounts off a monitor, mobo and games.

So yeah, that's a crazy price to quote and argue with since the point of the bundle is to overprice the card to discourage miners who wanted just the card but provide a decently priced bundle if someone wanted all that stuff at once since buying the bundle card grants a discount on the other hardware.

Roll on 2pm.

 

[Ayahuasca]

So you mean you're quoting these prices?:



...prices which are the bundle prices deliberately overpriced so you get the money back in discounts off a monitor, mobo and games.

So yeah, that's a crazy price to quote and argue with since the point of the bundle is to overprice the card to discourage miners who wanted just the card but provide a decently priced bundle if someone wanted all that stuff at once since buying the bundle card grants a discount on the other hardware.

Roll on 2pm.

Which is why I said even in a best case scenario they're overpriced, take $100 off those bundles, convert to £ and add VAT and you'll see the figures yourself.

 

[beany_bot]

And how much a year does a GPU running 700w cost you? Because heads up it's hardly going to be noticeable.

Actually. 700w running for 8 hours a day at 12p a unit will cost you a noticable £240 a year.

 

[BenJames84]

Look my post isn't biased. Even with spending £400 on a gpu you have the money to change your mind. I own a AMD Nano and paid when the Nano was £550, because it had its place and was the best card for the size and could fit into my tight itx water build.

Just because you made a decision to buy a freesync monitor doesn't mean what I said is incorrect. Maybe your purchase was the wrong decision? Ever thought of that? Of course you have that's why you're here trying to justify it

You know you should have waited For reviews before buying a freesync monitor and you know the price to performance of Vega is just not right for anyone.

Using the worst case example for Vega pricing is 100% evidence of your bias. You're biasing the argument with reductio ad absurdum. Also, your rhetoric is demonstrably biased.

And no, I don't have the money to change my mind. I wish I did. Perhaps you would like to fund me buying into the Gsync premium?

I'm not suffering buyers remorse and trying to justify my purchase post-factum. It was a 144hz ultrawide IPS at £388. Unbeatable value for money. It's self-justifying. I'm now trying to find the best way to power that monitor, and Vega 56 seems like the ticket, even at the increased power draw which I typically try and avoid (given my current Core i5 and GTX970 rig which was designed for minimal power draw to fit into a microATX case when I lived in Asia and moved around a lot).

If Vega 56 is just terrible, then I guess I'll resign myself to waiting further, since GTX1070 prices are asinine right now, the RX580 isn't enough of a jump to justify and mining prices linger, and I'm not willing to spend £500+ on a GPU when I don't get to game that often these days with work, music, life, socialising, etc ...

 

[orbitalwalsh]

Actually. 700w running for 8 hours a day at 12p a unit will cost you a noticable £240 a year.

8 hours a day! jesus- to kids and i game 2 hours every fortnight haha

 

[BenJames84]

Which monitor did you buy and how did you get it that cheap? :O

Got the LG 34UC79G-B on here actually. They had £100 off with a code. The monitor is fantastic, btw. I'm very impressed for the price.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

EEE You missed that its 50% not 25% power limit ??

I'm not really understanding what you're getting at. The 64 Air is a 300W card so 340W at 50% power limit doesn't seem outlandish when you see that the FE water rose from 350W to 440W at 25% power limit?
Also they might be running at 100% fan speed to reduce throttling.

Well yeah, higher clocks and higher power limit will do that.

Look at the balanced mode GAMING results,so again explain to me why the air cooled RX Vega 8GB in balanced mode is consuming 50W more than the air cooled Vega FE 16GB??

This is the thing - is none of you would even look at that Chinese site even once,when looking at reviews,yet suddenly its the gold standard for stuff?? You are getting overexcited and jumping on the first leaked review,which was published hours before the NDA which everyone else has kept too.

We all know Vega is late and poor performing,but its like you are trying to look at negative thing and blow it out of proportion.

So instead of the cruxification now,maybe wait until 2pm for some other sites to confirm what they have seen. Also,LMAO you lot are looking at 3DMark performance and power consumption - why didn't this site then published power consumption overclocked for a game??

Whats 3DMark power consumption got to do with anything??

IIRC,my system used to consume more under 3DMark then running actual games.

Why don't you actually wait for a review which shows a number of games and their power consumption??