• 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.
gthlm said:
I know you were just responding directly to shankly's claim, with worst case scenario, and your maths is good. But a few points to counter:

1. The only use likely use case for these cards that will see 100% duty cycle is mining. And who cares if it costs them really...
2. If whatever other card you might be using instead pulls about 400W then the difference is 3-4p an hour at full load.
Click to expand...

Very valid points.
 
BenJames84 said:
Way to reinforce your "non-biased" claim with that fatuous and juvenile first sentence.

I think I'll wait for the NDA to lift, for Vega prices to be shown, before I make definitive statements. It does look like the power draw is disappointing. The performance looks fine, as long as the price is. And buying the monitor that I bought, which happens to be freesync, was unequivocally the BEST choice at my price point.

I have said from the start that Vega 56 is the most interesting of the SKUs and the one to consider. Buying the high end Vega and a 3440x1440 high-refresh Freesync ultrawide would probably be worth just getting a Gsync setup, and I nearly went that route. But the £1300-1500 it would cost just looks horrible in contrast to the ~£750 I'm hoping/expecting to pay in the end, especially given how much I would use it in context.
Click to expand...

You don't have to justify your purchases to any one mate. (Take that the right way. I'm not being condescending)

I decided to go with a second hand 1080 and a £500 Gysnc monitor. About £900 in total.
 
In the past I have been happy to wait for AMD products, as you always knew even if it was not the best, it would improve price for performance. AMD have not done this now for many years. We now cannot even say Nvidia are over charging us anymore when AMD price their products like this. Sad times :(


CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Look I am not going to excuse make for the fact I am disappointed with Vega,and that its late too,and that power consumption is deffo not impressive. Heck I have a GTX1080 in a SFF rig,so unlike others power consumption and TDP and deffo important for me,not to save money or for bragging rights,but since my case would melt! :p

However,I just think maybe we need to look at a few reviews first to confirm all of this - if an air cooled RX Vega 8GB is basically hitting nearly as much power as a water cooled Vega FE 16GB,with half the VRAM,then it really is sad days! :(

I really hope the Vega56 at least is OKish:

https://videocardz.com/71953/are-these-radeon-rx-vega-56-benchmarks
Click to expand...

I will be surprised if even the most die hard AMD fan will be happy with Vega to be honest. It is a very disappointing card due to many reasons unfortunately.

The only one I think that could be classed as "okay", is Vega 56. Had they priced it 100 bucks cheaper, it would have been a good card however. Because at least the people who patiently waited for AMD would have been rewarded with a cheaper price for their loyalty. Instead after waiting 16 months, all they are getting is an option to get similar performance to 1070 for a similar price.
 
Hotwired said:
Lets do that.

$499 = £384.59
*1.2 = £461.508

Well there we have it, Vega 64 priced at the bottom end of the 1080 range using the quoted figures.

$599 = £461.66
*1.2 = £553.992

And Liquid Vega 64 is still quite a lot less than a 1080 with an AIO on it

Even with these paper numbers there's no basis for claiming overprice.
Click to expand...

Then lets hope for that pricing at 2pm, still overpriced in my opinion as we've had offers over the previous months for AIO 1080's for £500.

Air cooled as low as £450 and nVidia have previously shown they can adjust pricing to **** on AMD's parade although this time around it looks like they won't even need to.
 
opethdisciple said:
You don't have to justify your purchases to any one mate. (Take that the right way. I'm not being condescending)

I decided to go with a second hand 1080 and a £500 Gysnc monitor. About £900 in total.
Click to expand...

I agree, and thank you, and I'm certainly not justifying purchases in my reply - I'm correcting bias and fanboyism being applied and thrown out :cool:

If I wasn't 100% set on buying into the ultrawide market (which is fantastic btw), I would have definitely gone Gsync. It's a much easier prospect at 16:9, with entry options at 2560x1440 and 27" around the £500 mark, plus a gtx1070 at £400, being relatively palatable. The real trouble for me was the ultrawide Gsync market which pretty much requires a gtx1080 (as I love those high frame rates) becomes a very expensive prospect for any entry point adds another £400-500 minimum.

Hope you're enjoying your setup :D
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
BTW,has anyone seen how short the Vega56 PCB is
Click to expand...
I saw that card earlier and noticed how much shorter than the reference Vega 56 it is, guess there's a lot of wasted space on the reference PCB.

I wonder if those cards would work in crossfire, given half the heatsink is off the card so airflow wouldn't be as crippled as on a normal non blower card.
 
TNA said:
In the past I have been happy to wait for AMD products, as you always knew even if it was not the best, it would improve price for performance. AMD have not done this now for many years. We now cannot even say Nvidia are over charging us anymore when AMD price their products like this. Sad times :(


I will be surprised if even the most die hard AMD fan will be happy with Vega to be honest. It is a very disappointing card due to many reasons unfortunately.

The only one I think that could be classed as "okay", is Vega 56. Had they priced it 100 bucks cheaper, it would have been a good card however. Because at least the people who patiently waited for AMD would have been rewarded with a cheaper price for their loyalty. Instead after waiting 16 months, all they are getting is an option to get similar performance to 1070 for a similar price.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I was really hoping AMD would take control with Vega. I've had enough of all the Nvidia fanboys here on the forums and was wanting a real alternative to the 10xx series from Nvidia.
 
500 watt five hundred! 1080 SLI uses about 380.

giphy.gif
 
Hotwired said:
Lets do that.

$499 = £384.59
*1.2 = £461.508

Well there we have it, Vega 64 priced at the bottom end of the 1080 range using the quoted figures.

$599 = £461.66
*1.2 = £553.992

And Liquid Vega 64 is still quite a lot less than a 1080 with an AIO on it

Even with these paper numbers there's no basis for claiming overprice.
Click to expand...
It's been mentioned before that Threadripper pricing was 1:1 dollars to pounds so is probably a good indicator.
 
Why are we back to moaning about Freesync or Gsync - nothing is locking you in,as a Nvidia card will work fine,and also even if a GTX1070 was saying slightly cheaper than a Vega56,the fact it will still give you a better gaming experience overall.

GSync for me is a non-starter,even if 3 of my last 5 cards have been Nvidia,and of the last three two supported GSync and one supported FreeSync.

Why?? I am not spending silly amounts of money for that feature,when I can get a more colour accurate non-Sync monitor and a faster GPU with the money saved.

The only reason why FreeSync would interest me,is if there is a decent good value monitor I wanted and it happened to be included.

However,the most criticial thing I do with my monitor is image editing not gaming so YMMV.

spikerules said:
Looks like the Vega54 is the Vega Nano just with a bigger fan/heatpipe, no?
Click to expand...

The PCB is probably shared - I expect the Nano will use a downclocked Vega64 GPU.
 
beany_bot said:
Actually. 700w running for 8 hours a day at 12p a unit will cost you a noticable £240 a year.*
Click to expand...
*Assumptions based on someone that runs GPU, CPU, HDD and RAM benchmarks simultaneously with all fans at 100% and screen brightness maxed and always on. Features such as freesync, frame targets and chill will also never be used.
 
Every single release we get the same thing. folk doing the US dollars to GBP calculation, then adding VAT and saying thats the price. And every time the actual price is higher than that and folk loose their minds and throw up their hands.
Don't forget OC has to fly the cards over the Atlantic for a start.
 
beany_bot said:
Every single release we get the same thing. folk doing the US dollars to GBP calculation, then adding VAT and saying thats the price. And every time the actual price is higher than that and folk loose their minds and throw up their hands.
Don't forget OC has to fly the cards over the Atlantic for a start.
Click to expand...

Indeed, a lot of hoping and coping going on every release.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom