• 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.

The RX Vega 56 Owners Thread

SkeeterUK said:
So i have a question. Is it normal for a vega 56 not to run at max clock all the time in all games, as for example i was just having a quick go in borderlands 2 and at max settings at 1440p im getting max fps with no vsync (freesync) tho i have limiter ingame at 72 and i get 72 always. But msi afterburner osd shows the games using about 800mhz core and 700 and not 800 on the vram and sometimes 500hz yet i still get great fps. Temps are about 44c, the gpu and cpu are barely used like max 50% for any of em usually lower like 30%.

Just find it strange a game can run that good with so little usage from gpu and actually cpu as well at 1440p maxed. I could probably run it 4k and still might not get the cpu or gpu up much more lol.

Also notice gpu not maxing as well in a few other games. Tho some games it can get high usage then put the clock up. Seems like when i had a nvidia card it usually went max clock regardless of gpu load most of the time unless im remembering wrong.

Is it because of undervolting and underclocking slightly from default 1590 to 1552 as stage 7. Tho i think ive seen gpu get to 1600+ before regardless of what i set it at tbh.
Click to expand...

Vega throttles and struggle to maintain clocks, I think that's why you undervolt because it clocks nearer 1600 when undervolted. Flashing to a Vega 64 or using power play tables can help it clock higher if you need extra grunt now or down the line. If you use power play tables you can hit 2070 levels of performance

Because of this it can actually perform worse if overclocking
 
Borderlands 2 is not a very demanding game, and the card will reduce clocks to match current demand.

Remove the frame rate limiter, enable VSR, and run it at the highest possible resolution and see what happens to your clocks / usage.
 
I have the sapphire pulse vega 56. I tend to just install stuff mess with overclocking then just reset it to normal for everyday use.
I'd like to undervolt it to lower temps and get consistent clocks. (it jumps up and down a lot when I'm playing no man's sky).
Can you guys suggest some settings?
I'm open to flashing to a 64 bios if that will accomplish what I want.
 
Andygully said:
I have the sapphire pulse vega 56. I tend to just install stuff mess with overclocking then just reset it to normal for everyday use.
I'd like to undervolt it to lower temps and get consistent clocks. (it jumps up and down a lot when I'm playing no man's sky).
Can you guys suggest some settings?
I'm open to flashing to a 64 bios if that will accomplish what I want.
Click to expand...

Flashing to the 64 bios I believe increases power limits, increases the speed you can overclock memory too andpossibly unlocks more compute units, but no guarantee of the latter. You will use more power with a 64 bios.

Be careful and follow the guide, I personally haven't risked it but this looks like a good guide but I'd wait for others with more experience to advice:

 
Can anyone explain why when i tried to play x3 AP that when undervolting and underclocking from 1590 to 1552 for stage 7 for example when i tried play that game at 4k, afterburner was reporting my gpu clock speed going as far up to 3000 boost at times. The fps was about 140fps and didnt change much when the boost was fluctuating from 2000 to 3000 now and then.

example


Did i buy the most powerful card ever or something haha. Or is it a bug maybe tied to amds version of dsr.

Oh yeah and gta sa ran at 1200fps at 4k too, caused coil whine and sometimes didnt display the game after the initial menu after starting the game. Weird.. Still wish i can play gta sa but its just too buggy and cba to install loads of mods and fixes to get it working, i wish RS just combined them mods into a sorta patch for steam and then we can play it normally again without all those mods etc.
 
Last edited:
@SkeeterUK GPU-Z isnt that good at reading Vega clocks so try not to pay much attention to those high numbers.


Also, undervolting is something you do while leaving the clocks alone or overclocking.

Heres my clocks for yer, this is my stable undervolt/overclock of 1652/950 with state 7 at only 1050mv.

0v3TIQP.png

I just happened to run 3DMark earlier so heres the score with those settings.

https://www.3dmark.com/fs/20345708
 
Andygully said:
Cheers guys I'll take a look at mine over the weekend
Click to expand...

my advice is similar to Mybrains, leave the clocks at stock to begin with; undervolt it first to the lowest point whilst still being stable (make sure you test for stability, using games not benchmarks). now start increasing the clocks to there highest point (again keeping it stable test again in game not benchmark).

if it helps at all, here is one of my old scores at 1080mv on p7 with 1752 on the core and 980 on the memory - reference 56.
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/17316351
 
Anybody updated to the newest drivers? Finally got everything stable with 19.5.2 (no crashing in BFV) for my V56. The cautious side of me is like: "You know what? All is well. Leave it alone." The tinkerer though in me is like: "But what if you are leaving frames on the table?... Could be fun! Completely ignore your previous frustrations with instability!"
 
19.7.3 still for me, till i hear of a good stable one for the 56s.

Tho i have noticed and im presuming its gpu/driver related somehow. My taskbar icons just randomly out of nowhere sorta disappear and then reappear shortly after while im busy just doing some browsing maybe or youtube or something. Anyone ever spot this weird behaviour? I mean its not all of them but ive got win 10 with open-shell which is a newer version of classic-shell, and about 19 desktop shortcuts on the taskbar and 2 or 3 just sorta lose their icon and then it comes back after a few seconds.
 
Last edited:
I'm after a bit of help men and women, if anyone can afford me such. I'm currently running a 2500K @ 4.9 GHz water cooled, Vega 56 Pulse circa 1600 Mhz core, 945 MHz HBM, 8GB 1866 DDR 3 memory. I'm sick to the back teeth of sponsored web site benchmarks and complete pointless Y-tube videos. If anyone has a Ryzen 3600 or even a similar 2nd gen Ryzen and a Vega 56 I would be immensely grateful if you could post / message me a few benchmarks. I am feeling the need to upgrade my current rig, but at the back of my mind I am still doubtful the gains will be worth the investment. I game at 1080p most of the time, 1440p on occasion and 60 FPS is my comfort zone. I'm mindful that the odd reduction in CPU physics game settings keeps my low 1% frames close to 60 fps in the majority. A screen shot of Shadow of the Tomb Raider in game benchmark 1080p just set to high would be a big help. Any additional in game benchmarks would be welcome, just clarify the resolution and settings.



I know its a bit of an ask, I am just on the fence so to speak if a circa £400 investment will be worth it for my requirements.



Thanks Boys and Girls.



Dan.

Edit:

16GB DDR4 3200MHz, Ryzen 3600 and an ASUS TUF B450-PLUS could be mine for £379.96. Add an AM4 CPU water block for my custom loop for circa £50 and for £430 I am done.
 
Last edited:
dankeeys said:
I'm after a bit of help men and women, if anyone can afford me such. I'm currently running a 2500K @ 4.9 GHz water cooled, Vega 56 Pulse circa 1600 Mhz core, 945 MHz HBM, 8GB 1866 DDR 3 memory. I'm sick to the back teeth of sponsored web site benchmarks and complete pointless Y-tube videos. If anyone has a Ryzen 3600 or even a similar 2nd gen Ryzen and a Vega 56 I would be immensely grateful if you could post / message me a few benchmarks. I am feeling the need to upgrade my current rig, but at the back of my mind I am still doubtful the gains will be worth the investment. I game at 1080p most of the time, 1440p on occasion and 60 FPS is my comfort zone. I'm mindful that the odd reduction in CPU physics game settings keeps my low 1% frames close to 60 fps in the majority. A screen shot of Shadow of the Tomb Raider in game benchmark 1080p just set to high would be a big help. Any additional in game benchmarks would be welcome, just clarify the resolution and settings.

I know its a bit of an ask, I am just on the fence so to speak if a circa £400 investment will be worth it for my requirements.

Thanks Boys and Girls.

Dan.

Edit:

16GB DDR4 3200MHz, Ryzen 3600 and an ASUS TUF B450-PLUS could be mine for £379.96. Add an AM4 CPU water block for my custom loop for circa £50 and for £430 I am done.
Click to expand...

I kind of had a similar problem here running at 1080p/75hz:

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/t...or-is-it-just-my-ryzen-3-bottleneck.18863924/

I upgraded to a Ryzen 2600 and it eliminated much of the frame drops. Kingdom Come Delivarence still struggles at the highest setting but apparently that's standard and it's poorly optimised

As for a £400 investment, you could get 90% of the 3600 performance by going for:

2600 - £110
B450 - £70
16mb DDR4 3200mhz - £84

Total - £264
 
This video should help you, it compares 2200g to a 2600, the 2200g performs slightly better than your 2500k but both are very similar level and the same number of cores, so you should get an idea of what type of improvement you will get. Note the 2060/1660ti results as that's more on par with the Vega


Also I ran SOTR on my 2200g before the upgrade and I seemed to remember getting better FPS than that video showed
 
ANDREW GREEN said:
I kind of had a similar problem here running at 1080p/75hz:

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/t...or-is-it-just-my-ryzen-3-bottleneck.18863924/

I upgraded to a Ryzen 2600 and it eliminated much of the frame drops. Kingdom Come Delivarence still struggles at the highest setting but apparently that's standard and it's poorly optimised

As for a £400 investment, you could get 90% of the 3600 performance by going for:

2600 - £110
B450 - £70
16mb DDR4 3200mhz - £84

Total - £264
Click to expand...

I found a b-350 mortar behind my recycle bin with no delivery label on several months ago, I asked a few neighbours and no takers. I could upgrade even cheaper subject to the motherboard bios update. If any one here has a compatible AM4 CPU sat in a box etc willing to post it both ways and loan me it to upgrade the bios to support new Ryzen I would be grateful.
 
ANDREW GREEN said:
This video should help you, it compares 2200g to a 2600, the 2200g performs slightly better than your 2500k but both are very similar level and the same number of cores, so you should get an idea of what type of improvement you will get. Note the 2060/1660ti results as that's more on par with the Vega


Also I ran SOTR on my 2200g before the upgrade and I seemed to remember getting better FPS than that video showed
Click to expand...
Is the 2200g performing slightly better than a 2500K at stock speed tho Andrew? I am running my 2500k at 4.9GHz
 
Hi folks. I'm a noob on this forum as you can see although I’m not new to PC hardware and overclocking. I am however a relatively recent owner of a Vega 56 having picked up a Sapphire Pulse from OCUK in sweet deal with 2 games in the AMD 50 year anniversary promotion in May. I have to say I’m really pleased with the card and reckon I must have lucked out on the silicon lottery as overclocking has been pretty successful.

My best stable OC using Wattman is 1672MHz target clock on the GPU core and 980MHz on the (Samsung) HBM2. I’m using 1100mv on the P7 voltage and a 50% power limit. Testing on the benchmark in The Division 2 using the DX12 render mode, I go from 54 fps on stock to 56 fps with the HBM2 OC only and to 58 fps with the GPU OC only. Combined GPU+HBM2 OCs give me 60 fps which is an 11% performance gain. Max temps are 68C on the GPU and 69C on the HBM2. The downside is that the peak power draw (using HWINFO) goes from 181W stock to 267W OC (+48%) and the max fan RPM goes from 1663 to a very audible 2398 on a custom fan profile (+44%). I can get higher target core clocks to run but the power draw and temps go a bit crazy and the card throttles back and FPS drops.

So, to get to the point of my post which is to ask you experienced 56 owners out there whether I should be happy with my lot and ignore the greedy niggle that I could do better, or should I consider flashing the BIOS and squeeze every ounce of performance out of it? From reading the forums, it seems the only benefit to be gained from flashing the BIOS is to enable the higher Vega 64 HBM2 voltage and push the frequency up to ~1100MHz. As I’m already on 980MHz and assuming linear scaling, that would only give me c. +1 fps in The Division 2. Is that gain worth invalidating my warranty for? Are there any other benefits from flashing like increased GPU core OC, lower core voltage or unlocked CUs? I’ve not seen much evidence of that. Is there a consensus on the best 64 BIOS for the Sapphire Pulse? Seems to be a lot of conflicting views.

Does flashing the BIOS prevent using the zero RPM workaround on the fan profile? For this OC I have had to edit the Wattman profile XML to add 0 RPM and have to load to the profile twice to activate it in Wattman. I then have the AMD settings app starting up in windowed mode automatically with every PC start to ensure the profile loads. It’s not ideal but it works. Will this still work after flashing though?

If I opt not to flash, should I be concerned about running this high a power draw 24x7? Not from the lecky bill point of view (I pay that) but for the longevity of the card? I hope not to have to replace it until 2021.

Sorry that’s a long first post and a lot of questions.

I should also have said that I game at 1440p @ 75Hz.

Thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom