-
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 64 Owners Thread
- Thread starter Kaapstad
- Start date
Here is my AIO running Firestrike Standard.
Score 21 650
With AMD Radeon RX Vega 64(1x) @1700/1090
And Intel Core i7-6950X @4.444
Graphics Score 25 185
Physics Score 27 592
Combined Score 9 114
17.9.1 Drivers
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13606407
It does ok on this bench because of the CPU clockspeed.
Score 21 650
With AMD Radeon RX Vega 64(1x) @1700/1090
And Intel Core i7-6950X @4.444
Graphics Score 25 185
Physics Score 27 592
Combined Score 9 114
17.9.1 Drivers
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13606407
It does ok on this bench because of the CPU clockspeed.
Soldato
pretty good Kaap. Did you try the memory at 1100mhz?
And 1700mhz on the core still pretty decent, I wouldn't call that a particularly poor overclocker. There seems to be a sweetspot and a balance to be found, it wouldn't surprise me over the next few days we see you post a 1750mhz bench. I've seen dozens of AIO users on other forums not even hit 1700mhz and remain stable.
To me reading around, it feels like if you have a Vega64 that can do 1700mhz and up, and remain at those clocks through benching or gaming, it would appear you have a pretty good card on your hands. I still think as these drivers come along, it will pull well clear of the 1080, it just feels like there is way more left in the tank.
And 1700mhz on the core still pretty decent, I wouldn't call that a particularly poor overclocker. There seems to be a sweetspot and a balance to be found, it wouldn't surprise me over the next few days we see you post a 1750mhz bench. I've seen dozens of AIO users on other forums not even hit 1700mhz and remain stable.
To me reading around, it feels like if you have a Vega64 that can do 1700mhz and up, and remain at those clocks through benching or gaming, it would appear you have a pretty good card on your hands. I still think as these drivers come along, it will pull well clear of the 1080, it just feels like there is way more left in the tank.
Last edited:
It will only do 1100mhz when the card is still cold just after boot up.
Soldato
Ah ok, will be very little difference between 1090 and 1100 anyway. The huge jump in performance is going from 945 stock to 1050ish anyway.
Most of them are already pushing their limits. AMDMatt has some sort of anomaly card.It is a very poor overclocker on the core but the memory can do 1080.
Associate
Sapphire AIO owner here.
Without adjusting any voltages I can get 1050MHz on my HBM and 1770MHz core whilst running a +50% power increase; this gives a timespy score of 7932, anything higher results in a black screen crash.
I'm a bit confused about what to do with the voltage. Do I undervolt to reduce temperatures which results in improved stability, or overvolt to increase stability but will obviously increase temperatures?
Without adjusting any voltages I can get 1050MHz on my HBM and 1770MHz core whilst running a +50% power increase; this gives a timespy score of 7932, anything higher results in a black screen crash.
I'm a bit confused about what to do with the voltage. Do I undervolt to reduce temperatures which results in improved stability, or overvolt to increase stability but will obviously increase temperatures?
Core voltage and clock impacts the HBM so as you push higher clocks or more voltage it could force your HBM overclock to become unstable. IMO, get the HBM as high as you can then work on the core. It's possible that lowering the core clock or undervolting the core will help you achieve a higher stable HBM clock and improve performance. You'll need to find the balance then test.
Caporegime
Associate
Interesting, I'll have a go at seeing if I can push the memory higher if I leave the clock alone. I did read in a few places that there were more gains to be had overclocking the memory anyway.
Soldato
Sept - Oct ? I figured it was going to take this whole year for Vega to level out, nano this year I dont know
Soldato
When Nvidia launch new cards, it doesn't take them this long to get 3rd party cards out?
Caporegime
Good advice this from Kundi. Two of my 64's top out at 1075Mhz, one does all the way up to 1100 but it artifacts. The other crashes past 1075Mhz. My best sample does 1100Mhz at stock voltage.
1250 voltage and the highest possible clock frequency in state 7 will get you the highest possible clocks, coupled with +50% power limit. State 6 should be around 50Mhz/0.050mv lower than state 7 for best results.
No RMA ?
It does what it says on the box so no reason to RMA the card.
It does no one any favours when people RMA cards because they have not won the silicon lottery in the overclocking stakes.
+1It does what it says on the box so no reason to RMA the card.
It does no one any favours when people RMA cards because they have not won the silicon lottery in the overclocking stakes.
Caporegime
+2.It does what it says on the box so no reason to RMA the card.
It does no one any favours when people RMA cards because they have not won the silicon lottery in the overclocking stakes.
£780 wasn't enough of a ripoff, they've magically jumped to £800 today. Amazing how all the usual excuses (s&d, pound vs dollar brexit, price of cheese) can apply to paid for stock
Soldato
Temperature isn't is a big a factor with the AOI cards and can easily be kept away from the 70 degrees throttling limit by increasing the fan RPM. Unless you have the card under a custom water loop and are achieving temps below 50 I don't think there are any significant performance gains between the 55 and 65 your card is likely to mostly sit between at full load. As AMDMAtt said, pushing the voltage in state 7 a bit will allow you card to hit the highest boost clocks although you will likely see the clock frequency fluctuate quite a bit, for me this is usually between 1670 and 1730. Lowering the voltage and clock frequency allows for a more stable boost clock, I was able to achieve a more solid boost clock 'line' in the Wattman monitoring graph, staying much closer to 1700 although the actual performance between the higher voltage and clocks versus lower voltage were largely on a par. Actually I found that the previous drivers favoured the lower voltages more than 17.9.1. Here are the details of results I've achieved at various settings and drivers.
https://imgur.com/a/5KOgY
Going by my results, the drivers have so far provided an increase of 3.2% in performance - this is based on the Time Spy graphics score using the stock turbo profile; increasing from 7610 in the first drivers to 7853 in 17.9.1.
Last edited:
Soldato
Downloaded Battlefield 1 last night. Best performance for me was 1702/1150 and 1777/1200 on states 6 & 7 (power limit and memory are always +50% and 1080 for me now) - boost clock stayed fairly close to 1710.
Strangely, I left my PC on overnight last night to download the game and when I checked Wattman this morning, at some point during the night my max clock hit 1748 (never seen that high since 17.8.1 drivers) and the temp 68 - I wonder what it was doing?...