Soldato
I see nothing at all for cards like ASUS ROG Strix Vega 64 or offerings from GIGABYTE or MSI, they seem to be vaporware.
-
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
Associate
Not really vaporware we do know they exist and some of the STRIX editions even got to reviewers, however there was a BIOS issue which had to be resolved according to Jayz2Cents.
Maybe AMDMatt can shed some light on a potential release date...
Maybe AMDMatt can shed some light on a potential release date...
Caporegime
I can't shed any light, hair or skin unfortunately.
Can't shed hair or skin?? I knew it ... You're not human!!
Caporegime
Cyberdyne systems model 101.
Soldato
What's so amazing about this? I was running a FX-8350 and 290X for a while.
This doesn't appear to be anything new or amazing.
Still if we're sharing these things, I've just plugged an old pair of headphones into one of my PCs!!!!!!
I just really want the 3rd party cards to be released. Well, if they can deliver better performance (or the same performance at similar cost).
I've owned blower coolers from AMD and Nvidia in the past and I just don't think I can bring myself to do it again. AMD reference coolers are loud before they get to full speed, usually it's by about half way. Nvidia are quieter, but it seems to be because they just use slower fans, or by making them quieter also made them less effective so they need to spin at closer to their max in order to cool the cards. Of course in the past I've kept kidding myself that I'll watercool, but I never get around to it. So now I'm not even gonna pretend.
The Fury X was better, although far from silent. When you stick a 3000rpm 120mm fan on something it's gonna get loud. Even though I've not seen it get to that speed it still goes fast enough that I can't consider it silent. But I don't expect silent, I don't need silent, I just want quiet.
I'd love a nice Aorus or Strix Vega 64 that performed somewhere between the AC and LC versions (like we have with Nvidia and have in the past with AMD).
Well, I was merely pointing out that after months of research - I ended up building a AMD rig in its entirety.
It's testament to how far AMD have come, if anything.
Soldato
Oh that's true AMD did RAM and SSDs too didn't they?
So are these AMD builds using AMD SSDs too? (not sure if they did DDR4 ram?) Mine didn't
Caporegime
DDR3 only for RAM i think.
Associate
@AMDMatt
Played SWBF and LOTF last night and
SO RIP GTX 1080
.
Wolfenstein II should be fun tonight!
.
Have you done any f@h on your TR+VEGA setup?
Played SWBF and LOTF last night and
SO RIP GTX 1080
.Wolfenstein II should be fun tonight!
.Have you done any f@h on your TR+VEGA setup?
Last edited:
Caporegime
@AMDMatt
Played SWBF and LOTR last night and
SO RIP GTX 1080
Wolfenstein II should be fun tonight!
Have you done any f@h on your TR+VEGA setup?
Good FPS i take it? Wait till you try Wolfenstein, mother of god!
I've never done any f@h on any rig. I don't use the TR and 2x Vega 64/4K system much if i am honest.
I spend 95% of my time on the Ryzen + x1 Vega 64/UltraWide system.
Associate
Modded the MG279Q FreeSync range to 57-144Hz (LFC still active). Capped SWBF/LOTF to 140FPS in driver panel rest defaults. Same in game settings as "usual".
SWBF was so much more fluid and sharp responsiveness game experience. Fury X I used to use stock FS range (max 90Hz) and 88FPS cap and way better experience than GTX 1080. The GTX 1080 was not lack of FPS causing pain, but just as I didn't have G-Sync monitor the lack of this tech usage made experience pants IMO. The GTX 1080 even with V-Sync tinkering, FPS capping, just never felt right to the eye and mind as Fury X. Comparing it to VEGA is day vs night, so experience holds it's own IMO.
Lords of the fallen, even though nVidia title, was better experience on Fury X vs GTX 1080 IMO. And again VEGA rules them both. Yes higher FPS than Fury X from VEGA, from memory. Very comparable to GTX 1080. The experience that FreeSync brings vs no variable refresh tech usage on GTX 1080 words IMO can not convey the delight!
Whilst I played each game I had f@h paused and Steam downing Wolfenstein.
If you do try f@h be interesting to see PPD, etc .
SWBF was so much more fluid and sharp responsiveness game experience. Fury X I used to use stock FS range (max 90Hz) and 88FPS cap and way better experience than GTX 1080. The GTX 1080 was not lack of FPS causing pain, but just as I didn't have G-Sync monitor the lack of this tech usage made experience pants IMO. The GTX 1080 even with V-Sync tinkering, FPS capping, just never felt right to the eye and mind as Fury X. Comparing it to VEGA is day vs night, so experience holds it's own IMO.
Lords of the fallen, even though nVidia title, was better experience on Fury X vs GTX 1080 IMO. And again VEGA rules them both. Yes higher FPS than Fury X from VEGA, from memory. Very comparable to GTX 1080. The experience that FreeSync brings vs no variable refresh tech usage on GTX 1080 words IMO can not convey the delight!
Whilst I played each game I had f@h paused and Steam downing Wolfenstein.
If you do try f@h be interesting to see PPD, etc
.
Caporegime
Very nice.Modded the MG279Q FreeSync range to 57-144Hz (LFC still active). Capped SWBF/LOTF to 140FPS in driver panel rest defaults. Same in game settings as "usual".
SWBF was so much more fluid and sharp responsiveness game experience. Fury X I used to use stock FS range (max 90Hz) and 88FPS cap and way better experience than GTX 1080. The GTX 1080 was not lack of FPS causing pain, but just as I didn't have G-Sync monitor the lack of this tech usage made experience pants IMO. The GTX 1080 even with V-Sync tinkering, FPS capping, just never felt right to the eye and mind as Fury X. Comparing it to VEGA is day vs night, so experience holds it's own IMO.
Lords of the fallen, even though nVidia title, was better experience on Fury X vs GTX 1080 IMO. And again VEGA rules them both. Yes higher FPS than Fury X from VEGA, from memory. Very comparable to GTX 1080. The experience that FreeSync brings vs no variable refresh tech usage on GTX 1080 words IMO can not convey the delight!
Whilst I played each game I had f@h paused and Steam downing Wolfenstein.
If you do try f@h be interesting to see PPD, etc
TLDR: Vega > 1080.
Associate
FTFY .
Without FreeSync VEGA does fall short of GTX 1080 taking into account price and custom cards, etc, etc.
It's mind blowing that 1070 Ti is launching with so many AIB cards. AMD seems to lag behind on this aspect IMO and this time way behind .
.TLDR: Vega+FreeSync > 1080 without using variable refresh rate tech.
Without FreeSync VEGA does fall short of GTX 1080 taking into account price and custom cards, etc, etc.
It's mind blowing that 1070 Ti is launching with so many AIB cards. AMD seems to lag behind on this aspect IMO and this time way behind
.
Soldato
FTFY
Without FreeSync VEGA does fall short of GTX 1080 taking into account price and custom cards, etc, etc.
It's mind blowing that 1070 Ti is launching with so many AIB cards. AMD seems to lag behind on this aspect IMO and this time way behind
To be fair the Pascal architecture has been out for ~16 months so it probably only requires a small amount of tweaking. AMD decided to wait 14 months before releasing their competing cards so AIBs probably have to start from scratch figuring out how to make the coolers fit and what areas need cooling. Plus it sounds like AMD are trying to fob off all the dodgy C0 edition cores that AIBs are struggling to get working well.
What is dodgy about the C0 edition cores?
Yes, here at these very forums there does seem to be a surprisingly high number of people who bought Vega64 LC but returned it.
Even I was at the point of returning mine, but after (I forget which version) a driver update, all the crashing at stock levels (ie Balanced and Turbo) just stopped.
I then swapped out the grinding fan with a much quieter Gentle Typhoon model (cba with a RMA that could take months over a grinding fan) and this card is now soooo damned quiet and the paragon of stability.
Would I prefer a C1 stepped core in my rig? Sure!
But what would it get me that my C0 doesn't? AFAIK, AMD have not made the difference between the two editions public so it's just speculation.
Don't you start as well, that was something Nashadog came up with, based on a comment that random guy posted below a website article. It was also based off Videocardz article saying Gigabyte weren't going to supply AIB cards. Gigabyte themselves came out and squashed that rumour. The last word from Gigabyte themselves, is that they only recently got delivery of chips from AMD at the beginning of October. When AIB cards will appear is anybody's guess.
Soldato
Fair enough, it sounded like C1 was an improvement over C0 and I thought Asus had a C0 in the Strix that was getting reviewed, not sure where I got that from though.