• 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

Panos said:
I do not see why you want to change the AIO. Change the damn thermal paste. I bet you will find it being hard like cement. Use Cryonaut if you do not want to use Conductonaut.
Please do not put from tube straight to the chip, use a surface area to put it and transfer it with the swabs. You need 1 tiny drop for the GPU & HBM and 1 tiny drop for the cooler. No more.

My Nitro+ (one of the new ones made after May 2018 with the 2 8-pin connectors), with stock paste at Turbo mode 1630/945 had terrible cooling performance on both HBM ram (hitting 80C) and Core temps. When removed the cooler for watercooling (see previous page), the paste was hard as cement peeling. And that was 3 weeks old GPU.

Also I assume you followed the manual and you have placed the radiator properly yes? It has to be vertical with the pipes down.
That is the rule of thumb since the 295X2 if you want for it to work properly.
If you do not follow that simple rule than that is also your issue.

FuryX & 295X2 discussions were long explaining to people how important is to set the AIO correctly for the AMD cards.
Click to expand...

I can't fit the rad with pipes down in my case so they're at the top. Does pipes down really work better? I could mod the case.
 
docious said:
I can't fit the rad with pipes down in my case so they're at the top. Does pipes down really work better? I could mod the case.
Click to expand...

Yes of course. Check the manual of the correct positioning. But the rule of thumb on the AMD provided AIOs always vertical with pipes down.
Any other rotation and the performance of the cooling drops.

Doesn't your case has "exhaust" position for 120mm/140mm rad?
If not consider to buy 2 L shape brackets from your local stock (if you do not mind to look good, otherwise there are special for watercooling) and hang it from the top of the case.

The radiator has to be at higher elevation than the GPU and with the pipes down. And you will be set. No need to spend money on different product, which usually comes with it's own placement rules.
 
Panos said:
Yes of course. Check the manual of the correct positioning. But the rule of thumb on the AMD provided AIOs always vertical with pipes down.
Any other rotation and the performance of the cooling drops.

Doesn't your case has "exhaust" position for 120mm/140mm rad?
If not consider to buy 2 L shape brackets from your local stock (if you do not mind to look good, otherwise there are special for watercooling) and hang it from the top of the case.

The radiator has to be at higher elevation than the GPU and with the pipes down. And you will be set. No need to spend money on different product, which usually comes with it's own placement rules.
Click to expand...
The Sapphire 64 LC had no manual to speak of but at the time I did read somewhere that down is better. Yes, I'm using the rear exhaust in a Corsair Obsidian 550D but unfortunately some case metal prevents a pipes down position - I guess it wasn't designed for radiators at the back . Need to buy a Dremel to change that. Thanks.
 
docious said:
...unfortunately some case metal prevents a pipes down position - I guess it wasn't designed for radiators at the back . Need to buy a Dremel to change that. Thanks.
Click to expand...

You mean the top of the expansion card rear panel right?

I have a 64 LC in the same case and the rad does fit pipes down, just, if you remove the rubber grommets from the mounting holes.

I have to say this case is not well laid out. I have a H110i in the top of mine along with the 64 LC on the back and I had to do some pretty rough and ready stuff to get it all in. I had to cut the edge of the frame off of the rear most fan on the H110i to clear the top of the 64 LC rad, and I had to cut the clip off of the cpu power connector to get it to clear the bottom of the H110i. The H110i also doesn't quite fit the top of the case properly, as the radiator opening in the top is just slightly too short.

I really don't like this case and I'm looking to change it soon.
 
gthlm said:
You mean the top of the expansion card rear panel right?

I have a 64 LC in the same case and the rad does fit pipes down, just, if you remove the rubber grommets from the mounting holes.

I have to say this case is not well laid out. I have a H110i in the top of mine along with the 64 LC on the back and I had to do some pretty rough and ready stuff to get it all in. I had to cut the edge of the frame off of the rear most fan on the H110i to clear the top of the 64 LC rad, and I had to cut the clip off of the cpu power connector to get it to clear the bottom of the H110i. The H110i also doesn't quite fit the top of the case properly, as the radiator opening in the top is just slightly too short.

I really don't like this case and I'm looking to change it soon.
Click to expand...
Whaaaat! OK I need to retry this, thanks for the tip. Back in 2013 I thought this case would be future proof end-game but you're right, it kind of sucks.
 
Morning all.
I've been running an r9 290 since its release, and it's beginning to get a little long in the tooth. So, I'm looking at upgrading to vega, and just trying to decide between the cards that ocuk has. Going by the prices, vega 64 seems much better value vs 56, one of the cards is even cheaper than the 56 ones!

Is it a no brainer to grab the gigabyte 64? The powercolor and strix cards are clocked higher, but also quite a bit more expensive. I've never Overclocked a graphics card before, but I've also heard that vega is pretty hard to oc due to heat issues?
 
iviv said:
Morning all.
I've been running an r9 290 since its release, and it's beginning to get a little long in the tooth. So, I'm looking at upgrading to vega, and just trying to decide between the cards that ocuk has. Going by the prices, vega 64 seems much better value vs 56, one of the cards is even cheaper than the 56 ones!

Is it a no brainer to grab the gigabyte 64? The powercolor and strix cards are clocked higher, but also quite a bit more expensive. I've never Overclocked a graphics card before, but I've also heard that vega is pretty hard to oc due to heat issues?
Click to expand...

Someone else can confirm but from what I saw online the gigabyte vega card are crap that are breaking a lot. That might be the reason why they are so cheap. Good deals on VEGA are starting to appear so if you can wait a bit you might snatch a deal. I was lucky enough to get a vega 64 nitro+ for 410 pounds in France at the beginning of the week, more might be coming.
 
iviv said:
Morning all.
I've been running an r9 290 since its release, and it's beginning to get a little long in the tooth. So, I'm looking at upgrading to vega, and just trying to decide between the cards that ocuk has. Going by the prices, vega 64 seems much better value vs 56, one of the cards is even cheaper than the 56 ones!

Is it a no brainer to grab the gigabyte 64? The powercolor and strix cards are clocked higher, but also quite a bit more expensive. I've never Overclocked a graphics card before, but I've also heard that vega is pretty hard to oc due to heat issues?
Click to expand...


I wouldn't touch the Gigabyte with a barge pole. In the lead up to it being released Gigabyte all but admitted that they would not be doing the same amount of card development for the Vega cards as they do for Nvidia cards. This is apparent when you watch reviews of the Gigabyte version,
A recent review (I'll have a look for it) that's linked somewhere back in this thread shows all the Vega cards competing with each other. As often mentioned on this forum, If you want an AMD card go for one from an AMD only brand. ie: Sapphire or Powercolor.

The one to get today is the PowerDevil Vega 64. In the review it rated better than the Gigabyte & Asus and not far behind the Sapphire.
 
iviv said:
Morning all.
I've been running an r9 290 since its release, and it's beginning to get a little long in the tooth. So, I'm looking at upgrading to vega, and just trying to decide between the cards that ocuk has. Going by the prices, vega 64 seems much better value vs 56, one of the cards is even cheaper than the 56 ones!

Is it a no brainer to grab the gigabyte 64? The powercolor and strix cards are clocked higher, but also quite a bit more expensive. I've never Overclocked a graphics card before, but I've also heard that vega is pretty hard to oc due to heat issues?
Click to expand...
Raptorpg said:
Someone else can confirm but from what I saw online the gigabyte vega card are crap that are breaking a lot. That might be the reason why they are so cheap. Good deals on VEGA are starting to appear so if you can wait a bit you might snatch a deal. I was lucky enough to get a vega 64 nitro+ for 410 pounds in France at the beginning of the week, more might be coming.
Click to expand...
I'm not so sure. The Toms3D review of the Gigabyte Vega 64 was positive. https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gigabyte-rx-vega-64-gaming-oc-review,5441-7.html

I'm sure it's not the best 64 on the market, but it should be good for the price.
 
Raptorpg said:
Someone else can confirm but from what I saw online the gigabyte vega card are crap that are breaking a lot. That might be the reason why they are so cheap. Good deals on VEGA are starting to appear so if you can wait a bit you might snatch a deal. I was lucky enough to get a vega 64 nitro+ for 410 pounds in France at the beginning of the week, more might be coming.
Click to expand...

Exactly, Although I'm not sure I'd wait too long as we currently get 3 decent looking, as yet unreleased game codes with the AMD cards today, One of which is Assassin's Creed Odessey.
 
LtMatt said:
I'm not so sure. The Toms3D review of the Gigabyte Vega 64 was positive. https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gigabyte-rx-vega-64-gaming-oc-review,5441-7.html

I'm sure it's not the best 64 on the market, but it should be good for the price.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I couldn't find many other reviews but that did seem pretty positive which was why I was surprised at the price. And while I would rather avoid gigabyte due to the whole GPP thing, I'm not principled enough to cut my nose off to spite my face either.

Still, if it is as rubbish as you guys are saying, I might have to look at the other options.
 
iviv said:
Yeah, I couldn't find many other reviews but that did seem pretty positive which was why I was surprised at the price. And while I would rather avoid gigabyte due to the whole GPP thing, I'm not principled enough to cut my nose off to spite my face either.

Still, if it is as rubbish as you guys are saying, I might have to look at the other options.
Click to expand...

More than the review it was more around the number of users that were having issues with the card artifacting, card breaking after a few days. Not sure if I can post links to retailers website but look at the big us ones and the picture is not pretty.
 
Has anyone got the link to the recent Vega 64 face-off review as I cannot find it? :(


LtMatt said:
For £450 and 3 free games, the Gigabyte 64 is a no brainer for me. https://www.overclockers.co.uk/giga...hbm2-pci-express-graphics-card-gx-19n-gi.html
Click to expand...


Maybe but I don't think it'll be a nice card to live with, They reviewed Gigabytes identical Vega 56 a week or so earlier: https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gigabyte-radeon-rx-vega-56-gaming-oc-8g-review,5413-7.html

I've been looking for the recent Vega face off that was posted somewhere on this forum, It put all four Vega 64 versions up against each other and the Gigabyte was far behind the other three with poor temps, noise and clocks comparatively. Personally I'd pay the extra for the Red Devil.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom