The RX Vega 64 Owners Thread

JediFragger · 27 Aug 2018 at 10:28

@Panos This is kinda Vega related, but have you heard about any of the big brands producing a 43" 120hz 4k HDR monitor like the Wasabi UHD430? Am hoping for a Freesync version, which the Wasabi isn't apparently

Thanks

Panos · 27 Aug 2018 at 10:39

JediFragger said:
@Panos This is kinda Vega related, but have you heard about any of the big brands producing a 43" 120hz 4k HDR monitor like the Wasabi UHD430? Am hoping for a Freesync version, which the Wasabi isn't apparently

Thanks

No mate. Doubt we going to see anything this year tbh. Maybe if Wasabi puts a new firmware like they did on 420 but it will be stuck at 96hz either way.

Also monitors progression is a very stinking and slow point unfortunately. It will be easier to find 120hz HDR1000 HDMI 2.1 (VRR) TV next year for £1000 or less, than a monitor having those features even in 2020.
I predict it will be easier to find 40"+ OLED HDMI 2.1 TV next year, so screw monitors after that moment.
Tbh refresh rate limitations aside (60hz), the 43" Phillips VESA HDR1000 Freesync monitor is as good as we can go atm.

But high refresh rates kinda moot atm, given that even overclocked Vega 64 barely holds 60fps at 4K on my Freesync TV, and we won't see 120fps capable GPUs probably until 2020.
Even the new RTX2080s are not that faster than the GTX1080ti at 4K. (in HDR yes they are clearly faster but SDR no)

JediFragger · 27 Aug 2018 at 10:45

Ok thanks @Panos I'll keep my eye open for something suitable. The Phillips doesn't seem bad, just fancied something with a higher refresh to try.

Panos · 27 Aug 2018 at 10:47

JediFragger said:
Ok thanks @Panos I'll keep my eye open for something suitable. The Phillips doesn't seem bad, just fancied something with a higher refresh to try.

No worries, we are look out for that holly grail on monitors

I am between the Benq 32" 4K atm and the 43" phillips. all depends how my new house going to be and where my PC will go.
Yet I can see the appeal of Ultrawides on gaming.

JediFragger · 27 Aug 2018 at 10:49

Panos said:
Yet I can see the appeal of Ultrawides on gaming.

Ultrawides are pretty damn awesome, and should be some nice Freesync 2 HDR ones to come on the AMD side of things soon. Hopefully a faster Vega will be out within the next 6-7 months to power them, and much more in the way of DX12/Vulkan games

TrixX · 27 Aug 2018 at 11:27

7nm Vega is looking interesting, but we need to find out where AMD's headed with Navi. Unlikely that 2nd Gen Vega will be able to compete head to head with the top end Nvidia's. Navi also looks slightly compromised, from the leaks over the last 3-6 months. Looking past Navi might be required for AMD GPU fans for something to finally be back to competitive levels with Nvidia's top end.

Kelt · 27 Aug 2018 at 11:55

Panos said:
There is a video comparing all Vega 64s. Strix performance is even behind the reference card.
Is the worst V64 sample, yet used as reference of Vega 64 performance by some youtubers like Hardware Unboxed, and to everyone who argued about it he called them an AMD fanboys... -_-
Nitro+ and Red Devil are the two best Vega 64s followed by reference boards.

Why was the Strix down around 200 Mhz compared to the others when overclocked?

That seems to be the main reason it lagged.

JediFragger · 27 Aug 2018 at 12:01

TrixX said:
but we need to find out where AMD's headed with Navi.

It's rumoured that we'll get mid-range (and lower) Navi next year, with the bigger high-performance version to follow in 2020. Nothing solid yet though, and hopefully we'll get it earlier

Hades · 27 Aug 2018 at 12:11

Kelt said:
Why was the Strix down around 200 Mhz compared to the others when overclocked?

That seems to be the main reason it lagged.

I've been looking at various reviews and from what I can see the Strix is tuned to try to reduce fan noise. It allows the core temp to rise and spins the fans at a lower speed (you can see that in the first round of tests in the video). But it also has a problem with insufficient cooling of the VRM's. So at a pure guess (and it is just a guess on my part) the Strix is slightly slower on standard settings because it is trying to keep the fan at a lower rpm, and slightly slower when overclocked because it has heat issues. That's just a guess though.

Also I see that throughout that video the Powercolor was very frequently pulling a lot more wattage than the other cards. Again another guess on my part but they have good cooling on that card so are able to throw power at it to keep the speed high.

Panos · 27 Aug 2018 at 12:26

Kelt said:
Why was the Strix down around 200 Mhz compared to the others when overclocked?

That seems to be the main reason it lagged.

Bad VRM cooling, missing thermal pads on backplate and inadequate heatsink. Don't be fooled by those 3 fans, that looks like the cooler from the GTX980Ti Strix .
As @Hades mentioned, even at 100% fan speed with +50% power limit (no other overclock) shows how bad cooling on this card is, and any card is beaten by the reference, let lone by 10%, is meh. True the card might be shining under water, but on air is bad.

Hades · 27 Aug 2018 at 12:37

Panos said:
Bad VRM cooling, missing thermal pads on backplate and inadequate heatsink. Don't be fooled by those 3 fans, that looks like the cooler from the GTX980Ti Strix .
As @Hades mentioned, even at 100% fan speed with +50% power limit (no other overclock) shows how bad cooling on this card is, and any card is beaten by the reference, let lone by 10%, is meh. True the card might be shining under water, but on air is bad.

I think this is exactly why that card has issues. Asus sell far more NV cards so it didn't make financial sense to redesign a heat sink for the Vega. So they probably just adapted their old heatsink. That's not to say the card isn't worth buying at the right price point, of course.

Kelt · 27 Aug 2018 at 12:39

Hades said:
I've been looking at various reviews and from what I can see the Strix is tuned to try to reduce fan noise. It allows the core temp to rise and spins the fans at a lower speed (you can see that in the first round of tests in the video). But it also has a problem with insufficient cooling of the VRM's. So at a pure guess (and it is just a guess on my part) the Strix is slightly slower on standard settings because it is trying to keep the fan at a lower rpm, and slightly slower when overclocked because it has heat issues. That's just a guess though.

Also I see that throughout that video the Powercolor was very frequently pulling a lot more wattage than the other cards. Again another guess on my part but they have good cooling on that card so are able to throw power at it to keep the speed high.

Looks like the Red Devil is the one to go for then!

Panos said:
Bad VRM cooling, missing thermal pads on backplate and inadequate heatsink. Don't be fooled by those 3 fans, that looks like the cooler from the GTX980Ti Strix .
As @Hades mentioned, even at 100% fan speed with +50% power limit (no other overclock) shows how bad cooling on this card is, and any card is beaten by the reference, let lone by 10%, is meh. True the card might be shining under water, but on air is bad.

Shows it pays to do research before buying stuff!

You'd (wrongly) assume the Strix was the better card being more expensive, even allowing for ROG tax.

Panos · 27 Aug 2018 at 12:44

Hades said:
I think this is exactly why that card has issues. Asus sell far more NV cards so it didn't make financial sense to redesign a heat sink for the Vega. So they probably just adapted their old heatsink. That's not to say the card isn't worth buying at the right price point, of course.

If remembering correctly both Asus & Gigagyte said last year that they will invest almost to nothing on AMD GPUs going forward. While MSI has dropped the ball all together.

@Kelt yep thats correct. Hence I always stick to Sapphire or Powercolor on my AMD cards even if those are "AMD made" like the FuryX and Nano
Both those companies are the equivalent of EVGA & Zotac on AMD GPUs.

Troezar · 27 Aug 2018 at 12:55

Panos said:
If remembering correctly both Asus & Gigagyte said last year that they will invest almost to nothing on AMD GPUs going forward. While MSI has dropped the ball all together.

@Kelt yep thats correct. Hence I always stick to Sapphire or Powercolor on my AMD cards even if those are "AMD made" like the FuryX and Nano
Both those companies are the equivalent of EVGA & Zotac on AMD GPUs.

That is really useful to know. Shame really as my MSI Gaming X 1070 is really well made. I've had Sapphire cards in the past four AMD and found them to be really good. I'll definitely consider Powercolor too given they seem to be really on it with the cooling.

Is it easy/worth putting an AIO on AMD cards? Never tried it myself, do they cool the vrms as will as the GPU?

Hades · 27 Aug 2018 at 13:00

Panos said:
If remembering correctly both Asus & Gigagyte said last year that they will invest almost to nothing on AMD GPUs going forward. While MSI has dropped the ball all together.

@Kelt yep thats correct. Hence I always stick to Sapphire or Powercolor on my AMD cards even if those are "AMD made" like the FuryX and Nano
Both those companies are the equivalent of EVGA & Zotac on AMD GPUs.

Interesting, thank you. I think it's important to try to buy from companies committed to AMD so they get a strong signal that there is a market.

Do you know whether the Vega supports AMD@s hardware mixed rotation? I have a PLP triple monitor setup and need the two side monitors to be rotated in hardware while the screen is spread across all three in games. I know some AMD cards support this.

Panos · 27 Aug 2018 at 13:06

Hades said:
Interesting, thank you. I think it's important to try to buy from companies committed to AMD so they get a strong signal that there is a market.

Do you know whether the Vega supports AMD@s hardware mixed rotation? I have a PLP triple monitor setup and need the two side monitors to be rotated in hardware while the screen is spread across all three in games. I know some AMD cards support this.

@LtMatt Matt, has the bezel correction be fixed? It was an issue last August, if remembering correctly

ShortWarning · 28 Aug 2018 at 10:41

Been enjoying my Vega 64 for the last couple weeks albeit undervolted but sent it back for RMA today just in case it is faulty. Back to gaming on a 5 year old rMBP until I get my card back.

Purdy · 28 Aug 2018 at 10:50

I’m very tempted to get one of these and a Freesync 27” 1440p/144hz in a brand new build to support competition+openness of Freesync vs gysync.

However I can afford to get a 2080ti(or 1080ti if the benchmarks aren’t worth the ridiculous premium). If you guys were being impartial what would you suggest?

Also are there high quality IPS Freesync monitors, many seem a few years old but I guess so is that Asus everyone gets for gsync (at a premium also...)

Marine-RX179 · 28 Aug 2018 at 11:33

Purdy said:
I’m very tempted to get one of these and a Freesync 27” 1440p/144hz in a brand new build to support competition+openness of Freesync vs gysync.

However I can afford to get a 2080ti(or 1080ti if the benchmarks aren’t worth the ridiculous premium). If you guys were being impartial what would you suggest?

Also are there high quality IPS Freesync monitors, many seem a few years old but I guess so is that Asus everyone gets for gsync (at a premium also...)

I guess the question you should ask yourself is what kind of games you plan on playing.

Something like Vega64 or GTX1080 can already chew through vast majority of the games with at least 60fps+, and if you if you are a little short on GPU grunt on pushing 100fps+ on the GPS side, you can lower graphic settings by a little bit and the chances are you would miss the minor difference in the graphic details, but would provide noticable improvement on frame rate.

Also I think it's been mentioned that Vega can do Freesync for the newer 4K TV as well, whereas there's no plan on Nvidia size to have sync support for TV; so it may or may not be something you should also considering.

Hades · 28 Aug 2018 at 11:36

Being impartial I would get a GTX 1080. It's the better value card at this performance level and you don't seem embedded into Freesync yet.

I just ordered a Vega 64 but there were several factors leaning me towards that:

* I don't have a Gsync or Freesync monitor. In fact I have an old fashioned PLP setup.

* AMD are better for such PLP setups.

* I far prefer AMD's support of open standards such as OpenCL and Freesync compared to NV's proprietary approach.

* Both the 1080 and V64 are overkill for what I need so either would be fine.

* AMD have open sourced their drivers.

* Linux support is now better under AMD.

However if you don't have any of those needs or desires, then I feel the 1080 is the better value card.I can't see much point in the RTX 2080 yet. I would give that a generation or two before being bothered about ray tracing.

Edit: Vega 64 has a cooler name too