• 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

Gerard said:
Yup, think it's safe to say there's a few dodgy ones doing the rounds. Air cooled seems fine so far in comparison.
Click to expand...

This is likely stupid but is it possible that the chips used for the AIO's aren't the better chips but instead could they be chips that failed the tests for air cooled cards, we know the chips in the AIO's have got a different codename to those in the air models so ???
 
nashathedog said:
This is likely stupid but is it possible that the chips used for the AIO's aren't the better chips but instead could they be chips that failed the tests for air cooled cards, we know the chips in the AIO's have got a different codename to those in the air models so ???
Click to expand...

I thought they were all the same chip with no real binning going on, if the air cards can get a decent OC then you'd think the aio cards would be fine running with a better cooler. Vega is meant to be good for around 1700mhz or thereabouts, and people have got over that by a healthy margin, so no clue whats going on with the aio cards. Bad batch or maybe an issue with the cooler, as the dodgy ones all seem to be exhibiting the same behaviour.
 
Gerard said:
I thought they were all the same chip with no real binning going on, if the air cards can get a decent OC then you'd think the aio cards would be fine running with a better cooler. Vega is meant to be good for around 1700mhz or thereabouts, and people have got over that by a healthy margin, so no clue whats going on with the aio cards. Bad batch or maybe an issue with the cooler, as the dodgy ones all seem to be exhibiting the same behaviour.
Click to expand...

In one of the reviews I watched they said the chips used in the AIO's had different codes to those in the Air cooled models, I don't think I heard it wrong, Maybe some of those with Air Vega's and those with Water Vega's can open up GPU-z to check.

Here's the AIO model I had

iJx9416.png



http://i.imgur.com/iJx9416.png

The air cooled are all C1 revision while the Water cooled models are C0 revision,

That must have been what I was on about, What is it likely to mean though?

https://www.kitguru.net/components/graphic-cards/luke-hill/amd-radeon-rx-vega64-8gb-air-review/
 
Last edited:
nashathedog said:
This is likely stupid but is it possible that the chips used for the AIO's aren't the better chips but instead could they be chips that failed the tests for air cooled cards, we know the chips in the AIO's have got a different codename to those in the air models so ???
Click to expand...

Usually the more expensive products are binned better. The LE being the flagship and running at 1750Mz out of the box would suggest it's the best bin, though I guess anything is possible.
 
Dave2150 said:
Usually the more expensive products are binned better. The LE being the flagship and running at 1750Mz out of the box would suggest it's the best bin, though I guess anything is possible.
Click to expand...

As I posted while you was posting we have C0 revisions and C1 revisions, Does that imply the C0's are earlier ones in a similar way to how the Kepler 780's had A1 chips and then B1 chips for GHZ editions?
It seems to be the Watercooled C0's with the problem not the air-cooled C1's?
 
Last edited:
nashathedog said:
As I posted while you was posting we have C0 revisions and C1 revisions, Does that imply the C0's are earlier ones in a similar way to how the Kepler 780's had A1 chips and then B1 chips for GHZ editions?
It seems to be the Watercooled C0's with the problem not the air-cooled C1's?
Click to expand...

Mine's a C0, though GPUZ still needs to be updated for Vega support. It might be completely incorrect at the moment.
 
Dave2150 said:
Yours actually says Hynix in GPUZ 2.2.0?

Mine's Micron, though as you say GPU-Z could be interpreting it incorrectly.
Click to expand...

My bad, just double checked and it also reports Micron.

Been running Forza Horizon 3 for 2 hours and not a single black screen crash. Before the "1050 tweak" it would always crash after a few minutes....

Now I don't know what to do, should I still send it back as it's not working normally with default factory settings or should I keep it? I'm worried that it could be fine now and for some time and suddenly become unstable again due to what appears to be "weak/faulty" memory :(
 
Chewie said:
My bad, just double checked and it also reports Micron.

Been running Forza Horizon 3 for 2 hours and not a single black screen crash. Before the "1050 tweak" it would always crash after a few minutes....

Now I don't know what to do, should I still send it back as it's not working normally with default factory settings or should I keep it? I'm worried that it could be fine now and for some time and suddenly become unstable again due to what appears to be "weak/faulty" memory :(
Click to expand...
IMO you should return it.

The way I think of it is like this: I'm paying good money for a graphics card, and I want it to work perfectly out of the box, if it doesn't, it should be fixed. If it were some cheap whatever thingy, I wouldn't really care, but this is quite a bit of money we're talking.
 
Chewie said:
The original beta launch drivers didn't allow any kind of GPU/memory voltage changes via Wattman that's correct (well you could modify values but it had no effect really).
Click to expand...
Updated the driver so I could test your recommendation. Upping the voltage made my card extremely unstable, crashing it even in benchmarks which didn't present any issue before. I would advise people not to up the HBM voltage until we have a better idea what Wattman is actually doing to it.
 
kundi said:
Updated the driver so I could test your recommendation. Upping the voltage made my card extremely unstable, crashing it even in benchmarks which didn't present any issue before. I would advise people not to up the HBM voltage until we have a better idea what Wattman is actually doing to it.
Click to expand...

Wow that's interesting, I'm even more clueless as of why it seems to have helped in my case :confused:
 
Cancel original question.

So, I've settled on a clock now, done my benches higher to test stability and now dialled back down to 1650/1050 for 24/7 gaming. Just been playing Ghost Recon Wildlands mix of Very high and Ultra with SMAA, got a 72fps cap on and game is sticking to that cap like glue. Maybe the odd occasion it drop to 60fps but man its so damn good and smooth.

I think this card is bloody brilliant in all honesty, no idea what all the hate is for.
 
Last edited:
JediFragger said:
No hate here, I think it's got great potential!! Just concerned that it so very uneven in its performance. V weird.
Click to expand...

Ppl just love bashing stuff, its easy isn't it to fit in with the bashing crowd Jedi lmao. Couldnt be happier with it, at £449, think it's bloody brilliant performance and now with it under water, heat and fan noise zero problem.

here's my GPUz anyway. No Samsung here.

36018409693_7a37d12d0a_b.jpg
 
How is the fan noise on the air RX VEGA guys?

With everything default while gaming?

I search for a youtube video, but nothing came up sadly, i really like the desing of the limited edition, but im afraid of the noise.

Thanks!
 
Members discussing differing HBM IC manufacturers there should not be one.

In the VBIOS is a table, VRAM_Info, this contains RAM IC text ID string:- KHA843801B is in all RX VEGA VBIOS and no other string. When I extract VRAM_Info table which contains info on RAM IC, timings, straps, etc all RX VEGA VBIOS are identical.

W1zzard asked for beta testers of GPU-Z for VEGA support to be fixed on OCN today or so, so I'd get in contact with him on TPU.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom