Caporegime
I just don't get why anyone would buy them, even those with FreeSync.
-
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.
Poll: The Vega Review Thread.
- Thread starter Kaapstad
- Start date
Soldato
Soldato
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 12,804
AMD saved me £400, I'll keep my Fury for the time being, a 56 AIB card could be tempting depending on cost/performance but highly unlikely at this stage. I'll see what happens in September (More waiting) and see if I can resist spending the money on other things in that time.
Soldato
I still have my Fury X and tbh looking at 56 it's about identical, only it has more VRAM. Still get great performance out of my Fury X.
Associate
So the wait is over, and AMD have an expensive hot power hungry GPU that struggles to keep up with a 1080FE that is over a year older than Vega. 
you have to ask the question why would anyone want to buy Vega for gaming? can only be brand loyalty.
Any one who has enjoyed there 1080 for the last year + must be laughing now
its a shame really, but I always said if it was that good even AMD would enjoy leaking some results.
you have to ask the question why would anyone want to buy Vega for gaming? can only be brand loyalty.Any one who has enjoyed there 1080 for the last year + must be laughing now
its a shame really, but I always said if it was that good even AMD would enjoy leaking some results.
Caporegime
Yep,and you can most reviews consider it a solid card as long as it sticks to RRP,but have you noticed everyone just talks about the Vega64. Remember weeks ago I said the Vega56 would probably be close to the Vega64.
The Vega56 is slightly faster probably due to its greater VRAM,and it shows less performance drops in Nvidia sponsored titles,the very same titles Polaris showed gains over previous AMD cards.
But that is the point,your Fury X is almost GTX1070 level when it was getting thrashed at release by that card. As long as the miners don't bump the price it will be a solid alternative to the GTX1070,and if you look at your Fury X,it will be interesting to see what AMD can squeeze out of it.
The thing is if Vega56 does hit at under £400,an a big IF,then its fair contender to the GTX1070. If anything more of the review sites including TPU,who have been tough on AMD cards in the past,seem more positive about Vega56 if hits its RRP.
Last edited:
Soldato
Snap. It's still a peach of a card Imo. Best air cooler ever.
Associate
Where can you get a Vega 64 for £450?
Was there for a moment, not a regular price obviously so your comment doesn't make much sense.
Soldato
Where can you get a Vega 64 for £450?
Was there long enough - and I've a feeling that is the 'regular' price
Soldato
Soldato
In anything recent my Fury X is faster than a 1070. Unless it hits the VRAM limit, then it gets ugly. But yeah OC3D have a great guy called WYP who basically benches every game, and even revisits some for new drivers etc and the Fury X is finally reaching its potential. When it's not running out of VRAM...
It will only improve as DX12 matures too.
EDIT. Should point out that I am talking about 1440p, not 1080p ! I have a 1440p monitor, so that is the most relevant to me
Soldato
double the performance of my 390, can chin off crossfire, freesync monitor and 100fps @ ultra settings on a 1440p monitor is why. Come on dude, its pretty straight forward. Oh and ill sell my 390's for £500 on fleabay to miners, then the water blocks for £50, upgrade has then cost me nothing.
Soldato
I'd still get the 64 over a 1080 tbh.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 12,804
In anything recent my Fury X is faster than a 1070. Unless it hits the VRAM limit, then it gets ugly. But yeah OC3D have a great guy called WYP who basically benches every game, and even revisits some for new drivers etc and the Fury X is finally reaching its potential. When it's not running out of VRAM...
It will only improve as DX12 matures too.
EDIT. Should point out that I am talking about 1440p, not 1080p ! I have a 1440p monitor, so that is the most relevant to me
Mine is just the normal Fury, this video confirms for me at least that its not worth the cost to change to a 56 if a 56 is on par with a 1070
Associate
OcUK dropping GTX prices - https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/t...1060-179-99-1070-349-99-1080-449-99.18789153/Was there long enough - and I've a feeling that is the 'regular' price
For me Vega 64 is just too power hungry and hot. I am planning a new build with Ryzen in an Asterion Classic case and need a card that runs cool. As for Vega 56, that is no upgrade over Fury sadly.
Caporegime
Thats the point though - one of the biggest improvements Polaris and by extension Vega has over the older AMD cards,is they tended to tank less in Nvidia games when certain features were enabled. So think of the Vega56 as an updated version of your card with double the VRAM,better tessellation,a bit lower power and a lower RRP(although the blasted miners might change that).
Its not earth shattering,but at the same time,it means AMD finally does have a GTX1070 class card,and if anything there are more of these than all the GTX1080 and GTX1080TI cards on Steam. People are still buying GTX1070 cards- my mate got one a few weeks ago,so as long as there are cards under £400,AMD will get more sales in the segment than they had over the last year to 18 months.
In the end you need to consider AMD redirected most of its R and D towards Ryzen and they said that,and this is the effect of it.
Soldato
So is mine.
Soldato
If it's double the performance and you've got 2, then it's not really an upgrade is it? So a side-grade has cost you nothing...
Soldato
No definitely not !
I don't get why Fury/X stock just stopped. I do know that hardly any one bought it at launch, maybe that was why? Vega seems to be selling like hot cakes though !
If AMD could have launched Fury X for the same price as the 980 they would have had a major success on their hands. Instead it was like it was some sort of laboratory experiment, and now they are doing the same thing playing with HBM2? very strange logic they seem to have.
They are still trying to get their GPU tech supported. If they could you would see the same sort of gains in gaming that you see in mining. But, as far it hasn't happened. Just like it didn't happen for Nvidia with Fermi. AMD now need to revert back and release what games want and not what AMD think games want.
I don't get why Fury/X stock just stopped. I do know that hardly any one bought it at launch, maybe that was why? Vega seems to be selling like hot cakes though !
If AMD could have launched Fury X for the same price as the 980 they would have had a major success on their hands. Instead it was like it was some sort of laboratory experiment, and now they are doing the same thing playing with HBM2? very strange logic they seem to have.
They are still trying to get their GPU tech supported. If they could you would see the same sort of gains in gaming that you see in mining. But, as far it hasn't happened. Just like it didn't happen for Nvidia with Fermi. AMD now need to revert back and release what games want and not what AMD think games want.