• 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.

What do we think about Vega?

  • What has AMD been doing for the past 1-2 years?

  • It consumes how many watts and is how loud!!!

  • It is not that bad.

  • Want to buy but put off by pricing and warranty.

  • I will be buying one for sure (I own a Freesync monitor so have little choice).

  • Better red than dead.


Results are only viewable after voting.
Destiny 2 is a Blizzard Activision title - most of their titles have tended to prefer Intel/Nvidia for a very long time(I think Overwatch might be one of the more even ones but I have not looked into this in any detail so might be wrong). Its the same with any UE4 based game - even though Epic Games looks to have gotten a bit closer to AMD more recently(Tim Sweeney was at the Vega launch IIRC),they still have a strong working partnership with Nvidia(just like DICE has with AMD) which has spanned many years.
Overwatch performs better on nVidia cards generally, but it's such a low-requirement game that it's not a big deal.
 
Really confused by the Vega pricing. Why are some 56 the same price of some 64's? What a mess...

It's due to the game packs which come with 2 games for the extra £'s. They can also be considered the default SKU coming through the distribution channel. These are then discounted to the standalone card prices.
It does mean the game pack 56's hit the (limited run) 64 standalone prices.
 
It's due to the game packs which come with 2 games for the extra £'s. They can also be considered the default SKU coming through the distribution channel. These are then discounted to the standalone card prices.
It does mean the game pack 56's hit the (limited run) 64 standalone prices.

It's just pointless really. Isn't it. Just release one SKU like normal companies do.
 
I agree a 56 should be fine with a 500w psu providing it has a decent 12v rail.

I wasnt blaming his high power load entirely on the GPU, I just said it was high :)

I think the reviewers figures are high as well. I think the reason is that my cpu has very moderate voltages set (I refuse to run any cpu over 1.21v, yet many run 1.35v as routine). I also keep c states enabled, whilst many overclockers turn it all off. So I expect these inflated power stats, will be down to the cpu as well.

On my mining rig I have 2 gtx 1070s running on one 500watt PSU after someone told me I was crazy to use that PSU for 2 1070s and pulling over power 240w at the wall not even half the PSU capacity. Most enthusiasts tend to massively over provision on PSUs. Although both those 1070s are power limited to 70%.

I did a reasonably detailed review of my GTX1080FE on Hexus,and my mini-ITX system with a Xeon E3 1230 V2/Core i7 3770,B75 motherboard,16GB of RAM,SSD and some HDDs with a Corsair SFX450 was drawing between 140W~280W on the wall depending on the game,and that was at qHD.
 
AMD's next release :D

teleporter.jpg
 
Actually owning a 56 I can't see what the fuss is, I game at 2560 * 1080p, getting 60-90 FPS IN PUBG, over 100 FPS in BF1, loving it, not majorly noisy and good value
 
trying to convince myself to push the button on a 64 but £580 with a waterblock .. hmmm
yeah it's going to kill my 290 and my bank balance ...lol
 
A WC brand needs to make that limited edition backplate (or at least very similar), they would sell quite a few, even to people who don't watercool, it looks sweet with a waterblock
 
Actually owning a 56 I can't see what the fuss is, I game at 2560 * 1080p, getting 60-90 FPS IN PUBG, over 100 FPS in BF1, loving it, not majorly noisy and good value
I think the fuss is mostly about the fact you could've got this performance 16 months ago with a 1070 and people were hoping that after 16 months AMD would have done something more than match Nvidia performance for the same price but with higher power usage.

I don't think the Vega 56 or 64 are bad cards and I think the reception would've been much better if they'd released them 17 months ago.

I think if Nvidia or Intel released a product 16 months later than the competition and it performed about the same, cost about the same but used more power to do it then there would be complaints there too (except a few of the people making the complaints and not understanding the complaints might be switched).
 
I think the fuss is mostly about the fact you could've got this performance 16 months ago with a 1070 and people were hoping that after 16 months AMD would have done something more than match Nvidia performance for the same price but with higher power usage.

I don't think the Vega 56 or 64 are bad cards and I think the reception would've been much better if they'd released them 17 months ago.

I think if Nvidia or Intel released a product 16 months later than the competition and it performed about the same, cost about the same but used more power to do it then there would be complaints there too (except a few of the people making the complaints and not understanding the complaints might be switched).

+1
 
It's funny because people were moaning about nvidia trapping people into the gsync ecosystem, yet all I see are threads full of posters chained to their freesync monitors, trapped with having to buy awful vega cards that needs to run in the middle of Siberia to stay cool, on a mini nuclear plant.
 
It's funny because people were moaning about nvidia trapping people into the gsync ecosystem, yet all I see are threads full of posters chained to their freesync monitors, trapped with having to buy awful vega cards that needs to run in the middle of Siberia to stay cool, on a mini nuclear plant.
God yeah, its a nightmare really :D
 
Back
Top Bottom