Poll: The Vega Review Thread.

[Martini1991]

I thought there was noise of a Vega part replacing Polaris,so if that has improved performance it would probably bridge that gap.

A fury x performance type part could be quite decent at the right price.

 

[shankly1985]

Another game looking very well optimised out the door for AMD VEGA 56 matching very close to the 1080

 

[V F]

Adopting the Crysis meme?

 

[shankly1985]

Adopting the Crysis meme?

I guess haa he does that for all his videos. he seems like a cool guy.

 

[Martini1991]

Another game looking very well optimised out the door for AMD VEGA 56 matching very close to the 1080

Given the pricing this isn't a positive, the 1080's the same price cooler, quieter and uses less power.

 

[LtMatt]

Another game looking very well optimised out the door for AMD VEGA 56 matching very close to the 1080

Some more benches here.

I have this game but have not got round to testing it much yet. When i did i was a bit CPU bottlenecked, so Vega 64 performance is being held back a bit.

Spoiler

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/The-E...vil-Within-2-Techink-Test-Benchmarks-1241032/

 

[shankly1985]

Some more benches here.

I have this game but have not got round to testing it much yet. When i did i was a bit CPU bottlenecked, so Vega 64 performance is being held back a bit.

Spoiler

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/The-E...vil-Within-2-Techink-Test-Benchmarks-1241032/

Not that fair behind the 1080 Ti

 

[LoadsaMoney]

Runs fine for me too, get about the 50s @ ultra, 1440p, runs as good as the first one, and thats still on the old Crimson 16.3 hotfixes from last March

Will get onto it when i get Bioshock Infinite done.

 

[GoogalyMoogaly]

Not that fair behind the 1080 Ti

They are similar price, so you'd expect similar performance wouldn't you?
In fact given the price of the Vega 64 LC I'd expect it to be closer.
Also, that's at 1080p, the higher the resolution the better the Nvidia cards seem to do.
At 1440p the 1080 just beats the Vega 56 and at 4K it is neck-and-neck with the Vega 64 (AC).

So price/performance ratio seems to favour Nvidia at the higher end.

 

[shankly1985]

They are similar price, so you'd expect similar performance wouldn't you?
In fact given the price of the Vega 64 LC I'd expect it to be closer.
Also, that's at 1080p, the higher the resolution the better the Nvidia cards seem to do.
At 1440p the 1080 just beats the Vega 56 and at 4K it is neck-and-neck with the Vega 64 (AC).

So price/performance ratio seems to favour Nvidia at the higher end.

Lol
Based on what I paid am OK to judge :0 £470 cheaper than 1080.
Vega prices will drop again soon, once supply comes noticed vega is hardly in stock? Reason why prices are higher.

Happens all the time.

 

[GoogalyMoogaly]

Lol
Based on what I paid am OK to judge :0 £470 cheaper than 1080.
Vega prices will drop again soon, once supply comes noticed vega is hardly in stock? Reason why prices are higher.

Happens all the time.

Doesn't change current facts though.
Surely current opinion should be based on current prices not cherry picked prices from X months ago when there was an offer on or something?

 

[shankly1985]

Doesn't change current facts though.
Surely current opinion should be based on current prices not cherry picked prices from X months ago when there was an offer on or something?

Release price was £450 if someone pays that price nothing else matters that is what they compare there price to.
I paid £470 so I compare my price I paid to the price on offer atm.

Simple has that.
Sure if someone pays £500+ then they after compare to what is on offer at that price point.

 

[GoogalyMoogaly]

Release price was £450 if someone pays that price nothing else matters that is what they compare there price to.
I paid £470 so I compare my price I paid to the price on offer atm.

Simple has that.
Sure if someone pays £500+ then they after compare to what is on offer at that price point.

And for anyone that hasn't bought one yet?

Still, any way you need to twist it to make Vega seem good against a 16 month old.

Let me try...
If you bought a 1080 at release for £600, that's £37.50 per month of ownership.
If you bought a Vega 64 at release for £450, that's £225 per month of ownership.
It'll take 40 more months before the cost is level, so ~3½ years.

 

[Gregster]

And for anyone that hasn't bought one yet?

Still, any way you need to twist it to make Vega seem good against a 16 month old.

Let me try...
If you bought a 1080 at release for £600, that's £37.50 per month of ownership.
If you bought a Vega 64 at release for £450, that's £225 per month of ownership.
It'll take 40 more months before the cost is level, so ~3½ years.

Agreed.

£500 for Vega56 or £500 for a 1080 (£499 cheapest for both).

 

[Hotwired]

It would be funny if it wasn't the same people jumping on anyone that mentions Vega without being negative.

Oh you paid a good price for it did you? You're enjoying the performance are you?

WELL HOW DARE YOU.

 

[shankly1985]

And for anyone that hasn't bought one yet?

Still, any way you need to twist it to make Vega seem good against a 16 month old.

Let me try...
If you bought a 1080 at release for £600, that's £37.50 per month of ownership.
If you bought a Vega 64 at release for £450, that's £225 per month of ownership.
It'll take 40 more months before the cost is level, so ~3½ years.

Like I said meny times on here, I don't buy NVidia. It doesn't matter if it was 5 years later.
My stance is very clear I buy Amd, my upgrade path was from a R9290 and what a great upgrade it has been.
I judge my own money against the competition within benchmarks if vega 64 is beating out the 1080 I consider that a plus

 

[GoogalyMoogaly]

It would be funny if it wasn't the same people jumping on anyone that mentions Vega without being negative.

Oh you paid a good price for it did you? You're enjoying the performance are you?

WELL HOW DARE YOU.

It'd also be funny if it wasn't the same people defending whatever AMD do, even if they attack Nvidia for doing the same thing.
And the same people that jump on anyone that says something not positive about AMD. How dare you point out the truth! Facts are not welcome on this board, we just want threads about AMD beating Nvidia cards because of certain feature sets even though it turns out to just be drivers because it sounds better.

Seems to be ok to point out that GSync is proprietary and that it costs more than Freesync even though some people enjoy GSync. Do you moan about that too?
What about when someone posts a less than favourable comment about an Intel chip that people may own and enjoy? Will I find you jumping to Intel's defence there?

Like I said meny times on here, I don't buy NVidia. It doesn't matter if it was 5 years later.
My stance is very clear I buy Amd, my upgrade path was from a R9290 and what a great upgrade it has been.
I judge my own money against the competition within benchmarks if vega 64 is beating out the 1080 I consider that a plus

Why does it matter what Nvidia do if you're never going to buy it?
If the 1080 was 20x faster than Vega it wouldn't matter to you or if it was ½ as fast it wouldn't matter.
The only reason I can see for such comments is to bait an argument, then act the victim when it works.

 

[Davedree]

It'd also be funny if it wasn't the same people defending whatever AMD do, even if they attack Nvidia for doing the same thing.
And the same people that jump on anyone that says something not positive about AMD. How dare you point out the truth! Facts are not welcome on this board, we just want threads about AMD beating Nvidia cards because of certain feature sets even though it turns out to just be drivers because it sounds better.

Seems to be ok to point out that GSync is proprietary and that it costs more than Freesync even though some people enjoy GSync. Do you moan about that too?
What about when someone posts a less than favourable comment about an Intel chip that people may own and enjoy? Will I find you jumping to Intel's defence there?


Why does it matter what Nvidia do if you're never going to buy it?
If the 1080 was 20x faster than Vega it wouldn't matter to you or if it was ½ as fast it wouldn't matter.
The only reason I can see for such comments is to bait an argument, then act the victim when it works.

Just block them, pointless wasting time with people who are biased to a side or just their opinion.

 

[Hotwired]

It'd also be funny if it wasn't the same people defending whatever AMD do, even if they attack Nvidia for doing the same thing.
And the same people that jump on anyone that says something not positive about AMD. How dare you point out the truth! Facts are not welcome on this board, we just want threads about AMD beating Nvidia cards because of certain feature sets even though it turns out to just be drivers because it sounds better.

Seems to be ok to point out that GSync is proprietary and that it costs more than Freesync even though some people enjoy GSync. Do you moan about that too?
What about when someone posts a less than favourable comment about an Intel chip that people may own and enjoy? Will I find you jumping to Intel's defence there?

Do you think you're doing someone a favour by grabbing their posts and telling them how much you don't like Vega and how they also should not.

In a thread of 145 pages where everything you say is a multiple repeat from pages past.

I go past and see an obnoxious anti-AMD effort and you think I'm posting because of the word AMD in that.

 

[shankly1985]

It'd also be funny if it wasn't the same people defending whatever AMD do, even if they attack Nvidia for doing the same thing.
And the same people that jump on anyone that says something not positive about AMD. How dare you point out the truth! Facts are not welcome on this board, we just want threads about AMD beating Nvidia cards because of certain feature sets even though it turns out to just be drivers because it sounds better.

Seems to be ok to point out that GSync is proprietary and that it costs more than Freesync even though some people enjoy GSync. Do you moan about that too?
What about when someone posts a less than favourable comment about an Intel chip that people may own and enjoy? Will I find you jumping to Intel's defence there?


Why does it matter what Nvidia do if you're never going to buy it?
If the 1080 was 20x faster than Vega it wouldn't matter to you or if it was ½ as fast it wouldn't matter.
The only reason I can see for such comments is to bait an argument, then act the victim when it works.

Because even though I wont buy Nvidia GPU, that doesn't stop me being a PC gamer fan and be in the know!! I follow the PC scene a lot, it is my main hobby that I spend a lot of my hard working cash on!! Its also because of this love for PC gaming where a lot of what I choose comes from! For example I am a massive fan of Open scouce I been in the Android/Linux community for years to understand why Open Source is massive... AMD aim for is exactly everything I want from the PC platform and underdogs gets my money and a matter of a fact I enjoy seeing AMD win!
Because that Win is better for the PC platform!!

I think I asked you this question before but didn't get an answer!
Why is it the Games that AMD work on are known for some of the best PC games for Performance I.E Alien for example on both AMD and Nvidia!
While games that Nvidia work on are some of the most known for worst performance I.E Batman
Right here the question name me one Game AMD has worked on that was a bad PC port!! Or bad for Nvidia!