• 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.
RavenXXX2 said:
DX12 aint doing much for AMD here.

Click to expand...

You know, thats not the first time ive seen questionable DX12 performance on a Vega card, somethings definitely not right, they either havent geared the drivers for DX12 yet or the hardware is a step backwards with regards to their previous cards DX12 performance, because ive seen a few other people comment the DX12 performance does not seem where it should be given the hardware behind it.

I think it requires more analysis, anyone got a Vega and a Polaris card? would be interesting to test the performance of both cards in DX11 and DX12 over a range of titles.
 
Mayh3M said:
According to OC3D's review the 64 overclocked consumed as much power as two ROG Strix overclocked 1080 Tis. He checked this number over five times. Absolutely brutal.

No wonder even AMDTV called out AMD over these poor cards. Only the most rabid of fans now defend Vega.
Click to expand...
And only the most rabid Nvidia fans would pull out some overvolted "up to fifteen" numbers to call product bad.
Especially when thorough reviews show already default settings being clearly over optimal for power consumption/efficiency.

Besides every single GPU (+CPU) will start hogging power like crazy if going over some manufacturing process dependent tresholds.
Most of the times VRM would just burn out in such situations hence things like EVGA's EPower
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/31155...ives-your-devices-some-extra-juice/index.html
By your own logic must have been bad products to suck enough power to need one...
http://hwbot.org/newsflash/2071_tin..._overclocking_with_new_evga_epower_classified

Only value such number have is experiment value and telling VRM's strength.
 
ubersonic said:
I think he meant that Nvidia are better than AMD at delivering as much as they can from the card on day one.
Click to expand...

Bazzards said:
Spot on.
Click to expand...

I know what you meant, it's just not true because AMD also by definition deliver as mush as they can from day one. Both of you are ignoring the fact that Nvidia also deliver increased performance in their drivers over time. Unless you are suggesting that Nvidia driver team are crap and can't refine their drivers in subsequent releases?
 
ICDP said:
I know what you meant, it's just not true because AMD also by definition deliver as mush as they can from day one.
Click to expand...
You're misunderstanding.

Both AMD and Nvidia attempt to deliver as much of the cards maximum possible performance on day one, but Nvidia usually do it better. This is why Nvidia cards in general improve less than AMD cards over time, because they start out with a higher % of their max performance. Or at least this has been the case for the last decade (and looks to be for the foreseeable future).
 
Gregster said:
NVidia have their faults but on the whole, the performance you get is what you get and that's that. None of this 6 months time performance will improve spiel. I am not faulting AMD but I would rather have the performance now instead of later.
Click to expand...

But where is this myth coming from? Is it AMD fans claiming that AMD get better with time? Is it Nvidia fans claiming AMD are crap until they get their act together? The truth is that both AMD and Nvidia deliver performance increasing drivers for existing GPUs all the time.

So does this Nvidia driver release imply Nvidia didn't (shock horror) follow their normal, "performance you get is what you get" mantra you just stated?
https://www.ghacks.net/2017/03/10/nvidia-driver-378-78-big-directx12-improvements/

It's pure nonsense to declare that with Nvidia "performance you get is what you get" right from "day one". Conversely the opposite that AMD are somehow guaranteed to improve with age more than Nvidia is nonsense.

Both AMD and Nvidia have and will continue to improve performance in their drivers over the life cycle of their products.
 
ICDP said:
But where is this myth coming from? Is it AMD fans claiming that AMD get better with time? Is it Nvidia fans claiming AMD are crap until they get their act together? The truth is that both AMD and Nvidia deliver performance increasing drivers for existing GPUs all the time.

So does this Nvidia driver release imply Nvidia didn't (shock horror) follow their normal, "performance you get is what you get" mantra you just stated?
https://www.ghacks.net/2017/03/10/nvidia-driver-378-78-big-directx12-improvements/

It's pure nonsense to declare that with Nvidia "performance you get is what you get" right from "day one". Conversely the opposite that AMD are somehow guaranteed to improve with age more than Nvidia is nonsense.

Both AMD and Nvidia have and will continue to improve performance in their drivers over the life cycle of their products.
Click to expand...
Well you have picked out a DX12 driver that gives far better performance for some of the DX12 games on NVidia. Not sure what you want me to say but seems you have your mindset and no point trying to change it. Ohhh and many people here alone have stated that AMD gets better over time and you must have seen it?
 
KentMan said:
You know, thats not the first time ive seen questionable DX12 performance on a Vega card, somethings definitely not right, they either havent geared the drivers for DX12 yet or the hardware is a step backwards with regards to their previous cards DX12 performance, because ive seen a few other people comment the DX12 performance does not seem where it should be given the hardware behind it.

I think it requires more analysis, anyone got a Vega and a Polaris card? would be interesting to test the performance of both cards in DX11 and DX12 over a range of titles.
Click to expand...


I don't see why people expect Vega to some how see massive gains over nvidia in DX12. It just shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what DX12 is all about.

It is a complete myth that Nvidia/Pascal is bad at DX12. If there is poor performance then it is down to the developers. DX11 being a higher level APi allows more control and intervention by the drivers, allowing Nvidia and AMD to better optimize poor code. This is something nvidia is more successful at than AMD.



Results like the above are not isolated. E.g, TimeSpy is not only DX12 but makes heavy use of Async compute for example, Vega doesn't show any significant lead. The same goes for Vulkan. All very well the AMD fans going on about 1 game, Doom, but then they completely ignore the other main Vulkan game - The Talos Principle.
 
Gregster said:
Well you have picked out a DX12 driver that gives far better performance for some of the DX12 games on NVidia. Not sure what you want me to say but seems you have your mindset and no point trying to change it. Ohhh and many people here alone have stated that AMD gets better over time and you must have seen it?
Click to expand...

I have and they are right, but so do Nvidia. Anyone claiming AMD get performance over time and that Nvidia do not are deluding themselves.
 
Gregster said:
Well you have picked out a DX12 driver that gives far better performance for some of the DX12 games on NVidia. Not sure what you want me to say but seems you have your mindset and no point trying to change it. Ohhh and many people here alone have stated that AMD gets better over time and you must have seen it?
Click to expand...

i suspect its down to man / woman power (PC check) and time money resources ...Nvidia having more of it and with that there drivers are more up to scratch on release from the get go.. as opposed to AMD who have less but need more time to mature ..who knows ... maybe i am deluded ^ :p
 
One thing to keep in mind is that the drivers for the 1000 series have been out in the wild for over a year. Whilst Vega's is still raw. In time I'm sure AMD will sort the drivers out.
 
I was waiting for RX Vega 56, but after seeing the Sapphire RX 580 Nitro+ back in stock and at rrp (or pretty close at least), I brought that instead. I don't think there is any chance of a Nitro+ or Strix 56 being less than £440, which would be £150 more than I paid for the 580. I guess I'll just wait and see if Navi is any better. Its not like I'll be gaming at anything more than 1080p for now, so 580 will do me just fine. In the short term, it'll save me money since I don't really feel the need to buy a 4K monitor just yet (and if I do, I can still game on it at 1080p).
 
ICDP said:
Anyone claiming AMD get performance over time and that Nvidia do not are deluding themselves.
Click to expand...

No one is claiming that. The claim is that at card launch Nvidia's drivers are more complete in terms of performance than AMD's. Of course Nvidia's also improve but no where near as much as AMD's.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom