PCPartPicker

  • Log In
  • Register

Vega isn't dead yet...

Forum Search

Guidelines

  • Be respectful to others
  • No spam
  • No NSFW content
  • No piracy or key resellers
  • No link shorteners
  • Offensive content will be removed

Topic

eesti 2 months ago

Vega 64 can only benefit from the Radeon VII launch. It is nearly inevitable it will be benchmarked alongside the Radeon VII, and the RTX lineup. This will expose the performance improvements Vega 64 has gained over time. Vega will become even better once Navi launches, as it will bring the price of Vega 64 and 56 down quite a bit.

Comments Sorted by:

Gilroar 1 Build 2 points 2 months ago

Vega isn't going to benefit from VII launch its drivers are already matured extracting its potential.

VII being a refresh will benefit from Vega driver maturity but that also means there isn't going to be much untapped potential left in the cards.

It will be similar to the 480>580>590 transition drivers were matured under the 480 so the 580/590 topped out right at launch.

It would be the same as if NVidia were to rebrand Pascal cards with a new process to increase performance the underlaying architecture hasn't changed so you have nothing left to make use of.

eesti submitter 1 point 2 months ago

I meant it would benefit, because people would see how much vega has improved from the driver updates since launch

Gilroar 1 Build 0 points 2 months ago

Even with the driver updates nothing changed other then stability.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJFm51OFcNA

It is still trading blows with the GTX 1080 at a higher power draw and now no advantage in frame syncing tech pricing.

Pricing on the cards is fixed by the HBM2 used onboard.

Edit: Also most reviewers benchmarked Vega against the RTX cards as they launched highlighting their current performance and pricing versus those.

eesti submitter 1 point 2 months ago

HBM2 prices are pretty good right now, apparently

Gilroar 1 Build 2 points 2 months ago

HBM2 prices never dropped.

The only reason VII is using as much as it does is because they are failed Instinct cards and they money is already spent.

Better to lose less money repurposing them for gamers.

yawumpus 1 point 2 months ago

Just how many freesync monitors would a used GTX 1080 support? I haven't seen any indication that nvidia is going to open all boards retroactively to support all freesync monitors.

Of course this is more an issue comparing a used Vega 64 to a used (no longer manufactured) GTX 1080. As you mention a Radeon VII should compete with shipping RTXs (presumably a RTX2070)

Gilroar 1 Build 1 point 2 months ago

Just how many freesync monitors would a used GTX 1080 support?

Any that have a Display Port 1.2a or later work as per VESA adaptive sync specs.

If your Freesync panel only has HDMI then you are out of luck but that also applies to the Vega 64 since if you don't have a Display Port then they likely didn't include a later generation HDMI so it's a low refresh and resolution monitor.

And all 10 series and later cards support Vesa adaptive sync now.

Granddy 1 Build 1 point 2 months ago

Vega 56 is now nibbling at the gtx 1070 ti and RTX 2060. Around 5-10% slower on average than it but 50-60 dollars cheaper on the used market compared to the gtx 1070ti on the used market.

If you can deal with more power, heat and noise, then the cheaper card with freesync plus a good chance of flashing it to a vega 64(if you have samsung memory) can make it a good buy on the used market.

bucketofcrud12 4 Builds 2 points 2 months ago

all true, but you forget that Nvidia can now use Freesync just like any AMD card can. this was the singular thing that held me back from buying a 1080 ti originally. now that Nvidia can use freesync, I see no reasons aside from pricing to go AMD. I used to have both a 56 and a 64 (which I tried to crossfire at one point. Please, do not try that; its just terrible in any game). the 1080 ti is a great card and the Radeon 7 will definitely be competition for it (or it would've been, were 1080 ti's still being made). at least it will compete with the 2080 somewhat.

Granddy 1 Build 1 point 2 months ago

And how many freesync monitors work properly with nvidia cards? (There's unofficial support for other freesync monitors but many of them suffer desyncs, color decolonization and other bugs.)

bucketofcrud12 4 Builds 2 points 2 months ago

well, so far, all three freesync monitors that I've tried work fine with my 1080 ti. I've tried an officially supported Asus VG278Q along with two others that are not listed as officially compatible; the Crossover 34U100 and Acer SB220Q bi. all three worked just as intended. I have had no issues with any of them. freesync works as intended, with zero flicker, stutter, jitter, or lag. I am beginning to think that Nvidia rigged the demo at CES with bad monitors in order to promote their G-sync standard. then again, I've only tested this on 3 of who-freaking-knows how many monitors on the market. from what I can tell, Freesync doesnt work any worse on Nvidia than on AMD as far as I have seen personally. I am aware that some people are saying Nvidia isnt doing it as well as AMD in some cases, but we'll see this develope over time for sure. at least for now, I'm content with it.

Granddy 1 Build 1 point 2 months ago

Interesting.

I'll keep an eye out for specific freesync monitors that'll work with a gtx 1070 ti if I find a good deal on one.

bucketofcrud12 4 Builds 1 point 2 months ago

for 1080p, the VG278Q is REALLY good looking. if you were wanting 1440p, I dont know what I'd recommend. the Crossover 34U100 (3440x1440p @100hz) exhibits ghosting on both AMD and Nvidia cards, so that one is just a monitor issue (though its probably becasue they used a PVA panel with a 27ms response)

JMak00 1 Build 1 point 2 months ago

I agree with the OPs comment. Seeing a few reviews already the Vega was in the mix with vii and the rtx cards. I was surprised by how well the Vega stood up in actual game comparisons. Seeing how vii lacks tangible features of the rtx models and costs the same, Vega came out looking good.

Gilroar 1 Build 2 points 2 months ago

Vega 64 still has the problem of costing $50 more then what as often as not ends up a better performance card with the RTX 2060 and that is for the poorly cooled blower models with aftermarket starting at $150 more.

Vega 56 has one model that is somewhat competitive at $330 but the others are all over $400.

So aside from one lower performance card Vega as a whole is still massively overpriced for what you get. The downside of sticking $150+ of memory on cards meant to be middle range is when they need pricing cuts you are well and truly stuck on what you can do.

yawumpus 1 point 2 months ago

While AMD is sticking $150+ of memory, nVidia needs 40% more area* for raytracing and other features of the RTX system (comparing RTX2070 to GTX1080 as they both appear to use "all" the transistors). Its pretty bad when you can't compete in such a situation (never mind how AMD doesn't appear to be competitive at all in power efficiency, when "most computers" sold are laptops).

  • RTX2070 uses 445 mm2 in 12nm TSMC. GTX2080 uses 314 mm2 in 16nm TSMC That's a lot of silicon for raytracing (and anything else it includes).
Gilroar 1 Build 2 points 2 months ago

The 64 only competes with the 2060 which is using the same silicon as the 2070 cut down and gets to use 30-40% cheaper memory per GB let alone less of it.