Wednesday, September 20th 2017

Custom-design Radeon RX Vega Cards by Mid-October

Still reeling under supply issues and overpricing, AMD's Radeon RX Vega line of graphics cards may finally be available in custom-design products from the company's AIB (add-in board) partners by mid-October, according to a Hardware.fr report. ASUS was the first to announce custom-design RX Vega 64 and RX Vega 56 graphics cards under its ROG Strix series, back in August. The cards were, however, nowhere to be found in the markets.

AIB partners will begin announcing their custom-design RX Vega series products in the coming weeks, with retail availability slated for mid-October. Radeon RX Vega 64 is currently available in three AMD-reference design SKUs, the standard reference-design, the premium "silver" air-cooled reference-design, which features a brushed aluminium cooler shroud and LED ornaments; and a more premium AIO liquid-cooled variant with higher clocks. The RX Vega 56 is available in vanilla standard reference-design.

Source: Hardware.fr
Add your own comment

43 Comments on Custom-design Radeon RX Vega Cards by Mid-October

#1
MrGenius
Vega Lightning please. Thanks!
Posted on Reply
#2
cucker tarlson
This cards absolutely SUCKS for the price they're selling now. AIBs would have to be both better and cheaper than reference to change that.
Posted on Reply
#3
cucker tarlson
I found a nice 28" 4K display which is exactly what I wanted, but it had freesync and I got used to variable refresh. So, I thought, I'll just trade my 1080 for Vega. It's gonna do abut the same, 45-55 fps, which is fine by me. Then V64 happened....

Posted on Reply
#4
Sempron Guy
cucker tarlson said:
I found a nice 28" 4K display which is exactly what I wanted, but it had freesync and I got used to variable refresh. So, I thought, I'll just trade my 1080 for Vega. It's gonna do abut the same, 45-55 fps, which is fine by me. Then V64 happened....


I guess a handful of people who will play that game will care.
Posted on Reply
#5
B-Real
cucker tarlson said:
I found a nice 28" 4K display which is exactly what I wanted, but it had freesync and I got used to variable refresh. So, I thought, I'll just trade my 1080 for Vega. It's gonna do abut the same, 45-55 fps, which is fine by me. Then V64 happened....


So you think tof the Dishonored game that the Vega64 equals 1070 or what? Poor guy.
Posted on Reply
#6
nemesis.ie
All that said, oddly, Vega looks better at the lower resolutions:

http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-radeon-rx-vega-64-8gb-review,27.html

Which implies a lack of optimisation to me. Will there be a DX12/Vulkan update to this game?

Maybe it will also be targeted in the next driver release.

Unless it was something you were going to spend 100s of hours in (Skyrim, Star Citizen or other open world game or some online thing) I'd not be buying a card based on the performance in one title.
Posted on Reply
#7
Boosnie
cucker tarlson said:
I found a nice 28" 4K display which is exactly what I wanted, but it had freesync and I got used to variable refresh. So, I thought, I'll just trade my 1080 for Vega. It's gonna do abut the same, 45-55 fps, which is fine by me. Then V64 happened....


You nitpicked the worst possible review outcome from google images for a 2017 game that does not support DX12?
cool!
Posted on Reply
#8
Dimi
Boosnie said:
You nitpicked the worst possible review outcome from google images for a 2017 game that does not support DX12?
cool!
To be fair, the GTX 1070 is almost 300$ cheaper than the RX Vega 64.
With that price difference, there shouldn't be a "worst outcome" for any title.
I mean, can you show me 1 title where the GTX 1080 Ti gets beaten by a GTX 1070?
Posted on Reply
#9
B-Real
Dimi said:
To be fair, the GTX 1070 is almost 300$ cheaper than the RX Vega 64.
With that price difference, there shouldn't be a "worst outcome" for any title.
I mean, can you show me 1 title where the GTX 1080 Ti gets beaten by a GTX 1070?
1. It's NV vs. NV, not NV vs. AMD. Totally different story.

2. Actually the cheapest Vega64 costs £470, the cheapest 1070 costs £380. That's a £90 difference (VAT inc.), which is $122 with VAT.
Posted on Reply
#10
Dimi
Still 300$ difference, it should never be slower.
Posted on Reply
#11
B-Real
Dimi said:
Still 300$ difference, it should never be slower.
Nope, the price difference is 100$ (VAT exc).
Posted on Reply
#12
TheinsanegamerN
Oh boy, I cant wait for all 5 cards to be sold in milliseconds!

AMD still cant get their own stock in stock for more then 5 minutes, what hope do AIBs have? And at the current price, vega 64 is a trainwreck, and 56 is undesirable next to the 1070. And AMD's stupid combos suck up what little stock there is.

AMD doesnt seem to realize you need to provide the product for people to buy it. Not allowing the GPUs to be sold outside of combos is more boneheaded then anything nvidia has done in the last few years.

Boosnie said:
You nitpicked the worst possible review outcome from google images for a 2017 game that does not support DX12?
cool!
You still digging for excuses on vega 64 being a junk GPU? Cool.

Everybody known vega 64 is a slower, much hungrier 1080 competitor. It fails to keep up in many games, and most people know that most games are not DX12! Even in DX12 games VEGA barely manages to keep up! Sooner or later, you have to admit that vega was a year late, a frame short, and too hungry to truly compete, especially at the ridiculous prices AMD is selling them at.
Posted on Reply
#13
SPLWF
I don't think stock is the problem, it's the price.

Out of the four local Microcenters in my area, there's about 30+ V56 and about 10+ V64 in stock. No one is buying them because of pricing. Even Bestbuy.com/Amazon and Newegg is selling V56.
Posted on Reply
#14
lemkeant
TheinsanegamerN said:

You still digging for excuses on vega 64 being a junk GPU? Cool.

Everybody known vega 64 is a slower, much hungrier 1080 competitor. It fails to keep up in many games, and most people know that most games are not DX12! Even in DX12 games VEGA barely manages to keep up! Sooner or later, you have to admit that vega was a year late, a frame short, and too hungry to truly compete, especially at the ridiculous prices AMD is selling them at.
I wouldn't say it's junk. I have one and if you look at the large amount of people having success with undervolting, I think it goes to show how bad these things are tuned from AMD out of the factory.

If you can get the temps down (or stick it under water like I did) you can turn the voltage down and save a lot of power. The HBM2 starts loosening timings at like 60 C. Keep it under that and it helps bump up the FPS

It's a golden opportunity for the 3rd parties to solve the temp issues, make it quieter, faster, etc. There's no need to OC the core on these either

They still aren't worth $700+ though
Posted on Reply
#15
cucker tarlson
Boosnie said:
You nitpicked the worst possible review outcome from google images for a 2017 game that does not support DX12?
cool!
No, I pointed out a terrible,terrible buy which is this weak card at its huge retail price. Easily one of the worst GPU purchases ever.

Posted on Reply
#16
HD64G
TheinsanegamerN said:

Everybody known vega 64 is a slower, much hungrier 1080 competitor. It fails to keep up in many games, and most people know that most games are not DX12! Even in DX12 games VEGA barely manages to keep up! Sooner or later, you have to admit that vega was a year late, a frame short, and too hungry to truly compete, especially at the ridiculous prices AMD is selling them at.
That "everybody" of yours include the reviewer of GPUs in TPU named @W1zzard also? If not, take a look at his findings when testing on the launch-day driver of Vega GPUs. And come again in 2-3 months to discuss again if Vega is by then so big of a failure you and others talk about so much. I am talking ONLY about performance at present. Power consuption can become MUCH better with 2 clicks in the driver btw.



Posted on Reply
#17
cucker tarlson
Come on dude. Vega is a wack card across the board, it overcompensates in a handful of games for how badly it underperforms in others. Look at my previous post, in some games it's on par with a cut down GM200, which is 28nm and DDR5 with less power draw. It gets loses to 980Ti in GTA5 :roll:You're still gonna say it's NOT slower than a 1080 ?

TPU tests BF1 and DeusEx in DX12 only, while their DOOM results are OLD, Pascal cards got a fair bump in doom performance some time ago already. TPU shows V64 23% faster than 1080 at 4K, the difference is only 10%.

https://www.purepc.pl/karty_graficzne/radeon_rx_vega_64_vs_geforce_gtx_1080_test_kart_graficznych?page=0,12

And that horrendous price....

PC2 is just embarrassing

Posted on Reply
#19
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
MrGenius said:
Vega Lightning please. Thanks!
Waiting for a VaporX (Sapphire), Venom (Visiontek).

To the threadcrappers & trolls, this is good news because there is steam behind them now, better than any overhyped/priced Founders Edition card. Just remember without competition consumers suffer.
Posted on Reply
#20
Brusfantomet
SPLWF said:
I don't think stock is the problem, it's the price.

Out of the four local Microcenters in my area, there's about 30+ V56 and about 10+ V64 in stock. No one is buying them because of pricing. Even Bestbuy.com/Amazon and Newegg is selling V56.
that is because all of the cheap ones have gone to Norway, and i am not kidding, as of writing komplett.no has had this https://www.komplett.no/product/945230/datautstyr/pc-komponenter/skjermkort/pci-express/xfx-radeon-rx-vega-64-black# card in stock, continually for weeks, at launch price.
4990 NOK that is with 25% VAT, remove the VAT and the price is 512 USD, with standard 5 year "return right" (effectively a 5 year warranty covered by the shop and importer)
Posted on Reply
#21
Casecutter
Does anyone know how many Vega chips AMD is contracted to supply Apple for their Mac stuff?
Posted on Reply
#22
cucker tarlson
Brusfantomet said:
that is because all of the cheap ones have gone to Norway, and i am not kidding, as of writing komplett.no has had this https://www.komplett.no/product/945230/datautstyr/pc-komponenter/skjermkort/pci-express/xfx-radeon-rx-vega-64-black# card in stock, continually for weeks, at launch price.
4990 NOK that is with 25% VAT, remove the VAT and the price is 512 USD, with standard 5 year "return right" (effectively a 5 year warranty covered by the shop and importer)
This is actually what 1070s cost in that shop. Good deal. We've got V64 sitting at 1080Ti FE price and V56 still more expensive than 1080.
Posted on Reply
#23
W1zzard
cucker tarlson said:
TPU tests BF1 and DeusEx in DX12 only, while their DOOM results are OLD
We don't recycle results, all results have the same age. Last VGA rebench was around July time.
Posted on Reply
#24
cucker tarlson
W1zzard said:
We don't recycle results, all results have the same age. Last VGA rebench was around July time.
Thanks for clarification. I wonder what makes your results so different. Guru3D shows 9% at 4K, the site I linked shows 10%, this video shows anywhere from no difference to 15%, which would maybe amount to 10% overall and fall in line with the other two. HardCOP /1440p only available/ - 10% as well. Your new test shows 22%, more than twice as big as the ones I quoted, and in line with the initial Pascal DOOM Vulkan performance on old drivers, where 1070 gets beat even by Fury X.
Posted on Reply
#25
lewis007
HD64G said:
That "everybody" of yours include the reviewer of GPUs in TPU named @W1zzard also? If not, take a look at his findings when testing on the launch-day driver of Vega GPUs. And come again in 2-3 months to discuss again if Vega is by then so big of a failure you and others talk about so much. I am talking ONLY about performance at present. Power consuption can become MUCH better with 2 clicks in the driver btw.




Posted on Reply
Add your own comment