AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 8 GB

[Frick]

While the talk of increased TDP and power requirements are initially alarming, the additional costs look to be minimal. These increased power requirements won't stop me from buying Vega.

For end users (ie not servers) this has always been true, with a few rare exceptions.

 

[Th3pwn3r]

For end users (ie not servers) this has always been true, with a few rare exceptions.

Well, some of us don't want ovens running 24/7 in our rooms. I remember having my PC under my desk by my legs a long time ago, I learned my lesson. I'm all about efficiency.

 

[mastershake575]

I was talking about 4k.

I do not know a single person that has a 4K monitor. If they did, I doubt they would be running a Vega 56 (single 1080TI is already pushing it). I literally have no idea why 4K is in this discussion.

4-6% yes, is basically the same performance. All said and done was in reference to you talking about driver improvements. Would not be surprised if the driver improvements that the 56 gets is negated by the huge overclocking potential of the third party 1070s (third party 1070s are pretty consistently overclocking to stock 1080 territory, I hardly doubt third party 56's even with improved drivers are going to significantly leap stock 1080 performance).

Not really seeing the confusion or your obsession with hyping this mediocre card ? Are you the AMD white-knight of this forum ? (few AMD threads i've read have stated yes you are).

Reviews are showing these cards very close in performance and price. This card offered nothing new or exciting......... (get over it, this was a disappointing launch). I will say, it was defiantly better than the 64 but at the end of the day it's too little too late.

Slightly better performance at $50 higher MSRP is disappointing for a card thats 14 months late to the party (card offers no price wars and nothing intriguing to an already aging market).

 

[Jeffredo]

Makes me happy I bought my GTX 1070 almost a year ago for $365. The miners can have this one.

 

[Flak]

Does the Vega 56 not have the same power profile options as the Vega 64? Vega 64 and power saver profile seems like a win to me.

 

[Super XP]

This is a New GPU Generation by AMD. And a great attempt. Some might believe its based on its previous Gen, but not according to what AMD has done. I consider this VEGA as 1st Gen to something brand new from the ground up. That explains the power draw versus the 1080's.

Great work AMD, battling on both CPU & GPU fronts. Let the games begin.

 

[Super XP]

I must say compared to the 64, I am impressed. The profit margins are probably razor thin for RTG, but imagine if the MSRP for both cards were $50 less. I think the cards could be no-brainers vs their NVIDIA counterparts. Still, at the asking price for the 56 seems worth it, not so much for 64. I will be picking up one if possible for a reasonable price.

AMD has more than enough room to drop the prices for its VEGA line up and still make a commanding Profit.

 

[Th3pwn3r]

Does the Vega 56 not have the same power profile options as the Vega 64? Vega 64 and power saver profile seems like a win to me.

Power saver profile will turn your Vega 64 into a 1060 with more power consumption.

 

[Flak]

Power saver profile will turn your Vega 64 into a 1060 with more power consumption.

Odd, did you read the Techpowerup review? Didn't seem slower than a 1060 to me. Seemed faster than the Vega 56 with lower power consumption. Maybe I was reading the wrong review.

 

[Flogger23m]

1. GTX 1070 starts at 440$ atm.
2. Vega56 starts from 400$ hypothetically, though I don't see preorders yet.
3. Think of the price difference between G-Sync and Freesync monitors.

I suppose if you're starting from a blank slate that makes sense. But I purchased my GTX 1070 almost one year ago. So it doesn't seem like a good deal. At best we're getting a 20% jump, at worse, a 20% decrease depending on the game. Most games they seem to be within a frame rate or two. And keep in mind my GTX 1070 runs about 10% faster than stock, and most of these benchmarks use stock GTX 1070s I'd imagine. So those gains will look even worse considering that. Will Vega OC well? Maybe, but seeing the high power draw as it is, I think it may not have as much headroom as Nvidia's lineup. Assuming it does OC just as well, we're still at best 5% better on average (if that), with a maximum of 20% better in a small number of titles.

To be, that isn't worth upgrading to. If Nvidia released a card with similar performance for $400 I'd skip it as well.

 

[1Gpi2ZV6Jy]

I would never pay this money for any GPU and especially in Australia this card is ~Au$800

this price tag is not going anywhere

 

[Dimi]

I got my GTX 1070 in September LAST year for 410$ and bought a 1440p Gsync 165hz monitor last month for 399$. I'm extremely happy i didn't jump on the Vega hype. I'm running the card at 2050mhz and it plays every game i have flawless.

What i don't get is this whole driver debacle, they had the card running on show a full year ago playing Doom. How long do these people need to create a good release driver? People shat on Intel for rushing their X299 platform but ALL of the other AMD releases are rushed just as much. Ryzen, Threadripper and now Vega. Don't people ever learn?

 

[Shatun_Bear]

I got my GTX 1070 in September LAST year for 410$ and bought a 1440p Gsync 165hz monitor last month for 399$. I'm extremely happy i didn't jump on the Vega hype. I'm running the card at 2050mhz and it plays every game i have flawless.

What i don't get is this whole driver debacle, they had the card running on show a full year ago playing Doom. How long do these people need to create a good release driver? People shat on Intel for rushing their X299 platform but ALL of the other AMD releases are rushed just as much. Ryzen, Threadripper and now Vega. Don't people ever learn?

Please enlighten us to how the Threadripper launch was 'rushed'? And Ryzen's issues were hardly severe.

 

[RejZoR]

Vega 64 is "Made in Korea"? Samsung? Vega 56 "Made in Taiwan"? TSMC? Hm, that's interesting...

 

[SAMiN]

Vega 64 is "Made in Korea"? Samsung? Vega 56 "Made in Taiwan"? TSMC? Hm, that's interesting...

I think its other way around, Vega 56 is made in Korea and 64 made in Taiwan.

 

[D3mux]

At hardwareluxx.de they downvolted vega 56 and obtained a stable overclock reaching GTX1080 performance at lower consumption (lower than 1080...). Is it possible?
This would put Vega 56 over 1070 and 1080 in terms of both performance and perf/power.

 

[wizardfingers]

Hopefully I can get one per-ordered then I'll sell it off to the miners and get a 1080

 

[chief-gunney]

I would never pay this money for any GPU and especially in Australia this card is ~Au$800

this price tag is not going anywhere

ordered my vega56 today for $579 AU, etailer told me stock arrives on 1st Sept. Also ordered an EK waterblock for it.

 

[Footman]

I found a vanilla Vega 64 a few weeks ago at $499 USD and slapped on an EK waterblock. Apart from a little coil whine, the card has been amazing. Runs cool and quiet at around 52c full load and I have it undervolted at 1140mv down from 1200mv full load and it still boosts to just over 1600mhz in game. Provides similar performance to my old GTX 1080. I bought this to run with my Freesync monitor.

 

[Imsochobo]

I found a vanilla Vega 64 a few weeks ago at $499 USD and slapped on an EK waterblock. Apart from a little coil whine, the card has been amazing. Runs cool and quiet at around 52c full load and I have it undervolted at 1140mv down from 1200mv full load and it still boosts to just over 1600mhz in game. Provides similar performance to my old GTX 1080. I bought this to run with my Freesync monitor.

I shit on a 1080 watercooled with my ek block vega 64(air)
I do not come close to 1080TI, so we got that going for us.

under water it's better than all except 1080ti, not that horrible, not that great

 

[Footman]

Well, based on my comparison between graphic scores on unigine benchmarks and futuremarks, my Vega 64 does not shit on my old GTX 1080. While these are synthetic tests, I have not seen any huge differences in frame rates in games with these two cards.

 

[Shatun_Bear]

Well, based on my comparison between graphic scores on unigine benchmarks and futuremarks, my Vega 64 does not shit on my old GTX 1080. While these are synthetic tests, I have not seen any huge differences in frame rates in games with these two cards.

Lol you are not serious. Using unigine and futuremark to compare cards? Come on.

Also, game benches between a 1080 and Vega 64/56 with the biggest new PC releases show the 64 has a pretty large performance lead over the 1080 in 1440p and 4k.

Look at these benches of Battlefront 2 and Wolfenstein 2:

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/wolfenstein_ii_the_new_colossus_pc_graphics_analysis_benchmark_review,5.html

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/star_wars_battlefront_ii_2017_pc_graphics_analysis_benchmark_review,5.html

 

[Footman]

I used the GTX 1080 for over 6 months and have had the Vega 64 since release and can say that at 1440 resolution I see no realistic difference in my gaming with either card. A few extra fps in Wolfenstein or Battlefront do not translate to a better gaming experience. I have a Freesync monitor capped at 144fps. I can certainly say that I am enjoying the Vega 64 and Freesync combination though.

 

[Shatun_Bear]

I used the GTX 1080 for over 6 months and have had the Vega 64 since release and can say that at 1440 resolution I see no realistic difference in my gaming with either card. A few extra fps in Wolfenstein or Battlefront do not translate to a better gaming experience. I have a Freesync monitor capped at 144fps. I can certainly say that I am enjoying the Vega 64 and Freesync combination though.

Sure but the difference between cards is often just a few FPS. Look at the 1060 vs 480/580. Same for Fury X vs 980 Ti in some cases.

 

[Footman]

No arguments there Shatun. I agree that there are no more than a few fps difference between GTX 1080 and Vega 64...