Upgrade from a R9 290...RX 580 or Vega 56??

[_larry]

I'm looking to upgrade my rig, the Vega looks amazing but it is only the 1st gen of the chip and it is expensive and hard to find...
The RX 580 seems like a healthy upgrade over my 4 year old 290...8GB vs. 4GB, much better power efficiency, etc..
Thoughts?

 

[JC316]

I am using an RX580 right now. No complaints about it, way more powerful than my old GTX770.

 

[64K]

This is a bad time to upgrade a GPU and it's not what you prefer but I would say go with a GTX 1070.

 

[cdawall]

Cards are super overpriced right now the best deals to be had are when 1070Ti's drop to $459 on sale. If your plan is to upgrade from a 290 the minimum card would be a vega 56 to be worth your money, those are few and far between not to mention way over priced. 1070's go for $449 or so and the Ti cards keep hitting the sale rack for $459. That is my vote.

 

[NdMk2o1o]

Agree with what others have said, 1070/ti should be what you're looking to upgrade to as the 580 isn't "that much" of an upgrade over the 290, and it's a horrid time to buy a GPU right now with Vega's being way overpriced and idiots paying £200 for used 290x and the like which is keeping the price of new cards high in comparison.

 

[xkm1948]

Vega is good IF they actually sell around or below their initial MSRP, $399 and $499.

I say go for at least 1080. Or wait around until next gen GPU drops. GDC and GTC is gonna be here soon.

 

[eidairaman1]

Wait for what this year releases

 

[cdawall]

Wait for what this year releases

Just don't wait on amd to release something. They have a habit of being a day late and dollar short. It has been now 3 gpu generations since the 290 which was probably their last good look at me card.

 

[eidairaman1]

Just don't wait on amd to release something. They have a habit of being a day late and dollar short. It has been now 3 gpu generations since the 290 which was probably their last good look at me card.

What I am getting at is after this years release decide to upgrade.

 

[Thefumigator]

I'm looking to upgrade my rig, the Vega looks amazing but it is only the 1st gen of the chip and it is expensive and hard to find...
The RX 580 seems like a healthy upgrade over my 4 year old 290...8GB vs. 4GB, much better power efficiency, etc..
Thoughts?

EDIT I own a 470 480 which should be similar to a 580 and I'm completely in love with it.

 

[Aquinus]

If I upgrade, I really couldn't justify an AMD card at present which irritates me. Vega is nowhere to be found and the 580 is a side-grade more than anything else. I'm seriously considering giving up my morality and going green if this continues.

 

[NdMk2o1o]

Just don't wait on amd to release something. They have a habit of being a day late and dollar short. It has been now 3 gpu generations since the 290 which was probably their last good look at me card.

Horse shit.... the 480 and 580 respectively (and pretty much the rest of the4/5 series) were and still are damn good cards at their price/performance brackets, so what do you base your comments on? what you should have said is AMD didnt take the performance crown and that would have been a truer statement instead of your fanboy typical NVIDIA lovin bollocks they didnt take the performance crown, no, what they did is made a lot of very capable 1080p gaming GPU's available to the masses, in turn forcing NVIDIA to reduce the price of their own mid range GPU's ( I still remember when RX 480 came out and halved the used price of GTX 970's overnight) ala GTX 1060. Of course you could say Vega was a fail but was it? the demand outstripped supply and now they can't be had for less than a 1070, is that AMD's fault for not beating NVIDIA? no, it's simple economics of supply and demand, so whilst again it didnt take the perfromance crown from NVIDIA, AMD is happy as they have sold all of their GPU's and whilst vega wasn't the be all and end all GPU some people were hailing it to be, they don't have any inventory of it to sell.

P.S how are all of those older AMD cards holding up to the likes of NVIDIA's same generation GPU's? oh.... they have matured a lot more gaining performance with every driver release whilst NVIDIA has all but left Maxwell in the dirt

 

[cdawall]

Horse shit.... the 480 and 580 respectively (and pretty much the rest of the4/5 series) were and still are damn good cards at their price/performance brackets, so what do you base your comments on? what you should have said is AMD didnt take the performance crown and that would have been a truer statement instead of your fanboy typical NVIDIA lovin bollocks they didnt take the performance crown, no, what they did is made a lot of very capable 1080p gaming GPU's available to the masses, in turn forcing NVIDIA to reduce the price of their own mid range GPU's ( I still remember when RX 480 came out and halved the used price of GTX 970's overnight) ala GTX 1060. Of course you could say Vega was a fail but was it? the demand outstripped supply and now they can't be had for less than a 1070, is that AMD's fault for not beating NVIDIA? no, it's simple economics of supply and demand, so whilst again it didnt take the perfromance crown from NVIDIA, AMD is happy as they have sold all of their GPU's and whilst vega wasn't the be all and end all GPU some people were hailing it to be, they don't have any inventory of it to sell.

P.S how are all of those older AMD cards holding up to the likes of NVIDIA's same generation GPU's? oh.... they have matured a lot more gaining performance with every driver release whilst NVIDIA has all but left Maxwell in the dirt

The RX480/580 barely outperforms the 290 and is not a top end card. I assumed that was very readable in what I typed. AMD had not sold a top end card since the 290(x). The fury was a 290 with hbm for most accounts and performance about matched an overclocked 390x.

Now mind you I base this off of owning these cards. I actually not only had one rx 480 when they came out, but a second one shortly thereafter and they weren't reference cards they were and still are some of the best clocking models tpu saw. I still own and use a 390, sold more of my own 290's then you probably have ever seen. I also dabbled in the furys pretty heavily. I don't type anything in here without throwing my own hat in it from personal usage. This isn't a "I read on the forums post".

Talk smack on maxwell, but somehow the 980ti still struts around in today's games comfortably. I wouldn't complain about continuing performance of any of the maxwell cards. The 970 has some issues if you just push the resolution past the frame buffer, but we aren't talking about affecting many people since you shouldn't be playing 1440p and higher on one anyway. It is not a fault of Nvidia that the original driver they released was better than the one AMD got to after the card was obsolete.

OH and just for reference I actually have a Vega card. The best vega card at that. So take your Nvidia fanboy bull and stick it up your rear. AMD failed me and AMD failed its entire user base. This is just more proof of how far gone they actually are.

 

[NdMk2o1o]

The RX480/580 barely outperforms the 290 and is not a top end card. I assumed that was very readable I'm what I typed. AMD had not sold a top end card since the 290(x). The fury was a 290 with hbm for most accounts and performance about matched an overclocked 390x.

Now mind you I base this off of owning these cards. I actually not only had one rx 480 when they came out, but a second one shortly thereafter and they weren't reference cards they were and still are some of the best clocking models tpu saw. I still own and use a 390, sold more of my own 290's then you probably have ever seen. I also dabbled in the furys pretty heavily. I don't type anything in here without throwing my own hat in it from personal usage. This isn't a "I read on the forums post".

Talk smack on maxwell, but somehow the 980ti still struts around in today's games comfortably. I wouldn't complain about continuing performance of any of the maxwell cards. The 970 has some issues if you just push the resolution past the frame buffer, but we aren't talking about affecting many people since you shouldn't be playing 1440p and higher on one anyway.

OH and just for reference I actually have a Vega card. The best vega card at that. So take your Nvidia fanboy bull and stick it up your rear.

Nice ninja edit on your last line but I think AMD's last "look at me" card was the 480 which was perfectly priced and placed to do what it had to if you look at price/performance

Barely outperforms but was priced just to do that and like I said reduced the price of the GTX 970 overnight, yes, it wasn't a GTX 980 ti killer but it wasn't priced at $5-600 upon launch so no one expexted that, it did however outperform the 290x whilst consuming 50% less power and costing less so it did what it was meant to do, what none of us predicted was that dick head miners would drive up costs of even 2 gen old GPU's to the point that now 4 year old 290x's are still fetching upwards of £200+ on ebay, if it wasnt for the 480 you would still be paying $600 for gtx 980 performance, so again whilst it didnt take the performance crown it certainly defined the industry and done a lot more than the gtx 980 refresh gtx 1060

 

[eidairaman1]

Lets get back on track instead of arguing, the guy asked about upgrading, not a pissing match between both companies.

Honestly at the OP, Hold onto your card until a new product stack comes out then move, reference Vega is not in stock and are waiting for AIBs to launch full production units.

 

[cdawall]

Nice ninja edit on your last line but I think AMD's last "look at me" card was the 480 which was perfectly priced and placed to do what it had to if you look at price/performance

Barely outperforms but was priced just to do that and like I said reduced the price of the GTX 970 overnight, yes, it wasn't a GTX 980 ti killer but it wasn't priced at $5-600 upon launch so no one expexted that, it did however outperform the 290x whilst consuming 50% less power and costing less so it did what it was meant to do, what none of us predicted was that dick head miners would drive up costs of even 2 gen old GPU's to the point that now 4 year old 290x's are still fetching upwards of £200+ on ebay, if it wasnt for the 480 you would still be paying $600 for gtx 980 performance, so again whilst it didnt take the performance crown it certainly defined the industry and done a lot more than the gtx 980 refresh gtx 1060

The assumption that nvidia would not have released pascal if AMD did not release polaris is just hearsay. Pascal exists, it is just a refresh on maxwell and it can beat vega. That isn't good, in fact that shows just how far behind AMD is.

I also would hope with everything inside of me that people would assume Polaris would compete with Hawaii with half the power consumption. That is something Nvidia had been doing for the past several generations and quite honestly AMD wasn't doing terribly on it either. Tonga was a healthy reduction in power consumption over Tahiti admittedly it took an extra generation to really release.

I also leave mining out on prices right now. That really isn't fair on either end of the world for a real world comparison. The old 7870/7970/270/280 cards still demand a healthy price thanks to it and those compete with the 1050-1050Ti in games

AMD needs to get something going. This is just a joke at this point.

As I said originally the Polaris cards aren't really an upgrade to his 290 and he would be much better off value wise trying to find a 1070/1070Ti on sale.

 

[NdMk2o1o]

The assumption that nvidia would not have released pascal if AMD did not release polaris is just hearsay. Pascal exists, it is just a refresh on maxwell and it can beat vega. That isn't good, in fact that shows just how far behind AMD is.

I also would hope with everything inside of me that people would assume Polaris would compete with Hawaii with half the power consumption. That is something Nvidia had been doing for the past several generations and quite honestly AMD wasn't doing terribly on it either. Tonga was a healthy reduction in power consumption over Tahiti admittedly it took an extra generation to really release.

I also leave mining out on prices right now. That really isn't fair on either end of the world for a real world comparison. The old 7870/7970/270/280 cards still demand a healthy price thanks to it and those compete with the 1050-1050Ti in games

AMD needs to get something going. This is just a joke at this point.

Who gives a shit who can beat who, price performance rules, has Ryzen taught you nothing? so again, it's not about the performance crown cause we all know NVIDIA has that but they will charge you 1k+ for it, what matters is what you can afford and for the few who can afford the best and piss money away, go buy a titan xp xxl/volta wtf they're calling them now they still released their mid end and gimped the high end knowing full well it was gimped cause AMD couldnt compete on performance so they can now charge 2-3x what they would have. And vega competed where it was predicted to with 1070 and 1080, unfortunately they havent got the supply to keep up with demand so NV can keep fucking consumers over with their over inflated prices, but that's the market

 

[cdawall]

Who gives a shit who can beat who, price performance rules, has Ryzen taught you nothing? so again, it's not about the performance crown cause we all know NVIDIA has that but they will charge you 1k+ for it, what matters is what you can afford and for the few who can afford the best and piss money away, go buy a titan xp xxl/volta wtf they're calling them now they still released their mid end and gimped the high end knowing full well it was gimped cause AMD couldnt compete on performance so they can now charge 2-3x what they would have. And vega competed where it was predicted to with 1070 and 1080, unfortunately they havent got the supply to keep up with demand so NV can keep fucking consumers over with their over inflated prices, but that's the market

Ryzen taught me that AMD can release a half complete product and people think it is the greatest thing ever, yet when Intel releases something half complete and pushed out it is the end of days and they are an awful company.

AMD had to offer manufacturers a rebate and sell their product under cost to keep up with nvidia's "overpriced and gimped" middle range cards. $399 is under cost for a vega 56, it is not under cost for a 1070 so you tell me who has the overpriced products. Also remember I have so far purchased 7 1070's at $360 or less.

 

[xkm1948]

@cdawall, use the ignore function. It does wonders.

To OP, wait for Nvidia's new release in 2018. If you want AMD at least they may see some price cuts after new Nvidia release.

 

[cdawall]

@cdawall, use the ignore function. It does wonders.

To OP, wait for Nvidia's new release in 2018. If you want AMD at least they may see some price cuts after new Nvidia release.

Unless the new Nvidia cards are that much better at mining I don't see amd seeing price cuts. They are selling for nearly double msrp right now.

 

[NdMk2o1o]

Ryzen taught me that AMD can release a half complete product and people think it is the greatest thing ever, yet when Intel releases something half complete and pushed out it is the end of days and they are an awful company.

AMD had to offer manufacturers a rebate and sell their product under cost to keep up with nvidia's "overpriced and gimped" middle range cards. $399 is under cost for a vega 56, it is not under cost for a 1070 so you tell me who has the overpriced products. Also remember I have so far purchased 7 1070's at $360 or less.

This was rumoured, do you have facts to back up that Vega was offered at a discount to AIB's? no, just hearsay and bias, again it's supply and demand and the latter seems to be winning. As for the Ryzen comment, half complete? well maybe it's a good job it was half complete cause it would have destroyed intel had it been complete, btw Intel who have never released a mainstream 6 core CPU before Ryzen, and sold dual cores for the price of quad cores but please do tell me how good of a company they are and you're so glad to pay a premium to a corporation for a name and brand

 

[cdawall]

I had the cost sheet at my last job the showed aib pricing from the vender. The cheapest vega 56 card was $454.68 from gigabyte. I can say that now since I don't work there anymore. So you do the math.

As for ryzen memory madness and boards that killed themselves. Is what I meant by half complete. As a tester of their prerelease parts and one of the absolute first people to break 3866 stable on ram I dealt with release day bugs first hand.

 

[John Naylor]

To my eyes, I don't see AMD as having a horse in the race from the 1060 on up. While some comparisons can be made that can make a good case to the contrary... when all things are considered, again ... I don't see a hard choice for what I do and those we assist on building their own, but that doesn't include everyone ... Do the analysis from the perspective of your situation. Here's an example (480 vs 1060) comparison for a build we were involved with some time back. We provided the source material and helped the user do his own comparison. This was the result.

The correct choice will ultimately depend on what games you play. What we know:

1. Which one - Not all cards are created equal but this is especially true with the RX 480. Techpowerup writes:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/RX_480_Gaming_X/28.html

In my opinion, this is thus far the only RX 480 that looks like it can compete with the GTX 1060 and its custom designs.

2. Out of the Box performance - So let's compare two cards from the same (MSI) manufacturer and model line (Gaming X). From above link:

As a result, the card is 4% faster than the RX 480 reference and 6-7% slower than the [reference] GeForce GTX 980, GTX 1060, and Radeon R9 Fury, which all have roughly the same performance at 1080p.

3. AIB Cards - From the above, we see that the MSI RX 480 is 7% faster overall in TPUs 16 game test suite. From Below, the MSI 1060 Gaming X is 3% faster than the reference 1060 ... so we can can conclude that at the time of testing the MSI 1060 was 10% faster than the MSI 480 in the 16 game test suite

4. Overclocking - We see there that the MSI 480 overclocks 8.6% and the MSI 1060 overclocks 15.1%.. So when the 1060 (10% performance advantage) is overclocked, the relative difference would be:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/RX_480_Gaming_X/26.html
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X/27.html

110% x (115.1 / 108.6) = 116.6% of the 480s speed or 16.6 % faster

As for difference between brands ... the various brands trade wins depending on generation and model line but the EVGA SC is one to avoid as, unlike the competition, they use a reference PCB and reference style PCB cooling.

5. Driver improvements - AMDs driver improvements have improved the performance of the 480 since originally tested. As we can see from the link here, TPU tested the results from the latest driver improvements and found an increase if 2.1% at 1080 p average across 21 games:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Radeon_Crimson_ReLive_Drivers/6.html

Unfortunately, we have no info on what improvements have resulted from newer nVidia drivers but suffice to say, those improvements have not erased that 10% gap outta the box (16.6% in both overclocked).

6. Cost - At the time, the MSI 1060 6GB was about $15 more than the MSI 480 8GB on newegg. But there are other costs worth considering

7. Power - There is a significant difference in power usage between the two cards. One of the reasons for the MSI 480s performance,as stated in the review, is because it is able to use more power than many other 480s. That's 75 watts in typical gaming and 99 watts peak

The MSI 480 draws from 196 - 224 watts
The MSI 1060 draws from 121 - 125 watts

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/RX_480_Gaming_X/21.html

8. Power Costs - While this is something you normally wouldn't consider, when cards are very close in performance, it may be of significance to many users, especially those in Europe and especially in urban / suburban locales.

75 watts x 35 hours per week x 52.14 weeks per year x 3 years usage x $0.131 US average electric cost per kw-hr / (1000 watts per kw=hr x 85% efficiency) = $63.28

9. Case Cooling - The rule of thump for case fans in a relatively quiet system is one (1) case fan per 75 watts for power. So for comparable interior case temps, you might want to include the cost of an extra case fan.

10. Noise - The 480 is 3 dbA louder than the 1060

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/RX_480_Gaming_X/22.html
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X/23.html

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/RX_480_Gaming_X/6.html
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X/6.html

So ... that's the data ... it's up to each user to look at the data, adjust accordingly for overclocking, power, etc and decide how each pieece of info affects your individual situation.

- If you don't use MSI Afterburner, then the OC advantage may be of no interest to you
- If you wear headphones, then the noise advantage will be of no interest to you
- Initially the 480 has an apparent cost advantage but the larger PSU requirement and extra case fan eats that up. Considering power costs along with the preceding, the 1060 is the more cost effective buy by far
- If you already have an oversized PSU then the power advantage is of no interest to you
- If you don't pay for electricity cause it's included in rent, then the power advantage is of no interest to you
- But most of all, if those 16 - 21 games that TPU uses for testing are not ones you play, then you need to pay specific attention to how each performs in games you do play... so start here and see how each performs in the games you are interested in.

The result here is not the point. How each individual arrives at their choice will be different for everyone, there is no "wrong choice" here. It's in each users interests to find factual data and look at all factors; a card's advantage in any particular may be pertinent to you, for another it may not.

 

[Sasqui]

Vega is good IF they actually sell around or below their initial MSRP, $399 and $499.

I say go for at least 1080. Or wait around until next gen GPU drops. GDC and GTC is gonna be here soon.

There was a week or two back in October where both the 56 and 64 were available at retail on Newegg. I got one of the last stock Vega 64's at Microcenter in MA for $499.

Now hard to even find them anywhere, they are highly sought after for mining. Rumor has it the reference cards aren't being made anymore and we'll only see Vega chips in AIB boards.

If I were to upgrade now, given the availability of AMD, I'd go with a 1070 or 1080. Either Vega or GTX 1070/1080, you're going to see a HUGE leap over the 290. I know, because I had two 290x's

 

[eidairaman1]

To my eyes, I don't see AMD as having a horse in the race from the 1060 on up. While some comparisons can be made that can make a good case to the contrary... when all things are considered, again ... I don't see a hard choice for what I do and those we assist on building their own, but that doesn't include everyone ... Do the analysis from the perspective of your situation. Here's an example (480 vs 1060) comparison for a build we were involved with some time back. We provided the source material and helped the user do his own comparison. This was the result.

The correct choice will ultimately depend on what games you play. What we know:

1. Which one - Not all cards are created equal but this is especially true with the RX 480. Techpowerup writes:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/RX_480_Gaming_X/28.html



2. Out of the Box performance - So let's compare two cards from the same (MSI) manufacturer and model line (Gaming X). From above link:

3. AIB Cards - From the above, we see that the MSI RX 480 is 7% faster overall in TPUs 16 game test suite. From Below, the MSI 1060 Gaming X is 3% faster than the reference 1060 ... so we can can conclude that at the time of testing the MSI 1060 was 10% faster than the MSI 480 in the 16 game test suite

4. Overclocking - We see there that the MSI 480 overclocks 8.6% and the MSI 1060 overclocks 15.1%.. So when the 1060 (10% performance advantage) is overclocked, the relative difference would be:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/RX_480_Gaming_X/26.html
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X/27.html

110% x (115.1 / 108.6) = 116.6% of the 480s speed or 16.6 % faster

As for difference between brands ... the various brands trade wins depending on generation and model line but the EVGA SC is one to avoid as, unlike the competition, they use a reference PCB and reference style PCB cooling.

5. Driver improvements - AMDs driver improvements have improved the performance of the 480 since originally tested. As we can see from the link here, TPU tested the results from the latest driver improvements and found an increase if 2.1% at 1080 p average across 21 games:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Radeon_Crimson_ReLive_Drivers/6.html

Unfortunately, we have no info on what improvements have resulted from newer nVidia drivers but suffice to say, those improvements have not erased that 10% gap outta the box (16.6% in both overclocked).

6. Cost - At the time, the MSI 1060 6GB was about $15 more than the MSI 480 8GB on newegg. But there are other costs worth considering

7. Power - There is a significant difference in power usage between the two cards. One of the reasons for the MSI 480s performance,as stated in the review, is because it is able to use more power than many other 480s. That's 75 watts in typical gaming and 99 watts peak

The MSI 480 draws from 196 - 224 watts
The MSI 1060 draws from 121 - 125 watts

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/RX_480_Gaming_X/21.html

8. Power Costs - While this is something you normally wouldn't consider, when cards are very close in performance, it may be of significance to many users, especially those in Europe and especially in urban / suburban locales.

75 watts x 35 hours per week x 52.14 weeks per year x 3 years usage x $0.131 US average electric cost per kw-hr / (1000 watts per kw=hr x 85% efficiency) = $63.28

9. Case Cooling - The rule of thump for case fans in a relatively quiet system is one (1) case fan per 75 watts for power. So for comparable interior case temps, you might want to include the cost of an extra case fan.

10. Noise - The 480 is 3 dbA louder than the 1060

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/RX_480_Gaming_X/22.html
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X/23.html

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/RX_480_Gaming_X/6.html
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X/6.html

So ... that's the data ... it's up to each user to look at the data, adjust accordingly for overclocking, power, etc and decide how each pieece of info affects your individual situation.

- If you don't use MSI Afterburner, then the OC advantage may be of no interest to you
- If you wear headphones, then the noise advantage will be of no interest to you
- Initially the 480 has an apparent cost advantage but the larger PSU requirement and extra case fan eats that up. Considering power costs along with the preceding, the 1060 is the more cost effective buy by far
- If you already have an oversized PSU then the power advantage is of no interest to you
- If you don't pay for electricity cause it's included in rent, then the power advantage is of no interest to you
- But most of all, if those 16 - 21 games that TPU uses for testing are not ones you play, then you need to pay specific attention to how each performs in games you do play... so start here and see how each performs in the games you are interested in.

The result here is not the point. How each individual arrives at their choice will be different for everyone, there is no "wrong choice" here. It's in each users interests to find factual data and look at all factors; a card's advantage in any particular may be pertinent to you, for another it may not.

1060 is at best a sidegrade from any 290.