RX Vega Review and benchmarks "leaked"

[Prysin]

1 hour ago, Liltrekkie said:

You're comparing a dual GPU card to a single GPU. Which by the way, the 1080 FE doesn't beat your dual GPU card either. Only the 1080TI beats it. VEGA 64 is designed to compete with the 1080. 

 

Nothing to see here.

we are still talking about 2x GPUs from 2013-2014... matching near bleeding edge cards in 2017.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

Vega 56 will sell more than Vega 64. That's just standard market dynamics. RTG's issue is going to be the narrative problems more than anything else.

 

Though a Vega 56 + FreeSync monitor is still a good combo for most consumers. This is pretty much the exact same issue Intel finds itself in for the HEDT market: mindshare hit more than monetary hit.

They should have made a Vega 56 limited edition then , for not much more.

[Liltrekkie]

1 minute ago, Prysin said:

we are still talking about 2x GPUs from 2013-2014... matching near bleeding edge cards in 2017.

And you beat the 1080 and you weren't that far off from the 1080ti.

 

It's a dual high end card, dual high end cards ALWAYS beat high end single cards for a few years. See the 6990, for example. 

[Carclis]

So very disappointing... I'm glad I bought a 1080 Ti after seeing Vega being compared to the 1080.

[Maxxtraxx]

4 hours ago, ShadowTechXTS said:

Vega 64 Reference: $499

Vega 64 LE: $599

Vega 64 Liquid: $699

 

That's MSRP.

Newegg now has the Vega 64 reference card (air cooled non limited edition)up on their site for order in a few hours...

 

At $599

 

Link to promotion:

 

Here

[PCGuy_5960]

The source looks super untrustworthy. Wait for reviews from more trustworthy media outlets, like GN.

[Jito463]

Personally, I'll wait for official benchmarks.  It'll be next month before I can even consider upgrading, anyway.

[Mihle]

I would never look at just one benchmark site to know how something perform, no matter what that one is. Especially if its leaks.

But personally, i dont care about power consumption that much, I care more about perf/cost.

[Tech Enthusiast]

With that much energy consumtion and my personal "uptime" on my PC i would pay 630 Euro JUST for the energy needed to run this GPU.

That is over 400 bucks more then my current GTX 970. JUST FOR THE ENERGY IN ONE YEAR.

 

For that kinda extra price, id rather buy a GTX 1180ti once it launches. Seriously.

 

Of course people will just look at the buying price and ignore energy costs for the most part. But damn, if you do the math,... Vega really needs to be like 130 bucks or less to be competitive.

[XenosTech]

8 hours ago, ShadowTechXTS said:

Vega 56 Reference: $399

Vega 64 LE/Reference: $499

Vega 64 Liquid: $699

 

That's MSRP.

There FIFY

[LucidMew]

How is any of this a surprise? We've had the Reference Founders Frontier Edition of Vega to look at and run tests for over a month and a half now. We've known that it runs hot, and that only by modifying the voltages and putting it with an "overkill" cooler does it become competitive with the 1080+ (GamersNexus). The only people still holding out hope are fanboys in denial.

[Misanthrope]

5 hours ago, Liltrekkie said:

500+ watts with a +50% power limit increase????

 

So what is that, 250+ watts normally? 

 

It's Hawaii all over again, come on AMD. 

Well in slightly better news if the hash rate is not as insane as reported with this much power it probably won't be very attractive to miners.

 

[PCGuy_5960]

Guys why are we talking about i5 vs R5 in a Vega thread? lol

[AlTech]

For everybody freaking out right now, Don't panic. AMD GPUs do badly in Firestrike compared to NVIDIA cos there's a massive ton of Tessellation. This should not be indictative of most game benchmarks.

[The Benjamins]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11717/the-amd-radeon-rx-vega-64-and-56-review

 

https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/AMD-Radeon-RX-Vega-Review-Vega-64-Vega-64-Liquid-Vega-56-Tested

 

So basically the 54 is better then a 1070, the 64 is better then the 1080 and AMD runs better at higher resolutions.

[dizmo]

6 hours ago, Liltrekkie said:

 

I actually have no doubt it would if you increase the power limit to 50% like this leak suggests. Big power hungry hot GPU's have always been AMD's thing. It disappoints me knowing that Polaris was their attempt at efficiency. I was hoping they would learn from this and have made a 1080 competitor that didn't overload a power station. 

I still don't get why people think it's some massive outrageous number. Is it higher than Nvidia? Yes. But it's not like it's 2000w. An 850w PSU was still pretty common in system builds up until a year ago. 

6 hours ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

Background says the resolution though

Ahh. Merci. Not sure how I missed that though I still don't approve.. 

[tom_w141]

45 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Guys why are we talking about i5 vs R5 in a Vega thread? lol

Are you new?

[leadeater]

That was a lot of CPU talk in a GPU thread, try and keep it on topic.

[PCGuy_5960]

45 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11717/the-amd-radeon-rx-vega-64-and-56-review

 

https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/AMD-Radeon-RX-Vega-Review-Vega-64-Vega-64-Liquid-Vega-56-Tested

 

So basically the 54 is better then a 1070, the 64 is better then the 1080 and AMD runs better at higher resolutions.

Vega 64 trades blows with the 1080, it isn't better, it depends on the game and resolution

 

Vega 56 is definitely better than the 1070 though

[PCGuy_5960]

1 minute ago, valdyrgramr said:

Well, that was the point of Vega, originally.  1080 rivaling.  

True. IMO, Vega 56 is an amazing card for $400, it competes with the 1080 and costs $100 less. Vega 64 isn't very impressive

[PCGuy_5960]

Just now, valdyrgramr said:

Doesn't 56 rival the 1070, 64 rivals 1080?

Yeah, I meant it competes with the 1080 in terms of performance.

[tom_w141]

10 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Vega 64 trades blows with the 1080, it isn't better, it depends on the game and resolution

Seems to consistently beat the 1080 above 1080p. (AMD has always done better above 1080p for some reason their gpus don't scale linearly with resolution)

[tom_w141]

7 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

True. IMO, Vega 56 is an amazing card for $400, it competes with the 1080 and costs $100 less. Vega 64 isn't very impressive

Vega 64 is a hot and hungry 1085 (slightly more than a 1080 XD)

 

Not worth it imo, but the 56 kills a 1070 stone dead at $399 whilst competing with a 1080 when OC'd. That's amazing. No wonder AMD told reviewers to focus on the 56.

 

EDIT: Then again volta is sat on the shelf ready to go so this excitement may be short lived  If Vega sells really well Nvidia will just drop volta early and then that's AMD crippled.

[PCGuy_5960]

1 minute ago, tom_w141 said:

Seems to consistently beat the 1080 above 1080p. (AMD has always done better about 1080p for some reason their gpus don't scale linearly with resolution)

It's because of HBM2, AFAIK more bandwidth helps at higher resolutions

 

But as I said it trades blows with the 1080 depending on the game and the resolution.

[TacoSenpai]

1 hour ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Guys why are we talking about i5 vs R5 in a Vega thread? lol

Its a vicious cycle really.  Like a crack addiction we all tell ourselves we're going to stop but then another thread pops up with anything AMD related and we start scratching our necks until we can't hold it in any longer and bring in Ryzen vs Intel.  These civil wars have ravaged the tech land and meme farmers have suffered the most.

 

Also is it me or in the OP did I miss the temps?  I mean I expect Vega to be hot with its massive power draw.  Vega while competitive in some instances namely vs 1070 is a year too late and since I have a 1080 now that is much more power efficient theres no reason to even consider it. Though I'm interested what new system builders think of it though I hear miners are already eatin that shit up.