1080ti/FreeSync vs RX Vega64/FreeSync

[MoreRorgy]

What would be the better option for gaming between running a 1080ti which has considerably better performance than the RX Vega 64 but has no FreeSync technology or an RX Vega 64 with FreeSync but is not on par with the 1080ti's performance? 

A few things you may want to consider if you'd like more details that I'll clarify...
-No, G-Sync is out of the option
-This is aimed to run on an ultrawide with a resolution of 3440x1440
-In addition with the ultrawide, there'll be two 1080p monitors on the sides running other programs and applications
-Target CPU is the Ryzen 7 1700x
-I'll be running quite a lot in the background during gaming sessions
-I'll be running the highest graphic settings possible(there's a chance I might attempt to apply SSAA/super sampling)
-I understand SSAA might be useless and overkill
-I won't be using V-Sync if I were to use a 1080ti
-Refresh rate will be most likely 60 or 75(potentially 100)

[Misanthrope]

Vega 64 can probably not max out 3440x1440 so if you don't want to compromise you kinda need the 1080ti. However:

 

1) The compromise isn't that much honestly: High settings often is extremely close to ultra settings so I really don't think your overall looks would be that much worst with just a Vega 64 with more modest settings

 

2) Freesync supposedly helps at lower refresh rates to so actually dropping to 40 and 50 momentarily while averaging 60 or so would probably look very smooth.

 

That being said however, I just don't like how Vega 64 is looking: too expensive and power hungry for what it gives you. I'd personally get a 1080ti and a non g-sync ultrawide panel, to me the benefit of Freesync just isn't there to justify Vega64 but well some people do swear by Freesync I'd check it out in person if at all possible if you haven't.

[Guest]

Honestly Vega 64 price is being raised to 600, at that point idk if it'll even be worth it

[MoreRorgy]

Just now, Abyss Gaming said:

Honestly Vega 64 price is being raised to 600, at that point idk if it'll even be worth it

Not a large problem as Wolfenstein and Prey are great games I was planning to buy regardless, though by the time I decide to buy a GPU, the market price would be lowered anyways thus price isn't an initial problem.

[Guest]

Just now, MoreRorgy said:

Not a large problem as Wolfenstein and Prey are great games I was planning to buy regardless, though by the time I decide to buy a GPU, the market price would be lowered anyways thus price isn't an initial problem.

Does the 600 price include those games? And I was planning on Wolfenstein personally but I'm gonna go for the 56 if I go for Vega. Like I'm not talking about the bundle, the launch price of the card for"early adopters" was 500, it's gonna become 600

[Bananasplit_00]

You could save a bunch if you get one of those packs tbh. Might make Vega 64 worth it sort-of 

[MoreRorgy]

14 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Vega 64 can probably not max out 3440x1440 so if you don't want to compromise you kinda need the 1080ti. However:

 

1) The compromise isn't that much honestly: High settings often is extremely close to ultra settings so I really don't think your overall looks would be that much worst with just a Vega 64 with more modest settings

 

2) Freesync supposedly helps at lower refresh rates to so actually dropping to 40 and 50 momentarily while averaging 60 or so would probably look very smooth.

 

That being said however, I just don't like how Vega 64 is looking: too expensive and power hungry for what it gives you. I'd personally get a 1080ti and a non g-sync ultrawide panel, to me the benefit of Freesync just isn't there to justify Vega64 but well some people do swear by Freesync I'd check it out in person if at all possible if you haven't.

I am attempting to max out games though since I did indicate that I would be attempting to use the highest anti-aliasing anyhow.

[Misanthrope]

Just now, MoreRorgy said:

I am attempting to max out games though since I did indicate that I would be attempting to use the highest anti-aliasing anyhow.

Then you either need dual Vega 64 and some shoddy crossfire support at times or the 1080ti. Most people still don't have many numbers on ultrawide but you can extrapolate slightly better or worst numbers to those of the 1080:

 

 

As you can see for absolutely no compromise max settings 1440p, you kinda do need a 1080ti.

 

 

 

[MoreRorgy]

4 minutes ago, Abyss Gaming said:

Does the 600 price include those games? And I was planning on Wolfenstein personally but I'm gonna go for the 56 if I go for Vega. Like I'm not talking about the bundle, the launch price of the card for"early adopters" was 500, it's gonna become 600

It does certainly include the games but it's the air cooled version and I had my eyes on the liquid cooled version which is 700$ and the fact that it's white 

[MoreRorgy]

9 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Then you either need dual Vega 64 and some shoddy crossfire support at times or the 1080ti. Most people still don't have many numbers on ultrawide but you can extrapolate slightly better or worst numbers to those of the 1080:

 

 

As you can see for absolutely no compromise max settings 1440p, you kinda do need a 1080ti.

 

 

 

Hmm...I see
If I had some time to spare, would you recommend waiting for AMD's Navi cards to release and perhaps dive into those? 

[Misanthrope]

1 hour ago, MoreRorgy said:

Hmm...I see
If I had some time to spare, would you recommend waiting for AMD's Navi cards to release and perhaps dive into those? 

If you want to play current games by then only: Since we're talking at least a year and a half I suspect newer, more intensive games would be out by then and by then Navi would struggle with those maxed at 3440x1400p.

 

The high resolution market is quite a money sink tbh and I am not so sure AMD will even catch up to Nvidia at this point.

[MoreRorgy]

2 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

If you want to play current games by then only: Since we're talking at least a year and a half I suspect newer, more intensive games would be out by then and by then Navi would struggle with those maxed at 3440x1400p.

 

The high resolution market is quite a money sink tbh and I am not so sure AMD will even catch up to Nvidia at this point.

This is quite frustrating. I may resort to investing in a G-Sync monitor then. 

[Misanthrope]

1 minute ago, MoreRorgy said:

This is quite frustrating. I may resort to investing in a G-Sync monitor then. 

I understand where you're coming from: The elevated G-Sync prices piss me off too. But there's just not a top-of-the-line alternative from AMD: Freesync is going to remain a cheaper panel kinda deal for people pushing 2560x1440p max but more realistically 1080p midrange/budget gamers.

[MoreRorgy]

2 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

I understand where you're coming from: The elevated G-Sync prices piss me off too. But there's just not a top-of-the-line alternative from AMD: Freesync is going to remain a cheaper panel kinda deal for people pushing 2560x1440p max but more realistically 1080p midrange/budget gamers.

It's difficult especially if you're aiming to go ultrawide considering there aren't many options at a good price point without compromises.