vega power draw

[CatXice]

everyone is freaking out over the power draw but am not being funny other then sever companies and miners why would you care end of the day if u can afford a vega 64 am sure u can afford the extra power draw just saying in the uk in 3 hours it would cost u an extra 6-7 pence vs a 1080  omg noooo how will i ever to afford that.... and before people jump on the o u need a bigger psu well most people build systems with 550w+ which would be fine lets be honest ye it would close to its max but it would be 100% fine i dont see why everyone is freaking out about it

[Tiwaz]

4 minutes ago, CatXice said:

everyone is freaking out over the power draw but am not being funny other then sever companies and miners why would you care end of the day if u can afford a vega 64 am sure u can afford the extra power draw just saying in the uk in 3 hours it would cost u an extra 6-7 pence vs a 1080  omg noooo how will i ever to afford that.... and before people jump on the o u need a bigger psu well most people build systems with 550w+ which would be fine lets be honest ye it would close to its max but it would be 100% fine i dont see why everyone is freaking out about it

the problem is that AMD isnt willing to make a new architecture, VEga  is just a RX card with more stream processors. The architecture itself is still outdated, rx 580=180W, gtx 970 (last gen gpu)=145W, so the AMD gpus arent really a viable option unless they can bring in game changing software or better price points

[LienusLateTips]

one here will add something like half a canadian rupee to my power bill so it's fine

 

that's why i like AMD it sucks up power

[Mira Yurizaki]

I'm trying to figure out how people think 12.5 billion transistors will magically consume less power than 7 billion transistors.

[DrMacintosh]

The power draw really isn't an issue unless you cheaped out on the PSU. 

[pomkon]

1 hour ago, CatXice said:

everyone is freaking out over the power draw but am not being funny other then sever companies and miners why would you care end of the day if u can afford a vega 64 am sure u can afford the extra power draw just saying in the uk in 3 hours it would cost u an extra 6-7 pence vs a 1080  omg noooo how will i ever to afford that.... and before people jump on the o u need a bigger psu well most people build systems with 550w+ which would be fine lets be honest ye it would close to its max but it would be 100% fine i dont see why everyone is freaking out about it

x 24/7 and multiple cards

[CatXice]

21 hours ago, pomkon said:

x 24/7 and multiple cards

still it makes no difference to any1 but miners and server builders

[CatXice]

22 hours ago, Tiwaz said:

the problem is that AMD isnt willing to make a new architecture, VEga  is just a RX card with more stream processors. The architecture itself is still outdated, rx 580=180W, gtx 970 (last gen gpu)=145W, so the AMD gpus arent really a viable option unless they can bring in game changing software or better price points

56 is more powerful and cheaper then a 1070????? and the 64 is cheaper same power as 1080

 

[System Error Message]

If in Uk where it is 20p per KWH, vega can use up to 450W, but lets put 350W typical using the 50% extra power and better cooling. If you game 2 hours everyday, thats 700Wh. A month has 30 days average so thats 21Kwh which means your power bill for gaming 2 hours everyday on vega is gonna be £4.2 a month just for the GPU itself. However it is common in the UK for utility companies to overcharge you as well. Overclocking and fully using the GPU it can use up to 450W.

 

The architectures have been the same for nvidia and AMD. Nvidia's shader has been the same since fermi and for AMD since GCN. They differ the architecture by other means though. For example in kepler, nvidia changed the number of shaders each core had giving it better efficiency in graphics but not so good in compute.

[WhiteSkyMage]

I bought a 750W power supply thinking that one day I will go dual GPU...but it seems that I will still be using it with Vega. I am glad that I did.

On the other hand, power is cheap in my country - 10 centimes for 1kW h. They don't even charge me the first month cuz it's less than 50CHF. Second month they would charge. Power draw aside, I realized that benchmarks from the press are very unreliable. They are all using the in-game build benchmarks which in most games don't really show indicative performance. And their excuse is - we did not have time. 2 days is very short time to do a full scale review.

 

And then I see this guy who took his time and playing through using both Vega 64 and GTX 1080Ti. This is a review I would trust. Every other review doesn't tell me anything.

 

[Frankenburger]

There's more to power draw than the electric bill. For many of us, thermals is a concern. The more power is consumed, the more your chassis and room heats up. If you're in a 90+ degree climate, it's not as easy as opening a window.

[CatXice]

2 hours ago, Frankenburger said:

There's more to power draw than the electric bill. For many of us, thermals is a concern. The more power is consumed, the more your chassis and room heats up. If you're in a 90+ degree climate, it's not as easy as opening a window.

board partners will deal with the thermals ie the 1080ti is a 2.5 slot cooler so u know and if u live in a hot place thats not really amds problem not to be funny 

[Frankenburger]

18 minutes ago, CatXice said:

board partners will deal with the thermals ie the 1080ti is a 2.5 slot cooler so u know and if u live in a hot place thats not really amds problem not to be funny 

I'm not talking about the running temperature of the chip, I'm talking about the thermal exhaust a 300w+ card will pump into your tower or room. I'm gathering you're the kind of person who has the mindset of "It doesn't affect me, so it shouldn't affect others". Either that or you're white knighting for AMD. Regardless, high power draw is not a good thing, no matter how much you believe it should be ignored.

 

Also, it is AMD's problem if they lose sales because of it. I honestly don't understand how you can't see that.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

On 8/14/2017 at 9:51 PM, CatXice said:

everyone is freaking out over the power draw but am not being funny other then sever companies and miners why would you care end of the day if u can afford a vega 64 am sure u can afford the extra power draw just saying in the uk in 3 hours it would cost u an extra 6-7 pence vs a 1080  omg noooo how will i ever to afford that.... and before people jump on the o u need a bigger psu well most people build systems with 550w+ which would be fine lets be honest ye it would close to its max but it would be 100% fine i dont see why everyone is freaking out about it

I think most of it is just hype train derailing. Vega more or less stacks where it should when you compare price and performance with the 1070 and the 1080. But since it's not cheaper, it's not faster, and uses more power, it fails to be the sort of revelation some people fooled themselves about expected it to be. Ans since performance nor price are off, then it must be the power draw  

At the end of the day, it is a disadvantage, that may weigh more or less on a case by case basis, whether it gets hot in your build, whether electriciy is expensive, whether you have a freesync monitor...

 

On 8/14/2017 at 9:58 PM, Tiwaz said:

the problem is that AMD isnt willing to make a new architecture, VEga  is just a RX card with more stream processors. The architecture itself is still outdated, rx 580=180W, gtx 970 (last gen gpu)=145W, so the AMD gpus arent really a viable option unless they can bring in game changing software or better price points

No, Vega is a new architecture and its performance per watt is indeed higher than Polaris. Saying this is fatter Polaris is baseless, unless you can perhaps provide a source for it?

You can see a power consumption and performance comparison in the Gamers Nexus review:

Spoiler

 

 

[CatXice]

25 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

I think most of it is just hype train derailing. Vega more or less stacks where it should when you compare price and performance with the 1070 and the 1080. But since it's not cheaper, it's not faster, and uses more power, it fails to be the sort of revelation some people fooled themselves about expected it to be. Ans since performance nor price are off, then it must be the power draw  

At the end of the day, it is a disadvantage, that may weigh more or less on a case by case basis, whether it gets hot in your build, whether electriciy is expensive, whether you have a freesync monitor...

 

No, Vega is a new architecture and its performance per watt is indeed higher than Polaris. Saying this is fatter Polaris is baseless, unless you can perhaps provide a source for it?

You can see a power consumption and performance comparison in the Gamers Nexus review:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

vega 56 is cheaper and faster then 1070 64 is cheaper and as fast as 1080???

[SpaceGhostC2C]

1 minute ago, CatXice said:

vega 56 is cheaper and faster then 1070 64 is cheaper and as fast as 1080???

As far as I've seen there is barely any difference in MSRP between 56 - 1070 and 64 (air) - 1080.

[CatXice]

29 minutes ago, Frankenburger said:

I'm not talking about the running temperature of the chip, I'm talking about the thermal exhaust a 300w+ card will pump into your tower or room. I'm gathering you're the kind of person who has the mindset of "It doesn't affect me, so it shouldn't affect others". Either that or you're white knighting for AMD. Regardless, high power draw is not a good thing, no matter how much you believe it should be ignored.

 

Also, it is AMD's problem if they lose sales because of it. I honestly don't understand how you can't see that.

what am trying to say is that other then the people i stated it makes no difference to gamers the power draw coz if your buying a card like a 64 then u have the money to get a good psu/already have 1 just saying
and the fact that yr room gets hot is a person to person problem and thats not amds problem they will test the cards at a average room temp for most places to make sure its ok if u live in a hot place u just have to suck it really just saying

[CatXice]

1 minute ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

As far as I've seen there is barely any difference in MSRP between 56 - 1070 and 64 (air) - 1080.

there about £100 cheaper

[Frankenburger]

2 minutes ago, CatXice said:

what am trying to say is that other then the people i stated it makes no difference to gamers the power draw coz if your buying a card like a 64 then u have the money to get a good psu/already have 1 just saying
and the fact that yr room gets hot is a person to person problem and thats not amds problem they will test the cards at a average room temp for most places to make sure its ok if u live in a hot place u just have to suck it really just saying

[Fardin]

10 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

As far as I've seen there is barely any difference in MSRP between 56 - 1070 and 64 (air) - 1080.

Vega 56 is now nearly 500$ that means with adding a little you probably can get gtx 1080 . if anyone dont get vega 56 at 400$ then there is point of getting it with 500$, cause vega 64 is even have hard time to keep up with gtx 1080. since the price has gone nuts , anyone can get gtx 1080 ti for vega 64's price & thats a Hell lot better use for price to performance ratio. 

[CatXice]

23 minutes ago, Fardin said:

Vega 56 is now nearly 500$ that means with adding a little you probably can get gtx 1080 . if anyone dont get vega 56 at 400$ then there is point of getting it with 500$, cause vega 64 is even have hard time to keep up with gtx 1080. since the price has gone nuts , anyone can get gtx 1080 ti for vega 64's price & thats a Hell lot better use for price to performance ratio. 

msrp if retailers jack the price thats on them

[Fardin]

22 minutes ago, CatXice said:

msrp if retailers jack the price thats on them

still mate, it doesn't justify the price that one should spend that much unless they are Rich & plenty of cash to waste. Forget argument over power consumption, would you recommend gtx 1080 for 540$ or vega 56 for 500$ to someone? think that yourself if that make sense  

[CatXice]

Just now, Fardin said:

still mate, it doesn't justify the price that one should spend that much unless they are Rich & plenty of cash to waste. Forget argument over power consumption, would you recommend gtx 1080 for 540$ or vega 56 for 500$ to someone? think that yourself if that make sense  

vega 56 is not $500 its $400