AMD Radeon Software 17.8.2 improves PUBG performance on VEGA 64 and fixes important RX VEGA issues

[Humbug]

36 minutes ago, Armakar said:

Didn't understand the blind hate for vega. Yup, it's trash to buy now, but people who say it's a total flop didn't do their research. The specs of the 56 and the 64 (on paper) should smash their counterparts, it's a new architecture; wait for new drivers and the 64 will be beating the 1080 convincingly soon.

the hate is probably deserved for Vega64. It's basically clocked up by AMD outside the optimal range and hence guzzling power just so they can be marginally quicker than gtx 1080.

 

Vega56 on the other hand seems to kickass. I would pick it over the gtx 1070.

[Jito463]

Given what we know about Vega, I'm actually rather curious as to why they even made a "gaming" version of it.  For compute loads, it's apparently far superior in many ways, and the enterprise market allows for more profitability anyway, so their attempts to make a gaming card that's both late and power hungry - when they could make much more profit by selling it as a compute card only - just doesn't make much sense to me.

 

Then again, I'm not in charge of a major corporation _{^{(or am I....)}}, so I suppose they have their reasons.

[TheUzu]

I'm thinking most of the problems with Vega 64 drivers are due to the card being released not when it was ready but when it was promised to the shareholders.

[kiska3]

Quote

 (2) Testing done by AMD Performance Labs as of July 27, 2017, using an Intel Core i7 7700K (@4.2GHz), 2x8GB DDR4-3000 MHz memory, and Windows® 10 (64bit). PC manufacturers may vary configurations yielding different results. At 4K running the game Player Unknown's Battlegrounds, the Radeon™ RX Vega 64 (8GB) system with Radeon Software 17.8.1 scored 28.5 frames per second and the system with Radeon Software 17.8.2 scored 33.6 frames per second. This results in an 18% increase in performance with Radeon Software 17.8.2. All times an average of 3 test runs.  Results are estimates and may vary. Performance may vary based on use of latest drivers. RS-173

28.5 fps vs 33.6 fps

Still not quite playable experience at 4k

[DragonTamer1]

Did his update roll out for all AMD cards or just Vega? I updated my software the other day hoping to regain overclocking ability (which I did) but my 480 is very unstable with any sort of overclock orcundervolt.

[Rune]

I want to live in the parallel universe where AMDs hardware team got stuck with Nvidia's software group and this kind of crap doesn't happen.

[MoonSpot]

On 8/26/2017 at 0:58 PM, Humbug said:

the hate is probably deserved for Vega64. It's basically clocked up by AMD outside the optimal range and hence guzzling power just so they can be marginally quicker than gtx 1080.

 

Vega56 on the other hand seems to kickass. I would pick it over the gtx 1070.

Vega64 is not quicker than the 1080, It is slower the majority of the time.  So much so that the 1080 is a clear winner.

https://www.techspot.com/review/1476-amd-radeon-vega-64/page13.html

 

I don't even want to see how bad vega 64 liquid cooled will do against an OC'ed liquid cooled 1080, or....considering the price point VG64LC is asking for, a liquid cooled 1080ti.

 

Vega 56 at least doesn't seem to embarrass itself, but it's not available for purchase in any form as of yet either so....:shrugs:

[Doobeedoo]

Bit off topic though, but previous 17.8.1 performance driver for Quake Champions booster performance significantly that I was very surprised. It was also along Early Access update as well. But like game works better on Ultra than it did with Low before which is amazing, mind you it ran even before with higher framerate. And Vulkan is yet to come.

[Trixanity]

Before we sing praises, it isn't exactly unusual for a game to gain a big boost from driver optimizations which is why AMD has previously been criticized for being late with updated drivers for new games on launch day. Their new schedule means many more driver updates with game enhancements as well as WHQL drivers every year.