Bottleneck vega 56?

[Linus number 1 fan]

Hi all don't know if I'm the right place for this question, I'm upgrading from an r9 290 and looking at the vega 56 or even the 64, and I am unsure if the rest of my parts that are getting pretty old now; will drop like a bag of veggies or still hold their own if I put a vega in. I don't overclock and I'm stuck with red team as I have got a freesync 144hz monitor. I was hoping to 1080p game while getting my 144 fps and not bottle neck the GPU's abilities with the rest of my parts. Any help would be appreciated!

 

my build now:

AMD FX 8320

Asus M5A78L-M/USB3

Corsair CSM 750W Semi Modular 80+ Gold

DDR3 8GB (2x4) 1866mhz

240gb ssd

 

Yes i know the GPU is crazy out of the RRP and I will probably have to wait which I am going to do

[Jurrunio]

Upgrade the CPU with new mobo first (likely RAM as well). FX is weak, even for a R9 290

[themctipers]

freesync only works if you don't want to vsync because that feels less responsive, and if you are dropping below your monitor's refresh rate (which is something you never aim to have, lower your settings)

my experience with it has been.. completely useless (I had a 380 with a freesync 4k monitor for a while), since I usually do not vsync my games (I don't see frame tear, I like the extra fluidness, I always get over 60fps)

 

I'd say get a ryzen CPU + motherboard + DDR4 before you buy a new GPU, or even a used ivy/haswell computer.

[KarathKasun]

FX isnt going to push much over 90 in many titles while some may even struggle to get over 60.  FX has weak single thread performance, and that usually puts a pretty low cap on max FPS.

[R3ep3r]

29 minutes ago, Linus number 1 fan said:

Hi all don't know if I'm the right place for this question, I'm upgrading from an r9 290 and looking at the vega 56 or even the 64, and I am unsure if the rest of my parts that are getting pretty old now; will drop like a bag of veggies or still hold their own if I put a vega in. I don't overclock and I'm stuck with red team as I have got a freesync 144hz monitor. I was hoping to 1080p game while getting my 144 fps and not bottle neck the GPU's abilities with the rest of my parts. Any help would be appreciated!

 

my build now:

AMD FX 8320

Asus M5A78L-M/USB3

Corsair CSM 750W Semi Modular 80+ Gold

DDR3 8GB (2x4) 1866mhz

240gb ssd

 

Yes i know the GPU is crazy out of the RRP and I will probably have to wait which I am going to do

First of all I would suggest you upgrade your CPU since the performance of that FX8320 is below a G4560 in some games, paired with a 1070. If you want to keep up with the red team, you could go with a Ryzen 5 1600x or even higher with a Ryzen 7 1700 or if you want to switch teams you could go with an i5 8600k. Also why Vega56/64? As far as I saw both are overpriced and as I noticed vega 56 performs almost equal to the 1070 right now(in some titles vega 56 is better but still overpriced)

Spoiler

 

 

[Morgan Everett]

4 hours ago, themctipers said:

freesync only works if you don't want to vsync because that feels less responsive, and if you are dropping below your monitor's refresh rate (which is something you never aim to have, lower your settings)

my experience with it has been.. completely useless (I had a 380 with a freesync 4k monitor for a while), since I usually do not vsync my games (I don't see frame tear, I like the extra fluidness, I always get over 60fps)

 

I'd say get a ryzen CPU + motherboard + DDR4 before you buy a new GPU, or even a used ivy/haswell computer.

With a 380 at 4K, you were probably outside the monitor's freesync range much of the time.

[themctipers]

47 minutes ago, Morgan Everett said:

With a 380 at 4K, you were probably outside the monitor's freesync range much of the time.

I'd play on lowest on games like GTA V and metro 2033/last light redux. 

[Morgan Everett]

24 minutes ago, themctipers said:

I'd play on lowest on games like GTA V and metro 2033/last light redux. 

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.

[themctipers]

51 minutes ago, Morgan Everett said:

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.

I just play on lowest and get 60fps at 4k. Upscaled 1080p or 1440p looks terrible on my monitor, worse than native 4k itself. Freesync was useless to me because I never dropped below 60. 

[Morgan Everett]

Just now, themctipers said:

I just play on lowest and get 60fps at 4k. Upscaled 1080p or 1440p looks terrible on my monitor, worse than native 4k itself. Freesync was useless to me because I never dropped below 60. 

I find it a bit difficult to believe you were consistently hitting 4k60 in those games even at the lowest settings, to be honest.

[themctipers]

1 hour ago, Morgan Everett said:

I find it a bit difficult to believe you were consistently hitting 4k60 in those games even at the lowest settings, to be honest.

 

4k isn't that hard to run. TUrning things up is hard. You don't *need* Ultra to play at 4k, you can get by on low. 

Think this was the right video.

[Morgan Everett]

59 minutes ago, themctipers said:

 

4k isn't that hard to run. TUrning things up is hard. You don't *need* Ultra to play at 4k, you can get by on low. 

Think this was the right video.

I'm still erring on the side of scepticism, I'm afraid. Still, you've no obligation to change my mind.