AMD RX Vega 64/56 Review Thread

@

@md_Guy

New member
--sadly no 64 Ref vs 64 Limited that I see so far.


AnandTech: http://www.anandtech.com/show/11717/the-amd-radeon-rx-vega-64-and-56-review
BitWit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOIVkIgtrvE (56 Ref / 64 Limited)
Computerbase: https://www.computerbase.de/2017-08/radeon-rx-vega-64-56-test/
Guru3d: https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-radeon-rx-vega-56-8gb-review,1.html
Hardocp: https://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/08/14/amd_radeon_rx_vega_64_video_card_review
HardwareInfo: https://nl.hardware.info/reviews/7517/amd-radeon-rx-vega-56--64-review-minder-euros-meer-watts
Hotwardware: https://hothardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-vega-gpu-review?page=1
Hexus: http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/108889-amd-radeon-rx-vega-64-radeon-rx-vega-56/
Lab501 http://lab501.ro/placi-video/review-amd-radeon-rx-vega-64-liquid-aircooled (64 Ref / AIO)
Pauls: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AL5oNxkQRHA (limited Ed)
Pcgameshardware: http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Radeo...266623/Tests/Benchmark-Preis-Release-1235445/ (Limited Ed)
PCPer: https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graph...-Review-Vega-64-Vega-64-Liquid-Vega-56-Tested (Ref / AIO)
Techpowerup: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Radeon_RX_Vega_64/ (64 Ref)
TechPopwerup: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Radeon_RX_Vega_56/ (56)
TechReport: http://techreport.com/review/32391/amd-radeon-rx-vega-64-and-rx-vega-56-graphics-cards-reviewed
TomsHardware: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-vega-64,5173.html
TweakTown: https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graph...-Review-Vega-64-Vega-64-Liquid-Vega-56-Tested

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ii1kW_Balfo
--
 
Last edited:
Not looking good so far. AMD has to be pretty brazen to release a GPU pulling this much power. So much for trying to get away from their (recent) reputation for high power usage. This is probably their worst card yet in terms of power use.

I really think AMD should seriously consider replacing Raja Koduri as head of RTG. I'm not sure what the hell this **** is. :nuts:
 
Nagorak said:
Not looking good so far. AMD has to be pretty brazen to release a GPU pulling this much power. So much for trying to get away from their (recent) reputation for high power usage. This is probably their worst card yet in terms of power use.

I really think AMD should seriously consider replacing Raja Koduri as head of RTG. I'm not sure what the hell this **** is. :nuts:
Click to expand...

RAJA is not to blame for Vega, Polaris was already done when he came on board and Vega was going to be rushed due to the Polaris failure.

The card to look for will be Navi as that has been designed completely under Raja's leadership. If Navi should be a joke, then yeah fire him.
 
The only interesting ones so far are the Vega 56 models with their near 1080 performance levels and 210 watts of power for 400$.....For that price, it's hard to complain, and at most i'd like to see the 500$ fully enabled air cooled version, where power starts getting up there at 295 watts, but the price is still reasonable.


700$ for water cooling and another ~100Mhz on the water version for both base and boost clocks, over the fully unlocked air cooled version, while using up to 345 watts?.....AMD can shove that one where the sun doesn't shine....
 
shadow001 said:
The only interesting ones so far are the Vega 56 models with their near 1080 performance levels and 210 watts of power for 400$.....For that price, it's hard to complain, and at most i'd like to see the 500$ fully enabled air cooled version, where power starts getting up there at 295 watts, but the price is still reasonable.


700$ for water cooling and another ~100Mhz on the water version for both base and boost clocks, over the fully unlocked air cooled version, while using up to 345 watts?.....AMD can shove that one where the sun doesn't shine....
Click to expand...

You feeling alright Shadow?
 
Hapatingjaky said:
You feeling alright Shadow?
Click to expand...


Very much so, thanks for asking.....:p ;)


If the results from this early leak are confirmed in other reviews, the extra clocks from the water version lead to an additional ~5 Fps extra over the air cooled versions, so paying another 200$ over the air cooled one is foolish to put it mildly, never mind the power use of the water version is insane for that little gain.


I'd only consider even the 500$ air cooled version, simply because it has more shading power than anything else out there, and the Vega GPU supports tier 3 of all DX12 features ( Pascal doesn't, some are tier 2 ), even if in both cases those advantages aren't reflected in current games.
 
Not all gloom and doom.. DX12 optimized seems to pay off:

b291fe2803b45114c9c262524b81e0d8b656cbe5.jpg
 
@md_Guy said:
Not all gloom and doom.. DX12 optimized seems to pay off:

b291fe2803b45114c9c262524b81e0d8b656cbe5.jpg
Click to expand...



Even there, it's a lot of pay 200$ more for the water edition over the air cooled one for that extra 6 Fps at 4K, never mind the crazy power use for the water edition......Vega 56 and air cooled 64 seem to be the ones to go for mainly for their price points ( 400 and 500$ respectively ).


700$ for the water version?.....No thanks.
 
Yes and no. Dx12 is actually slower on Nv hardware in bf1, and thats against an FE which is probably throttling to some degree.
 
Assuming my current Quad setup isn't up to the task any longer, the most i'd consider is a triple Air cooled Vega 64, and add my own EK water blocks which would still cost less than buying the water versions at 700$ each, and cool the damn things better anyhow.


That's and also taking pity of my power supplies......3 air cooled Vega 64's would draw 900 watts on their own at max TDP for each one without overclocking them at all....:eek: :nuts:
 
demo said:
Yes and no. Dx12 is actually slower on Nv hardware in bf1, and thats against an FE which is probably throttling to some degree.
Click to expand...

It also doesn't show that the Vegas are drawing more power than the 1080 Ti despite being decisively slower. The power draw of the Vega Liquid edition according to those tests is absolutely insane. It turns out the 1000w requirement wasn't some sort of exaggeration.

The rest of the reviews should hit in 8 minutes, so I guess we'll see the bad news.
 
Last edited:
demo said:
Yes and no. Dx12 is actually slower on Nv hardware in bf1, and thats against an FE which is probably throttling to some degree.
Click to expand...

But.. but.. we were told that nearly ALL 1080FEs run at.above 2.1Ghz... /snark :-P

Nagorak said:
It also doesn't show that the Vegas are drawing more power than the 1080 Ti despite being decisively slower. The power draw of the Vega Liquid edition according to those tests is absolutely insane. It turns out the 1000w requirement wasn't some sort of exaggeration.

The rest of the reviews should hit in 8 minutes, so I guess we'll see the bad news.
Click to expand...

Ppl are surprised that a 375W card is using 375W ?

For the majority of users still using 1080p/1440p @ 60Hz I think they are going to find Chill substantially reduces power draw..sadly does not look like many reviewers care about such and it's the typical Avg/Max FPS , Power and $ charts are going to get the attention
 
@md_Guy said:
But.. but.. we were told that nearly ALL 1080FEs run at.above 2.1Ghz... /snark :-P



Ppl are surprised that a 375W card is using 375W ?

For the majority of users still using 1080p/1440p @ 60Hz I think they are going to find Chill substantially reduces power draw..sadly does not look like many reviewers care about such and it's the typical Avg/Max FPS , Power and $ charts are going to get the attention
Click to expand...


Using cards this fast to still play at 1080p is silly, no matter which you pick and i suppose a case can be made for 1440p but only if you're using a panel with a 120Hz refresh rate to begin with.
 
Vega 56 performance/watt doesn't look that bad. It's at least no worse than Polaris (although there's no improvement from using HBM either). It's not that far shy of the 1060 (although that is the least efficient Pascal chip). Of course it looks worse at low resolution.

perfwatt_3840_2160.png
 
Well that was underwhelming, R600 all over again. Ordered a EVGA 1080 SC. The power consumption is insane, 330w for the Air 64. Well lets hope they can bounce back with Navi. :bleh:
 
Yeah, overall pretty underwhelming. It saves me some effort. I'll just stick with my 1080 and run with Vsync instead of Freesync. For single player games I couldn't care less about input lag anyway. For multiplayer... hell, I play MP so rarely these days that who really cares? If I actually do and feel like I need some sort of edge, I'll just turn Vsync off and accept some tearing.

I kind of feel like GCN needs to be put into the wood chipper at this point. Generation after generation we see the same deficit at low resolution. Maybe it made sense when there was hardly anything besides 60 Hz monitors, but now 144 Hz is becoming more common. Hopefully Ryzen and Threadripper are successful enough to get AMD back into the game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top