Vega Owners Thread

What do you think of this monitor shadow001? Big enough :lol:It's $900 US at New Egg.

https://www.newegg.com/global/uk/Pr...-na-_-na&cm_sp=&AID=11877032&PID=1800524&SID=



Funny enough, it could replace my current 3 monitor setup and still be easier to drive since the vertical resolution is only half as much as a 4K display, never mind also having freesync, 144 Hz and being a curved display....:up:


Would definitely consider it for sure.....It would be a walk in the park for the dual Vega's, and the only thing left would be to make a 5120*2160 version at the same size with all those features to make it ideal....I'd snap one up instantly.
 
Latest price check at newegg.ca lists the Gigabyte Vega 64 at nearly 1500$ each Canadian......Out of stock of course and if this keeps up, I'll start naming my pair of Vega 64 liquid editions "my precious ones".......:lol:


They're nearly 500$ higher each than what I paid for my liquid versions just a little over 4 months ago, without being liquid versions themselves.... It was 979$ Can for the Gigabyte labelled one and 1029$ for the MSI one when I bought mine.


It would be 3500$ to set up a pair using EK water blocks.....:eek:
 
Funny enough, it could replace my current 3 monitor setup and still be easier to drive since the vertical resolution is only half as much as a 4K display, never mind also having freesync, 144 Hz and being a curved display....:up:


Would definitely consider it for sure.....It would be a walk in the park for the dual Vega's, and the only thing left would be to make a 5120*2160 version at the same size with all those features to make it ideal....I'd snap one up instantly.

It would be a walk in the park for a single Vega.
 
It would be a walk in the park for a single Vega.


True, since each frame is 4.147 megapixels which is about half of the native resolution of a 4k screen, so as far as the GPU is concerned it means having only half the work to deal with......It should easily handle 60+ Fps with just one being used but having said that and when you consider the 144Hz refresh of this screen, it would be hard on pretty much any single GPU to hit that and keep it locked there on it's own.
 
True, since each frame is 4.147 megapixels which is about half of the native resolution of a 4k screen, so as far as the GPU is concerned it means having only half the work to deal with......It should easily handle 60+ Fps with just one being used but having said that and when you consider the 144Hz refresh of this screen, it would be hard on pretty much any single GPU to hit that and keep it locked there on it's own.


Guys you really forget about ports...I tried Nier Automata and is not perfectly smooth on my rig.Let alone running in some sort of 4k resolution...
 
Still enjoying my gaming on Vega 64. Can't believe it's now on scan computers UK for £993 WTF (Strixx AIB). Basically that's £544 or 2.2x the price I paid for my Sapphire blower card :lol: Cheapest AIB 1080ti is a paltry £840 a bargain!!!
 
Still enjoying my gaming on Vega 64. Can't believe it's now on scan computers UK for £993 WTF (Strixx AIB). Basically that's £544 or 2.2x the price I paid for my Sapphire blower card :lol: Cheapest AIB 1080ti is a paltry £840 a bargain!!!


Same here and anxiously awaiting the availability of LG's 34WK95U 21/9 display, in order to take the next step in resolution ( 5120*2160 ).....Basically the same vertical resolution as 4K screen, but the horizontal of a 5K one and even bothering with something like AA is entirely optional, when there's about 11 million pixels on one's screen....Many countries don't have that many people living in them..... :p


My pair of Vega liquids are handling themselves beautifully with speed to spare at 4K and only getting faster as new drivers are released......Never mind the whole mining crap having vastly increased prices, regardless of GPU one picks.
 
Same here and anxiously awaiting the availability of LG's 34WK95U 21/9 display, in order to take the next step in resolution ( 5120*2160 ).....Basically the same vertical resolution as 4K screen, but the horizontal of a 5K one and even bothering with something like AA is entirely optional, when there's about 11 million pixels on one's screen....Many countries don't have that many people living in them..... :p


My pair of Vega liquids are handling themselves beautifully with speed to spare at 4K and only getting faster as new drivers are released......Never mind the whole mining crap having vastly increased prices, regardless of GPU one picks.

4K PC Gaming - Dying or Already Dead?



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwYxXrbcJUg
 
Guys you really forget about ports...I tried Nier Automata and is not perfectly smooth on my rig.Let alone running in some sort of 4k resolution...


It's a common complaint with this game and just how much effort did square Enix put into the PC version of this game.....Seems they and the developer we're more concerned about piracy issues for the PC version, hence using additional software like denuvo for the latter.


It's got nothing to do with the GPU itself basically.
 
4K PC Gaming - Dying or Already Dead?



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwYxXrbcJUg



I agree with some of the points made in the video, but most of them aren't motivated by technical limitations, but more by cost and here's a couple of examples :



Display port 1.4 can sustain a 240 Hz refresh rate at 4K resolutions, 120 Hz at 5K (5120*2880), and 60 Hz at 8K (7680*4320), and all the latest cards recently released support it.....Finding display port cables build well enough in terms of signal integrity ( read not a sweat shop in the middle of nowhere... :p ), is problematic to put it mildly, and the better built ones will be more expensive by quite a lot more.


Microsoft does indeed need to get it's crap together when it comes to scaling options when just using the O/S outside of gaming, same goes for some professional apps.


Having hardware that could drive a 4K panel ( preferably 34 inches or larger ) to 120 Hz refresh absolutely requires using a Multi GPU setup and even then they better be high end cards, meaning expensive even before the whole mining issue took off and almost doubled card prices.



Until a single card can do 120hz at 4K in gaming, which we're still a couple of years away at least, 4K gaming and beyond will always be a niche market that only a tiny portion of players have the means to indulge themselves in.
 
The only option that could fill out most of the requirements mentioned above is LG's 38UC99-W 21/9 display:


It's a 38" diagonal with a 21/9 aspect ratio and a 3840*1600 resolution, so windows scaling isn't an issue as the screen is large enough, while the resolution is lower on the vertical so it should be easier than 4K for a single high end video card setup, while it supports a 75 Hz refresh with freesync 2 support.....It's not 120 Hz but no single video card can pull that off with recent games all settings at the highest quality.


Bad part?......It's 1300$, meaning more expensive than an actual 4K display, so there's always a catch somewhere unfortunately.
 
This is why I don't pay much attention to GPU hardware performance comparisons at the high end to the degree I used to, because for one, display makers are taking their sweet time releasing products supporting the latest display port standard that's needed for said high resolutions at high refresh rates, and keep to display port 1.2 even today in the vast majority of cases, even though the technology is ready for far more.



Two, said displays would make any current high end card look like crap, forcing users to back down settings to get acceptable frame rates, which is what was the case in the early years of the GPU war, and an example of that is looking at the 32 bit color example at 1024*768 in the old days, and who could sustain that while hitting 60 FPS averages on a single GPU.....It took several years to make it happen, then there was the AA comparisons, which one was best and could be used with 32 bit color at which resolution.


Now imagine doing similar tricks, while trying to hit a 4K resolution @120Hz refresh on a single GPU, or even a 5K resolution@120Hz, basically going back to a proper GPU war where the limits of the hardware are being pushed, and weaknesses revealed......


These days we get to enable everything and the kitchen sink, and simply see who's got the fastest FPS and no, I don't find a 10~15 Fps performance difference at 4K as night and day issue, since most users aren't even willing to get a 4k display because they'll be limited to 60Hz refresh anyhow, so what's the point of waiting for even faster GPU hardware?......Faster 1080p and 1440p numbers?, give me a break as we've got plenty of speed there.


Seems that the display hardware industry in general is showing it's got no b**** or leadership whatsoever, and is simply remaining mainstream over their entire product line for the most part save for rare examples, and GPU makers would really have a challenge on their hands trying to make GPU's that perform well at those higher resolutions, so they they don't mind having an easier job and charging 700$+ for their cards, which is more money than most put on their CPU purchase.....:p
 
Buddy of mine picked up a Vega 64 and man what a disappointment. Totally unstable for him he can't get it to work. Guess from what we read about it the fact he's got an older non UEFI motherboard is making it a giant pita. He had no idea it needed UEFI but apparently a lot of people run into that problem. Google proves as much.

So now he's got a Ryzen upgrade on the way. Cool and all but he didn't plan on having to spend hundreds more on a whole system. Guess thats the way cookie crumble. :)
 
Buddy of mine picked up a Vega 64 and man what a disappointment. Totally unstable for him he can't get it to work. Guess from what we read about it the fact he's got an older non UEFI motherboard is making it a giant pita. He had no idea it needed UEFI but apparently a lot of people run into that problem. Google proves as much.

So now he's got a Ryzen upgrade on the way. Cool and all but he didn't plan on having to spend hundreds more on a whole system. Guess thats the way cookie crumble. :)


Card is defective. It has a legacy BIOS module on there. That part is probably dead. Mine worked on my old AM2+ non-UEFI 790GX-M2RS.
 
Last edited:
Buddy of mine picked up a Vega 64 and man what a disappointment. Totally unstable for him he can't get it to work. Guess from what we read about it the fact he's got an older non UEFI motherboard is making it a giant pita. He had no idea it needed UEFI but apparently a lot of people run into that problem. Google proves as much.

So now he's got a Ryzen upgrade on the way. Cool and all but he didn't plan on having to spend hundreds more on a whole system. Guess thats the way cookie crumble. :)

It doesn't require a UEFI Motherboard/bios. I have mine running on a 9 year old Asus p6t deluxe v2 motherboard.

What power supply is he using, and what motherboard?
 
Vega prices are falling. Amazon dropped their ASUS STRIX V64 card to $799 down from $1,187. (then it sold out).. lol..

Newegg is down to $899 for Vega 56 and $1,100 for Vega 64. Down $100 from their previous points.
 
Oh we'll find out if it was defective soon enough. He has a Ryzen upgrade here for the weekend to install.

It ran fine with vga.drv. Any time he installed the ATI driver it had major issues wouldn't even boot just blue screen. His psu is a seasonic gold 750w. Highly unlikely to be the problem and I'd put money on it having nothing to do with the issue.

We both google searched and yah, the vega has problems with some legacy motherboards that don't have UEFI support. Maybe it works with some and he just has a model that it doesn't like. Not sure what it is, doesn't honestly matter at this point - Ryzen FTW :D
 
My edit above - I had actually posted that I hope the Vegas drop in price more. I'm surprised that I like my current AMD card as much as I do. First one since the 9700 pro and they're come a long way.

Don't know why I edited it out lol
 
Oh we'll find out if it was defective soon enough. He has a Ryzen upgrade here for the weekend to install.

It ran fine with vga.drv. Any time he installed the ATI driver it had major issues wouldn't even boot just blue screen. His psu is a seasonic gold 750w. Highly unlikely to be the problem and I'd put money on it having nothing to do with the issue.

We both google searched and yah, the vega has problems with some legacy motherboards that don't have UEFI support. Maybe it works with some and he just has a model that it doesn't like. Not sure what it is, doesn't honestly matter at this point - Ryzen FTW :D

NO, some older motherboard bios are not supporting the Vega, that is not the Vega's fault. That is on the motherboard and the motherboard manufacture. Example: my son is using an older dell xps 8300, it will not take newer AMD card because Dell refuses to update the bios to support newer AMD cards, but they did update it to support the Nvidia 1060 GTX and such. Some people have actually down graded their bios to get the Vega working correctly, in fact, MOST of the problems are those with Pheonix bios. It has NOTHING to do it being UEFI or not. In fact there are people with UEFI bios that are having issues as well.

Has your friend installed the latest bios for his MB?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top