I'm at work and can't do a lot of research and linking but what I'm gathering is Vega is a huge disappointment. The GTX 1080 "competing" card is $500 I believe. Oh well. Have my money Nvidia. I figure we should just have one thread regarding Vega.
I'm at work and can't do a lot of research and linking but what I'm gathering is Vega is a huge disappointment. The GTX 1080 "competing" card is $500 I believe. Oh well. Have my money Nvidia. I figure we should just have one thread regarding Vega.
You've already summed it up: a disappointment. Moving on!
It really depends where the price/performance lays.
If the amd cards are $25-50 cheaper than nvidia for the same performance, and you get freesync monitors( avoiding another $50-100/tax per monitor for gsync ), then amd makes sense.
( I'm on a 1070 with freesync monitors ).
I'm not sure what the obsession is with "OH IT DOESNT BEAT A 1080TI? WHAT THE FUCK?".
I certainly don't expect it to beat a 1080Ti, but all told it's looking like the same performance as a base 1080 with the same pricetag. That's not bad necessarily, but I was expecting a little more.
Depending on deals, the 1080 has been as low as $390 (best ever) with most deals hovering $410-$430. While I'd love to buy a Freesync monitor, I already have the 40" 4k and I doubt I'd be able to sell it for a decent price so I'm more than likely just going to get a 1080 or maybe TI.
The only way you can realistically obtain these cards is through bundles...
I read Vega 56 could be bought without it but Vega 64 and up need bundles. That's incentive enough for me not to look at them for a LONG time.
Aside from AMD cards shooting through the roof in terms of price due to miners and the usual AMD issues (they still haven't figured out how to lower their TDP...), this was pretty much expected. Their last couple of generations have been pretty poor in terms of PPR and their main selling point, affordable budget cards, has been dethroned by the 1060. Their CPUs might still be interesting but even those aren't looking great unless you're doing something commercial that makes use of a threadripper's massive number of physical cores.
I think the big disappointment is that you're looking at AMD matching performance for cards that are already over a year old, while having a higher power draw.
It'll be another fury/290x situation, where on release it was trying to match a well established nvidia card and years down the road drivers/updates put it at the heels on newer ones, but waiting years for actual improvements like last time? Meh.
I just want a 4/570 or a 4/580, fuck.
Reddit post citing Tweaktown bench showing RX Vega 56 ahead of the 980TI, 1070, and trading blows with the 1080. Salt should be taken as many factors are at play here and Tweaktown is probably trying to get them clicks and ad revenue. If true, RX Vega 56 at $400 is a great value and probably the better buy than the higher TDP RX Vega 64.
If AMD is sandbagging........
Spoiler: show
I heard these are ridiculously good at mining so good luck getting one
Yeah, a lot of articles are circulating saying that. They only downfall would be the really REALLY high TDP compared to other cards.
p much been the case for the last couple generations for AMD. high TDP but ridiculously high compute performance. ends up driving the price of AMD cards through the roof for most manufacturers
Found a local store carrying a Asus Radeon RX 570 4GB ROG STRIX for 20$ over MSRP (200$). Woot.
First tier embargo has lifted and YouTubers/Press are doing unboxings. No Official Benchmarks yet