AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 and 56 Reviews [*UPDATED* Aug 28]

[tamz_msc]

Every review i have read, VEGA 56 is faster than GTX1070.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11717/the-amd-radeon-rx-vega-64-and-56-review

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-amd-radeon-rx-vega-56-review

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Radeon_RX_Vega_56/31.html

https://www.techspot.com/review/1468-amd-radeon-rx-vega-56/

And power is only 40-50W more (Chill enabled) for a desktop GPU which many will not even care. Im not saying power consumption doesnt matter, im saying that most people doesnt care for 50W more on a desktop gaming system to be the first criteria of purchase.

Let's take the Tech spot review because it has the largest selection of games and has AIB cards for comparison. Vega 56 is 2 percent faster than the GTX 1070 at 1440p. That's margin of error. A big part of it is due to Dirt 4, and removing it would essentially result in a slight loss or a tie for Vega 56.

 

[AtenRa]

Let's take the Tech spot review because it has the largest selection of games and has AIB cards for comparison. Vega 56 is 2 percent faster than the GTX 1070 at 1440p. That's margin of error. A big part of it is due to Dirt 4, and removing it would essentially result in a slight loss or a tie for Vega 56.

If we take AIB cards, ASUS Vega 64 Strix is close to 5% faster than blower VEGA 64 and that will make the AIB Vega 56 at least 5% faster than AIB GTX1070 cards.

 

[Unreal123]

Seriously what was RTG thinking before developing VEGA?

Even OC GTX 980 Ti is seriously competiting against RX VEGA 64.

 

[Unreal123]

If we take AIB cards, ASUS Vega 64 Strix is close to 5% faster than blower VEGA 64 and that will make the AIB Vega 56 at least 5% faster than AIB GTX1070 cards.

Why are you guys comparing GTX 1070 with RX VEGA 56? GTX 1070 will be around $100 cheaper than RX VEGA 56 and it is confirm. Only AMD fanboys are comparing it with GTX 1070 for the sake of AMD ,however it should and must be compared with GTX 1080.

Vega only made Nvidia Pascal pricing more better and more compelling.

 

[jpiniero]

You can't actually buy the 1070 at MSRP either. Most are in the $450-$480 range.

 

[Unreal123]

Every review i have read, VEGA 56 is faster than GTX1070.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11717/the-amd-radeon-rx-vega-64-and-56-review

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-amd-radeon-rx-vega-56-review

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Radeon_RX_Vega_56/31.html

https://www.techspot.com/review/1468-amd-radeon-rx-vega-56/

And power is only 40-50W more (Chill enabled) for a desktop GPU which many will not even care. Im not saying power consumption doesnt matter, im saying that most people doesnt care for 50W more on a desktop gaming system to be the first criteria of purchase.

You are miss leading people here. RX VEGA 56 will be much more expensive than GTX 1070 when it launches . I pretty sure that it will be more expensive than GTX 1080.

 

[Unreal123]

You can't actually buy the 1070 at MSRP either. Most are in the $450-$480 range.

RX VEGA 56 much more expensive than that. Retail wants profit but AMD wants retailers to sell RX vega 56 without profit.

 

[Carfax83]

Seriously what was RTG thinking before developing VEGA?

Even OC GTX 980 Ti is seriously competiting against RX VEGA 64.

OC 980 Ti is a beast! Never before had there been such a ridiculous amount of untapped performance for a GPU! I still have fond memories of overclocking my Zotac GTX 980 Ti Amp Extreme to 1500/8000 on air

 

[Elixer]

You are miss leading people here. RX VEGA 56 will be much more expensive than GTX 1070 when it launches . I pretty sure that it will be more expensive than GTX 1080.

Why don't you wait for the cards to actually ship before throwing accusations around?

AMD stated they want it to be $399, so, that is all the information we have to go on right now.

Looking at newegg's current prices, they have 1070 (blower) cards are around $429, and 1080 FE (blower) cards range from $509 - $549.

If retailers sell Vega56 at the $399 price point AMD wanted, then we will see it, and if not, then opinions will change.

 

[Trumpstyle]

I figured out what is happening regarding AMD pricing, atleast I think. This is what I gathered from reading and listening to various sites like Gamersnexus and sweclockers.

We all at first thought 599$ was the real MSRP for vega 64 with those 2 game packs. And that the 499$ was just for launch day.

But it's likely worse than this. All those packs and stand-alone vega prices we saw in that picture are just temporary that a select retailers around the world will have access to (like newegg in US and Komplett in scandavia).

And when this "access" is gone the real MSRP for vega 64 will be 650-700$ (maybe even more). This is the price other retailers will be forced to sell at to even make a very minor profit. And it will very likely be the same for Vega 56.

This way AMD can claim the MSRP for Vega 64 is 499$ and 399$ for vega 56 without lying and give vague statements like they have.

So let's w8 for other retailers like Amazon and see what they selling at before we judge the real MSRP.

 

[krumme]

Factoring how? As in not buying it? Some just can't wait or the money isn't an issue. Amazingly, Anti-aliasing isn't something some people care about. For me it's imperative.

There hasn't been extensive testing yet done of Vega at all considering the short time AMD decided to give the reviewers, let alone extensive testing done of the MSAA issue. I certainly won't purchase one yet and wasn't planning to until at least AIB Vega 56's are out anyway.

My reasoning is an rx64 or 1080ti with 4x msaa is not nearly fast enough in 4k now and never will be. Besides i dont value it. So its really simple.

 

[krumme]

RX VEGA 56 much more expensive than that. Retail wants profit but AMD wants retailers to sell RX vega 56 without profit.

Will people buy it then?
If yes then its apatently the price the market dictates.
As far as this board is concerned only 2 people have bought it yet as i know?. 2 people buying the rx64 at aprox 10% below lowest price 1080.

The idea that amd want retailers to sell with no profit is idiotic. I dont know where to start but even in North Korea they woulnt hardly understand this nonsense.
Sometimes i fully understand why amd is not betting their business on consumers.

 

[krumme]

I figured out what is happening regarding AMD pricing, atleast I think. This is what I gathered from reading and listening to various sites like Gamersnexus and sweclockers.

We all at first thought 599$ was the real MSRP for vega 64 with those 2 game packs. And that the 499$ was just for launch day.

But it's likely worse than this. All those packs and stand-alone vega prices we saw in that picture are just temporary that a select retailers around the world will have access to (like newegg in US and Komplett in scandavia).

And when this "access" is gone the real MSRP for vega 64 will be 650-700$ (maybe even more). This is the price other retailers will be forced to sell at to even make a very minor profit. And it will very likely be the same for Vega 56.

This way AMD can claim the MSRP for Vega 64 is 499$ and 399$ for vega 56 without lying and give vague statements like they have.

So let's w8 for other retailers like Amazon and see what they selling at before we judge the real MSRP.

Is it possible for you and others to understand amd can not decide the price?
That the gpu market isnt the former Soviet union.

This amd bashing is hillarious. Its a very small player on the market yet all those conspiracy theories is pasted all over. Get realistic.

 

[krumme]

I agree, if the price price is right. I was hoping for gtx 1080TI +10-15% gaming performance ...

Did you?
This is your post from 4 august
"AMD promises higher clock higher IPC.... and we do get higher clock, but lower IPC.
"
Look at your posts from 6 aug. Same. Unsubstatiated claims.

 

[Trumpstyle]

Is it possible for you and others to understand amd can not decide the price?
That the gpu market isnt the former Soviet union.

This amd bashing is hillarious. Its a very small player on the market yet all those conspiracy theories is pasted all over. Get realistic.

Ofc AMD can't decide pricing, but they can put a floor and that what we all trying to figure out. As it's almost confirmed the MSRP amd put out is very misleading. Even before reviews were out, videocardz went out with a article having 4 sources claiming something is odd with the pricing.

But let's w8 intill other retailers start selling vega and it will very likely be confirmed my theory is correct

 

[Unreal123]

Some people are still posting who said that RX VEGA will cheaper than GTX 1080 Ti and faster than GTX 1080 Ti. It is funny how they are blindly defending even though RTG PR is not even defending VEGA.

 

[richaron]

Some people are still posting who said that RX VEGA will cheaper than GTX 1080 Ti and faster than GTX 1080 Ti. It is funny how they are blindly defending even though RTG PR is not even defending VEGA.

Well... there are a few people like me who are correcting obviously stupid Vega bashing.

And if any of us claim Vega competes with a 1080Ti you can correct us also. Rather than... what was your point? Are you saying anyone who doesn't bash Vega is "blindly defending" it?

 

[Unreal123]

Well... there are a few people like me who are correcting obviously stupid Vega bashing.

And if any of us claim Vega competes with a 1080Ti you can correct us also. Rather than... what was your point? Are you saying anyone who doesn't bash Vega is "blindly defending" it?

Vega is the worst GPU launch history.

It consumes 2.2X more watts, it is 10% slower, 20% more expensive than GTX 1080 after 1.4 years late. It deserve to get bash and AMD cannot escape with moto of we are small team, competition is good, open source etc. They made a turd and they deserve to get turd a response.

 

[richaron]

Vega is the worst GPU launch history.

It consumes 2.2X more watts, it is 10% slower, 20% more expensive than GTX 1080 after 1.4 years late. It deserve to get bash and AMD cannot escape with moto of we are small team, competition is good, open source etc. They made a turd and they deserve to get turd a response.

Lol you can call it a turd if you want to live your life with blinders on.

In the real world I bought a Vega 64 for roughly the same price as a 1070. In gaming Vega will easily outperform the 1070 in power saving mode (which I will use) for 50-60W more. Plus I use Freesync and I will be using compute features of this card. Sure I got a good price, and this instantly turns what you call a "turd" into the obvious choice for my usage case.

So again, many of us aren't making wild claims about Vega, or "blindly defending". We can probably see more than someone like you. I just came here to correct the nonsense bashing.

 

[psolord]

OC 980 Ti is a beast! Never before had there been such a ridiculous amount of untapped performance for a GPU! I still have fond memories of overclocking my Zotac GTX 980 Ti Amp Extreme to 1500/8000 on air

The 5850, 7850 and 7950, were really good overclockers too, with much untapped performance left on the table.

Untapped not being the exact correct word however, since OC does take the power draw off the charts. I mean it's left "untapped" for a reason. Not that I complain if the OC need arises, for fun or for needed performance.

But all that was back in the day where AMD was not shameless enough in order to offer preoverclocked cards as stock.

 

[antihelten]

You can't actually buy the 1070 at MSRP either. Most are in the $450-$480 range.

Actually most 1070's are much more expensive than that. Looking at Newegg, only about 10% fall within that range, and the average price is $550-600.

Basically mining is screwing everyone these days, regardless of brand.

 

[Tup3x]

Lol you can call it a turd if you want to live your life with blinders on.

In the real world I bought a Vega 64 for roughly the same price as a 1070. In gaming Vega will easily outperform the 1070 in power saving mode (which I will use) for 50-60W more. Plus I use Freesync and I will be using compute features of this card. Sure I got a good price, and this instantly turns what you call a "turd" into the obvious choice for my usage case.

So again, many of us aren't making wild claims about Vega, or "blindly defending". We can probably see more than someone like you. I just came here to correct the nonsense bashing.

The thing is... In "real world" you got extremely lucky and that doesn't apply to 98 % of potential buyers.

This is the reality here in Finland:

Zero cards available and prices are beyond ridiculous. Cheapest available GTX 1070 costs 439,90 € in the same shop (all prices have 24% VAT included).

 

[richaron]

The thing is... In "real world" you got extremely lucky and that doesn't apply to 98 % of potential buyers.

This is the reality here in Finland:

Zero cards available and prices are beyond ridiculous. Cheapest available GTX 1070 costs 439,90 € in the same shop.

Yeah without a doubt I got a good price. I'm happy I got in early I'm in Australia though, and the inflated Vega 64 price (atm) still only puts it equal with 1080. So for many people Vega's still a viable option.

I'm not pretending my situation represents everyone, in fact the opposite; I'm just providing an example of a real situation which goes against those blindly bashing Vega. They are the ones pretending everyone should agree with them.

 

[IRobot23]

Did you?
This is your post from 4 august
"AMD promises higher clock higher IPC.... and we do get higher clock, but lower IPC.
"
Look at your posts from 6 aug. Same. Unsubstatiated claims.

That was based on FE VEGA

 

[IRobot23]

wat? why in the world were you hoping that? No wonder you claim it a complete failure. You started off in fantasy land.

Because its die size is bigger than GTX 1080TI.
I was thinking about R9 270X vs R9 290X (x2.06) - die size difference is similar to RX 580 and RX VEGA (x2.094)
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/radeon-r9-290x-crossfire-vs-sli-review-benchmarks,16.html
vs
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_rx_vega_64_8gb_review,15.html