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

[krumme]

I think most will be surpriced to look back at 680 launch. Care to give it a look anyone as memory is short?:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5699/nvidia-geforce-gtx-680-review/13
It slammed the 7970. For perf and efficiency and with a leaner mem interface. In bf3 it was way faster than 1080ti is vs rx64.

 

[krumme]

The same retailer sells RX 580 8GB for £330. People really need to adjust to the current market realities.

You know why its 330 pounds?
Its because supply is so little.

/jk

 

[estarkey7]

AMD can force pricing up, by charging a unreasonable wholesale that doesn't allow for a reasonable retail profit when selling for the $499 "MSRP".

There is every indication that this IS the case, and that AMD was giving retailers rebates to offer a small batch of "MSRP" cards.

The rebates went away, and so did the "MSRP" cards.

You have no idea how basic economics works . If a retailer can't make a profit on a product, they won't carry it! The reason the prices are higher is simple supply and demand.

Furthermore, do you think AMD would risk their relationship will distributors who may stop carrying Ryzen and Threadripper in retaliation for being screwed on wholesale Vega cost? If you still think you're right on your pricing theory, you need medical help!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[Elixer]

Think about that. 15 months later, 5% faster, 35% higher power draw, worse perf/$ at MSRP prices... GOLD AWARD.

Classic.

Don't shoot the messenger.

I just hope they all update their "reviews" accordingly once the full picture comes out.

 

[tviceman]

Don't shoot the messenger.

I just hope they all update their "reviews" accordingly once the full picture comes out.

I know; I'm not. Awards are given out on hardware review sites just for products being shipped to their doorsteps.

"Congratulations! 15 months behind the competition and you almost caught up to them at higher prices! GOLD AWARD!"

 

[Erithan13]

This pricing situation is looking very ugly.

Could have got a 480 last year. Waited for Vega. Could have got a Fury air for a great price earlier this year. Waited for Vega. Could have got a 580 in that oh so brief period before the miners arrived in full force. Waited for Vega.

If the AIB 56 isn't reasonably priced there's basically nowhere to upgrade or even sidegrade to, suspect a lot of others are in the same boat. Started to look at the NV/Gsync ecosystem in preparation.

 

[Muhammed]

According to Techpowerup, VEGA 56 is 6% faster than GTX 1070

According to TechSpot it's only 2% faster@1440p, so yeah, the 56 trades blows with the 1070.
https://www.techspot.com/review/1468-amd-radeon-rx-vega-56/page8.html
https://www.techspot.com/review/1468-amd-radeon-rx-vega-56/page8.html

 

[nurturedhate]

This pricing situation is looking very ugly.

Could have got a 480 last year. Waited for Vega. Could have got a Fury air for a great price earlier this year. Waited for Vega. Could have got a 580 in that oh so brief period before the miners arrived in full force. Waited for Vega.

If the AIB 56 isn't reasonably priced there's basically nowhere to upgrade or even sidegrade to, suspect a lot of others are in the same boat. Started to look at the NV/Gsync ecosystem in preparation.

You would still be looking at inflated prices due to mining or sidegrades for the most part. It's just a bad time overall.

 

[krumme]

This pricing situation is looking very ugly.

Could have got a 480 last year. Waited for Vega. Could have got a Fury air for a great price earlier this year. Waited for Vega. Could have got a 580 in that oh so brief period before the miners arrived in full force. Waited for Vega.

If the AIB 56 isn't reasonably priced there's basically nowhere to upgrade or even sidegrade to, suspect a lot of others are in the same boat. Started to look at the NV/Gsync ecosystem in preparation.

Yes its a near hopeless situation. Amd cards beeing expensive. Who would have known its worse than when they were cheap? Lol

Now seriously why did you hold out on the fury sale for 300 usd or so? It looks like a good gpu today.
More so for polaris. They do fine. The 580 "trades blow" with the 1060 why did you hold out on the 480?

Did others tell you what to think about those cards initially?

I am going to sell my 470 for far more than i gave for it launch day. Got that card for a good deal less than i got from my used gtx 970. Now got a rx64 for less than a 1080.

 

[Elixer]

This pricing situation is looking very ugly.

Doesn't it always look ugly on first launch?
Realistically, you have to wait a few months after launch, when the initial demand goes down a bit.
Then prices go down.

Just look at the Ryzen launch...

You know, I wonder if that is what AMD is going to have to end up doing, basically sell the card themselves like they do with Ryzen.

 

[AtenRa]

According to TechSpot it's only 2% faster@1440p, so yeah, the 56 trades blows with the 1070.
https://www.techspot.com/review/1468-amd-radeon-rx-vega-56/page8.html

VEGA 56 Blower is 2% faster than an AIB overclocked GTX 1070, it will be 6-8% faster again if you use a AIB Vega 56 card

from your link

So rather than testing with the GTX 1070 Founders Edition, we're using the MSI Gaming X model which is a little bit faster thanks to a better cooler and factory overclocking.

 

[railven]

Wow, this rollercoaster just won't end, will it? Who did AMD piss off (or put in charge?) to get such a weird backlash from just about everyone!

Spoiler

It seems every positive for Vega has a few asterisks tied to it. From day 1
"It will be faster than GTX 1080 Ti"*
"Once drivers are improved it will be a great competitor"**
"Price is great and it will deliver much needed competition."***
"Power consumption isn't bad."******

Even now with the pricing, it's another "who done it" situation. Did AMD drop the ball (selling to retailers at stupid high resulting in original MSRP $400/$500 being unsustainable without kick backs) or are retailers gouging? Just about every step of this product has been marred with something. I'm reading now it was the CFO that basically through a wrench in everything claiming they want higher margins at the expense of reputation. What!?

Even now the fate of Vega56 is pending it's price point. Watching people argue that a $450 Vega56 is reasonable when it's barely $30 away from an custom 1080 is mind blowing. At this point it isn't even the architecture being a failure or dud, but just the execution from start to end is going to get it's own documentary at some point. Woof.

 

[krumme]

Don't shoot the messenger.

I just hope they all update their "reviews" accordingly once the full picture comes out.

AT labelled their gtx 680 review
"retaking the performance crown"
We know where that went. The excact opposite and not even by a small stretch.
People were misled in millions. Only a few complained. Most tried and try to make sense of their bad decision by emitting tons of smoke.

So complaining about rx56 reviews needs to be seen in context. Yes it is a classic but its far more complex than 15 months late only plus 5%.... Clearly reviewers is part of the business and the hype and thats why we need to discuss here.
We need more testing and more to some specific areas to assess raw perf better.

 

[PeterScott]

Doesn't it always look ugly on first launch?
Realistically, you have to wait a few months after launch, when the initial demand goes down a bit.
Then prices go down.

Just look at the Ryzen launch...

You know, I wonder if that is what AMD is going to have to end up doing, basically sell the card themselves like they do with Ryzen.

How is that comparable?

Ryzen 1700 MSRP was $330, and it never went above that, so zero shenanigans here.

Vega OTOH, seems to have a special "look good in reviews" price for base MSRP cards, that really seems unattainable, with most cards starting $100 higher for a LE silver cards, or game bundle cards. And complaints from retailers that the $499 cards were based, not on a reasonable wholesale channel price, but on rebates to the retailers from AMD.

It looks like shenanigans with the Vega pricing, to appear better in reviews (on price/perf comparisons), but in reality those prices are not really generally available. It leaves a bad taste.

If AMD had just done straight up pricing and sold out and retailers were trying to grab higher prices, I think people would just blame retailers, but with packages, and rebates behind the scenes it really looks like AMD is trying to have it's cake and eat it to, appear in reviews to have favorable pricing, that is manipulating behind the scenes get more.

Whatever is actually going on, the optics look bad for AMD.

 

[krumme]

You would still be looking at inflated prices due to mining or sidegrades for the most part. It's just a bad time overall.

Agree. If i look at gpu ddr4 and ssd prices the only reasonably priced product i can find in stock in my country is a gtx 1060 3gb that is priced a tad higher than one year ago. Wow.
The only uplift is the new cpu prices.
Those r5 1600 with a decent cooler is the best to happen in that space for at least a decade.

 

[krumme]

Wow, this rollercoaster just won't end, will it? Who did AMD piss off (or put in charge?) to get such a weird backlash from just about everyone!

Spoiler

It seems every positive for Vega has a few asterisks tied to it. From day 1
"It will be faster than GTX 1080 Ti"*
"Once drivers are improved it will be a great competitor"**
"Price is great and it will deliver much needed competition."***
"Power consumption isn't bad."******

Even now with the pricing, it's another "who done it" situation. Did AMD drop the ball (selling to retailers at stupid high resulting in original MSRP $400/$500 being unsustainable without kick backs) or are retailers gouging? Just about every step of this product has been marred with something. I'm reading now it was the CFO that basically through a wrench in everything claiming they want higher margins at the expense of reputation. What!?

Even now the fate of Vega56 is pending it's price point. Watching people argue that a $450 Vega56 is reasonable when it's barely $30 away from an custom 1080 is mind blowing. At this point it isn't even the architecture being a failure or dud, but just the execution from start to end is going to get it's own documentary at some point. Woof.

How is this not speeding up the rollercoaster?
I mean gossip from the cfo. Come on. Lol. Hear say in spades.
Drama. We like it or we wouldnt be here. We just like our own drama more than the others.

 

[Elixer]

How is that comparable?

Ryzen 1700 MSRP was $330, and it never went above that, so zero shenanigans here.

Read what I wrote under the graph.
AMD itself sold the processor, that was the reason it never went above* was because AMD was in full control. AMD sold directly to distributors.
Now, AMD sells the chips to AIBs, AIBs sell to distributors, distributors sells to retailers.
Now, when margins are so tight with Vega, everyone is trying to capitalize on the early adopters.

*When places were out of stock, there was lots of 3rd parties having higher than MSRP prices.
Same graph as before, but with 3rd parties enabled.

 

[Centauri]

You know, I wonder if that is what AMD is going to have to end up doing, basically sell the card themselves like they do with Ryzen.

I think 3dfx will be the last to make that mistake.

 

[Muhammed]

AT labelled their gtx 680 review
"retaking the performance crown"
We know where that went. The excact opposite and not even by a small stretch.
People were misled in millions. Only a few complained. Most tried and try to make sense of their bad decision by emitting tons of smoke.

The 680 aged fine compared to the 7970 though, it's the big Kepler that fared worse.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfSi-Z8r12M

 

[ElFenix]

have you guys been living under rocks every time game consoles have launched for the past decade? same #%@&.

]

Even now the fate of Vega56 is pending it's price point. Watching people argue that a $450 Vega56 is reasonable when it's barely $30 away from an custom 1080 is mind blowing. At this point it isn't even the architecture being a failure or dud, but just the execution from start to end is going to get it's own documentary at some point. Woof.

i mean, if you're just going to invent things.

anyway, $450 isn't $30 from custom 1080s, 1080s start at $515 shipped on newegg. know what is $30 from custom 1080s? most 1070s. only 1 1070 listed below $450 right now, and that's from some company i've never heard of. almost no *gaming* reason to buy a 1070 right now.

 

[tential]

almost no *gaming* reason to buy a 1070 right now.

Can you just complete the thought with the rest of the explanation as to why this is the case?
TPU Charts or something.
I understand your reasoning, but the numbers make it a lot more compelling.

Also what are the parameters we are using here to determine the prices for everything?
Especially Vega 56.....
Is this MSRP?
The arbitrary ?$450?

How long til we say "Ok this is the price for Vega 56?"

Just seems like an odd debate to have when the price will be quite fluid.

 

[guachi]

Even now the fate of Vega56 is pending it's price point. Watching people argue that a $450 Vega56 is reasonable when it's barely $30 away from an custom 1080 is mind blowing. At this point it isn't even the architecture being a failure or dud, but just the execution from start to end is going to get it's own documentary at some point. Woof.

Checked Newegg. Cheapest 1080 with faster clocks than a blower version is $520 or $70 more than $450. Maybe you can get a 1080 for $480 somewhere but not there.

According to TPU, the 1080 is 12% faster at 1440. $480 for a 1080 is 6.7% more than a Vega 56. Clearly, 12% more performance for 7% more dollars makes the 1080 a better deal except, perhaps, for those with a Freesync monitor.

At $520, it's 15.6% more for 12% more performance. This means the Vega 56 is a good value at $450 compared to a 1080.

Vega 64 is about neck-and-neck with a 1080 (TPU tests at 6 different power/BIOS settings) and seems to compete best at 4k resolutions with the 1080 for performance but its power is all over the place so it's hard for me to give it a better grade other than "mediocre" until I see what the AIB cards look like.

 

[krumme]

have you guys been living under rocks every time game consoles have launched for the past decade? same #%@&.




i mean, if you're just going to invent things.

anyway, $450 isn't $30 from custom 1080s, 1080s start at $515 shipped on newegg. know what is $30 from custom 1080s? most 1070s. only 1 1070 listed below $450 right now, and that's from some company i've never heard of. almost no *gaming* reason to buy a 1070 right now.

Gulp !! Arg...you are right. Same here. What happened? Most 1070 in stock is like i paid for a rx64 a week ago.

Get the 1080 while you can guys.

Miners be warned; I got 14 bajonet kills out of 28 in a round today.

 

[PeterScott]

Vega 64 is about neck-and-neck with a 1080 (TPU tests at 6 different power/BIOS settings) and seems to compete best at 4k resolutions with the 1080 for performance but its power is all over the place so it's hard for me to give it a better grade other than "mediocre" until I see what the AIB cards look like.

Or you know, you look at most other reviews that show the 1080 clearly out in front.

After looking at a large number of reviews, I think the fairest assessment is that 1070/1080 trade blows with Vega 56/Vega 64.

In trading blows the Vega 56 has a slight edge over 1070, and the 1080 has a slightly bigger edge over the Vega 64.

If and when, the Vega cards are priced comparable to their performance (at their MSRP) they will be reasonable purchase, but at $100 above MSRP, they really aren't.

 

[guachi]

I've looked at two different reviews, TPU and Anandtech, and both show Vega 64 about 1% faster than a 1080 based on the 99th percentile results (and averages if otherwise not available) . These are the only two reviews I've actually looked at. I should clarify that neck-and-neck refers to 4k gaming. I haven't done a weighted review of any other sites yet as I haven't looked at them.

4k Freesync monitors are cheap and 4k is great for general PC usage (text looks really nice) that, personally, I won't game at a lower resolution. There's just no value to me. Both Vega and the 1080 are marginal at 4k at max/near max details (the kind sites like to test) and, unfortunately, don't test at a setting I'd actually game at. But you go with what you can get, right?

In any event, 2 of 2 review sites say Vega 64 is faster at 4k than a 1080, even if just barely.

EDIT: Looked at 3 more sites. techspot didn't let me see individual game results (at least not that I could tell) so I skipped it. pcgameshardware had the 1080 about 7-8% faster (depending on whether it was minimum or average fps). Guru3d has the 1080 0.4% faster.

Still not seeing where most sites show the 1080 faster than Vega 64 by more than Vega 56 is faster than a 1070.