Arachnotronic
Lifer
- Mar 10, 2006
- 11,715
- 2,012
- 126
Jeez, overclocking the Asus adds another 140W+ of power consumption. 450W of board power to beat a stock GTX 1080.
Wow. Pathetic.
Jeez, overclocking the Asus adds another 140W+ of power consumption. 450W of board power to beat a stock GTX 1080.
First AIB review I believe, for the Asus RX Vega 64 Strix Gaming:
http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/109078-asus-radeon-rx-vega-64-strix-gaming/
Jeez, overclocking the Asus adds another 140W+ of power consumption. 450W of board power to beat a stock GTX 1080.
IKR! Oh Asus what are you doing?
I don't see how it's Asus's fault that Vega 64 was already well off the performance-efficiency curve to begin with...
I don't see how it's Asus's fault that Vega 64 was already well off the performance-efficiency curve to begin with...
Jeez, overclocking the Asus adds another 140W+ of power consumption. 450W of board power to beat a stock GTX 1080.
Jeez, overclocking the Asus adds another 140W+ of power consumption.
450W of board power to beat a stock GTX 1080.
No it doesn't. It goes from 455W without OC, to 532W with OC. So an increase of 77W, not 140W+
Guys what do you think will happen with Raja? He's been doing really great on the software side of things, AMD really have a full packaging that is actually better what Nvidia is currently offering, their open source and semi open source features and code is also great, their driver updates are frequent and with really good game optimizations.
That said in terms of hardware its been shambles, the RX 400/500 series were decent, certainly the RX 400 were saved by board partners who made the card competitive and with the RX 500 series they basically released the cards that were supposed to be released before, but couldn't manage.
No one can recommend the GTX 1060 6GB over the RX 580 8GB, the RX 570 is absolutely king of the mid to low range(of course I'm talking pre mining craze and prices and availability going bonkers).
Vega is an utter disaster, at computing its really good, Nvidia just released a driver that increases Titan xp performance on average about 5% in various programs, in Maya in certain tasks up to 60% faster, etc... Vega still has an advantage, certainly its priced better, but not a clear cut winner at all.
I can only see one positive point about the Vega architecture: it requires less memory bandwidth than their previous architectures.
I expect a really good basic gaming APU based on DDR4 + Vega.
About Vega10 die: its a flop, its even worse than Fiji, performance per watt had a regression, instead of improving.
Guys what do you think will happen with Raja? He's been doing really great on the software side of things, AMD really have a full packaging that is actually better what Nvidia is currently offering, their open source and semi open source features and code is also great, their driver updates are frequent and with really good game optimizations.
That said in terms of hardware its been shambles, the RX 400/500 series were decent, certainly the RX 400 were saved by board partners who made the card competitive and with the RX 500 series they basically released the cards that were supposed to be released before, but couldn't manage.
No one can recommend the GTX 1060 6GB over the RX 580 8GB, the RX 570 is absolutely king of the mid to low range(of course I'm talking pre mining craze and prices and availability going bonkers).
Vega is an utter disaster, at computing its really good, Nvidia just released a driver that increases Titan xp performance on average about 5% in various programs, in Maya in certain tasks up to 60% faster, etc... Vega still has an advantage, certainly its priced better, but not a clear cut winner at all.
Hopefully he gets canned, because if navi is as bad as vega Nvidia is going to have 95%+ of the gaming market share by 2019-2020.
Vega is going to get murdered by volta, by this time next year AMD is not going to have a hope vs 2060/2070 let alone the flagship 2080/2080Ti, navi will be the only glimmer of hope, it absolutely has to deliver.
I failed at math. It's 121W additional over a reference card.
Card is still pulling 430W+
Hopefully he gets canned, because if navi is as bad as vega Nvidia is going to have 95%+ of the gaming market share by 2019-2020.
Vega is going to get murdered by volta, by this time next year AMD is not going to have a hope vs 2060/2070 let alone the flagship 2080/2080Ti, navi will be the only glimmer of hope, it absolutely has to deliver.
Lets just face reality: They aren't going to close the gap entirely with Navi vs. Volta. It just isn't going to happen. Polaris and Vega had fairly steep mountains to climb to catch Pascal, but instead of clawing back perf/w, the gap widened. So rather than saying "catch up to" Volta, or hoping that Navi "delivers," AMD just needs to move in the right direction.
Unless Volta is horrible (which it won't be, we've already seen Nvidia improve perf/w by 50% with GV100 over GP100) and Navi is a miracle (again, it won't be), the best we should honestly hope to get is that instead of a further widening gap in perf/w, AMD is able to close some of the gap. AMD getting more competitive in perf/w means that they won't have to push all their chips to the limit at stock speeds AND they can reach more notebooks, SFF machines, and avoid the horrible stigma of having a 345w GPU that competes with a 180 watt GPU.
Lets just face reality: They aren't going to close the gap entirely with Navi vs. Volta. It just isn't going to happen. Polaris and Vega had fairly steep mountains to climb to catch Pascal, but instead of clawing back perf/w, the gap widened. So rather than saying "catch up to" Volta, or hoping that Navi "delivers," AMD just needs to move in the right direction.
Unless Volta is horrible (which it won't be, we've already seen Nvidia improve perf/w by 50% with GV100 over GP100) and Navi is a miracle (again, it won't be), the best we should honestly hope to get is that instead of a further widening gap in perf/w, AMD is able to close some of the gap. AMD getting more competitive in perf/w means that they won't have to push all their chips to the limit at stock speeds AND they can reach more notebooks, SFF machines, and avoid the horrible stigma of having a 345w GPU that competes with a 180 watt GPU.
Vega closed some of the gap, it's just the equivalent of the RX 580 right now. Pushed to the limit.Lets just face reality: They aren't going to close the gap entirely with Navi vs. Volta. It just isn't going to happen. Polaris and Vega had fairly steep mountains to climb to catch Pascal, but instead of clawing back perf/w, the gap widened. So rather than saying "catch up to" Volta, or hoping that Navi "delivers," AMD just needs to move in the right direction.
Unless Volta is horrible (which it won't be, we've already seen Nvidia improve perf/w by 50% with GV100 over GP100) and Navi is a miracle (again, it won't be), the best we should honestly hope to get is that instead of a further widening gap in perf/w, AMD is able to close some of the gap. AMD getting more competitive in perf/w means that they won't have to push all their chips to the limit at stock speeds AND they can reach more notebooks, SFF machines, and avoid the horrible stigma of having a 345w GPU that competes with a 180 watt GPU.
Hmm, I wonder if the 56 will see an even greater improvement with better cooling, since it is way more efficient overall. If it manages a +8-10% boost from a tricooler or even liquid, that would be an excellent card.
Radeon RX Vega 64 demand continues to exceed expectations. AMD is working closely with its partners to address this demand. Our initial launch quantities included standalone Radeon RX Vega 64 at SEP of $499, Radeon RX Vega 64 Black Packs at SEP of $599, and Radeon RX Vega 64 Aqua Packs at SEP of $699. We are working with our partners to restock all SKUs of Radeon RX Vega 64 including the standalone cards and Gamer Packs over the next few weeks, and you should expect quantities of Vega to start arriving in the coming days