Fractal Design Vector RS review
Corsair iCUE 465X review
be quiet! Pure Base 500 review
Borderlands 3: PC graphics performance benchmark review
Swiftech H240 X3 AIO review
Promo: URCDKey Autumn Sale Windows 10 Pro for $11
Corsair HS35 Stereo Gaming Headset Review
MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT Gaming X review
Gears of War 5: PC graphics performance benchmark review
XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT THICC II Ultra review
Tech preview: AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 and 64
Posted by: on: 07/31/2017 04:27 AM [
50 comment(s) ]
In this technology preview we'll have a closer look at the now announced AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 and 64. AMD is to release three models for the consumer market, two air-cooled versions and one liquid cooled product. Wanna know more? Read all about it here.
Read article
Advertisement
Tagged as:
radeon rx vega,
amd
pages 1 2
kendoka15
Senior Member
Posts: 114
Senior Member
Posts: 114
Posted on: 07/31/2017 06:56 AM
What a weird name for an event
What a weird name for an event
Robbo9999
Senior Member
Posts: 1303
Senior Member
Posts: 1303
Posted on: 07/31/2017 07:39 AM
I'm sure you knew, but just in case, that's a photo of the character Patrick Bateman in the film American Psycho, it is weird though!
What a weird photo of you 
I'm sure you knew, but just in case, that's a photo of the character Patrick Bateman in the film American Psycho, it is weird though!
FM57
Senior Member
Posts: 151
Senior Member
Posts: 151
Posted on: 07/31/2017 07:43 AM
What about the green planet stuff ?
At that rate, we will all need personal power plants to run PCs.
What about the green planet stuff ?
At that rate, we will all need personal power plants to run PCs.
reix2x
Senior Member
Posts: 245
Senior Member
Posts: 245
Posted on: 07/31/2017 07:52 AM
well.. threadripper looks like a success already, but vega have a long hard path to run... i think the pricing isn't that bad..
well.. threadripper looks like a success already, but vega have a long hard path to run... i think the pricing isn't that bad..
cryohellinc
Senior Member
Posts: 2572
Senior Member
Posts: 2572
Posted on: 07/31/2017 08:23 AM
Damn that 1900x looks smexy, however lets see how hot it gets and how well it can OC.
Damn that 1900x looks smexy, however lets see how hot it gets and how well it can OC.
Ricepudding
Senior Member
Posts: 491
Senior Member
Posts: 491
Posted on: 07/31/2017 09:15 AM
425watts on the vega 64 LCS... that's a whole system by itself lol, maybe the 1200+ watts power supplies might start selling more again
Looking forward to your review HH, hope it comes out Better than the rumours so far
425watts on the vega 64 LCS... that's a whole system by itself lol, maybe the 1200+ watts power supplies might start selling more again
Looking forward to your review HH, hope it comes out Better than the rumours so far
LocoDiceGR
Senior Member
Posts: 1905
Senior Member
Posts: 1905
Posted on: 07/31/2017 09:18 AM
425watts on the vega 64 LCS... that's a whole system by itself lol, maybe the 1200+ watts power supplies might start selling more again
pfffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
425watts on the vega 64 LCS... that's a whole system by itself lol, maybe the 1200+ watts power supplies might start selling more again
pfffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
baasgene
Member
Posts: 49
Member
Posts: 49
Posted on: 07/31/2017 09:26 AM
So much for the almighty HBM2, it has the same bandwidth as a Ti, except you know like most of us my Ti is running at 12ghz memory so that's well over 500gb of bandwidth. If HBM1 is any indication it won't OC very well and end up being worse than GDDR5x.
Unless HBM3 is leaps and bounds ahead then I'd say GDDR6 is the future.
So much for the almighty HBM2, it has the same bandwidth as a Ti, except you know like most of us my Ti is running at 12ghz memory so that's well over 500gb of bandwidth. If HBM1 is any indication it won't OC very well and end up being worse than GDDR5x.
Unless HBM3 is leaps and bounds ahead then I'd say GDDR6 is the future.
BReal85
Senior Member
Posts: 320
Senior Member
Posts: 320
Posted on: 07/31/2017 09:50 AM
Pricing seems good, especially when compared to the rumored prices a few days ago (500 or 550$). For complete system builders/changers, that extra 100$ voucher for the CPU+MOBO combo is neat. Plus you get 2 games, one of which is an upcoming title.
well.. threadripper looks like a success already, but vega have a long hard path to run... i think the pricing isn't that bad..
Pricing seems good, especially when compared to the rumored prices a few days ago (500 or 550$). For complete system builders/changers, that extra 100$ voucher for the CPU+MOBO combo is neat. Plus you get 2 games, one of which is an upcoming title.
Biffo
Member
Posts: 39
Member
Posts: 39
Posted on: 07/31/2017 10:41 AM
Awaiting general power consumption results for ordinary tasks before deciding on this.
Awaiting general power consumption results for ordinary tasks before deciding on this.
nevcairiel
Senior Member
Posts: 583
Senior Member
Posts: 583
Posted on: 07/31/2017 12:17 PM
So much for the almighty HBM2, it has the same bandwidth as a Ti, except you know like most of us my Ti is running at 12ghz memory so that's well over 500gb of bandwidth. If HBM1 is any indication it won't OC very well and end up being worse than GDDR5x.
Unless HBM3 is leaps and bounds ahead then I'd say GDDR6 is the future.
You could actually double the bandwidth of HBM by using more stacks, like NVIDIA does on their GV100 GPUs - but of course more stacks cost more money (and GV100 costs a fortune, but its a "pro" datacenter GPU).
In any case I tend to generally agree. HBM is largely overrated for consumer use. To get an actual bandwidth advantage you would need to use 4 stacks, which costs a lot of money, and at 2 stacks GDDR5x and the future GDDR6 will match or even beat it - at a lower pricepoint at that.
So much for the almighty HBM2, it has the same bandwidth as a Ti, except you know like most of us my Ti is running at 12ghz memory so that's well over 500gb of bandwidth. If HBM1 is any indication it won't OC very well and end up being worse than GDDR5x.
Unless HBM3 is leaps and bounds ahead then I'd say GDDR6 is the future.
You could actually double the bandwidth of HBM by using more stacks, like NVIDIA does on their GV100 GPUs - but of course more stacks cost more money (and GV100 costs a fortune, but its a "pro" datacenter GPU).
In any case I tend to generally agree. HBM is largely overrated for consumer use. To get an actual bandwidth advantage you would need to use 4 stacks, which costs a lot of money, and at 2 stacks GDDR5x and the future GDDR6 will match or even beat it - at a lower pricepoint at that.
thesebastian
Member
Posts: 83
Member
Posts: 83
Posted on: 07/31/2017 12:26 PM
My Gigabyte G1 1080, consumes 216W (capped by BIOS) and it still has Power perfcap at that wattage limit.
But of course, it's overclocked and it performs very well for that Wattage, between a 1080 reference and a 1080 ti reference.
I'd like to switch to AMD in a future, but I hope AMD has a good alternative regarding performance/powerconsumption. If it's just a few watts more worse than nvidia (like 30-50 watt) I'd buy, but not more.
At the end, it should help the market and benefit all of us, if nvidia has some competition in the hi-end.
My Gigabyte G1 1080, consumes 216W (capped by BIOS) and it still has Power perfcap at that wattage limit.
But of course, it's overclocked and it performs very well for that Wattage, between a 1080 reference and a 1080 ti reference.
I'd like to switch to AMD in a future, but I hope AMD has a good alternative regarding performance/powerconsumption. If it's just a few watts more worse than nvidia (like 30-50 watt) I'd buy, but not more.
At the end, it should help the market and benefit all of us, if nvidia has some competition in the hi-end.
Ryu5uzaku
Senior Member
Posts: 6769
Senior Member
Posts: 6769
Posted on: 07/31/2017 12:40 PM
425watts on the vega 64 LCS... that's a whole system by itself lol, maybe the 1200+ watts power supplies might start selling more again
Looking forward to your review HH, hope it comes out Better than the rumours so far
Wasn't that Vega Liquid cooled model 345W vs 295W of the air cooled vs 215w of the 56 model.
425watts on the vega 64 LCS... that's a whole system by itself lol, maybe the 1200+ watts power supplies might start selling more again
Looking forward to your review HH, hope it comes out Better than the rumours so far
Wasn't that Vega Liquid cooled model 345W vs 295W of the air cooled vs 215w of the 56 model.
teleguy
Senior Member
Posts: 1262
Senior Member
Posts: 1262
Posted on: 07/31/2017 01:03 PM
I read several times that these numbers are only GPU power, not the entire card. Don't know if true.
I sure hope the 56 model turns out to be a lot faster than the 1070, that's the most interesting one for me.
Wasn't that Vega Liquid cooled model 345W vs 295W of the air cooled vs 215w of the 56 model.
I read several times that these numbers are only GPU power, not the entire card. Don't know if true.
I sure hope the 56 model turns out to be a lot faster than the 1070, that's the most interesting one for me.
Ricepudding
Senior Member
Posts: 491
Senior Member
Posts: 491
Posted on: 07/31/2017 01:05 PM
From what i have seen it's around 350-400 watts alone for the LCS one, getting different numbers depending on what article i've seen, although real world numbers could very well be lower depending on the game and demand of course
Overclocking the card (if possible) could quite easily increase that to 500watts from the GPU alone, no wonder they put a liquid cooler on it again, the thing is going to be so toasty with just air
Wasn't that Vega Liquid cooled model 345W vs 295W of the air cooled vs 215w of the 56 model.
From what i have seen it's around 350-400 watts alone for the LCS one, getting different numbers depending on what article i've seen, although real world numbers could very well be lower depending on the game and demand of course
Overclocking the card (if possible) could quite easily increase that to 500watts from the GPU alone, no wonder they put a liquid cooler on it again, the thing is going to be so toasty with just air
Ryu5uzaku
Senior Member
Posts: 6769
Senior Member
Posts: 6769
Posted on: 07/31/2017 01:09 PM
From what i have seen it's around 350-400 watts alone for the LCS one, getting different numbers depending on what article i've seen, although real world numbers could very well be lower depending on the game and demand of course
Overclocking the card (if possible) could quite easily increase that to 500watts from the GPU alone, no wonder they put a liquid cooler on it again, the thing is going to be so toasty with just air
I just wonder. Where is the 4x perf/watt vs whatever. Oh well. It might be on lower clocks.
From what i have seen it's around 350-400 watts alone for the LCS one, getting different numbers depending on what article i've seen, although real world numbers could very well be lower depending on the game and demand of course
Overclocking the card (if possible) could quite easily increase that to 500watts from the GPU alone, no wonder they put a liquid cooler on it again, the thing is going to be so toasty with just air
I just wonder. Where is the 4x perf/watt vs whatever. Oh well. It might be on lower clocks.
NewTRUMP Order
Senior Member
Posts: 390
Senior Member
Posts: 390
Posted on: 07/31/2017 01:18 PM
Wow how disappointed are Ryzen 1700/1800 builders right now? A threadripper with 8/16 got snuck in. I'm sure they kept that quiet to keep selling the Ryzen. I had a sneaking suspicion they might do this and luckily I waited to pull the trigger on Ryzen. Now just wait and see how the 1900x gets along. The Vega seems to be a clunker. The 1080 has been around too long now for AMD to upset that market. And now with the ridiculous power requirements. 1000w gpu needed to run just the Vega? A Threadripper build with A Vega card is going to cause so much heating problems inside of cases. As someone else stated you will need a separate power company account to run the computer! An overclocked Threadripper, an overclocked Vega card, you will be able to pop popcorn on top of your rig. That's o.k. I guess if you watch Netflix on your computer. This will also cause degradation of all the electronics in your rig. THREADRIPPER YES! VEGA NAH NOT FOR ME.
Wow how disappointed are Ryzen 1700/1800 builders right now? A threadripper with 8/16 got snuck in. I'm sure they kept that quiet to keep selling the Ryzen. I had a sneaking suspicion they might do this and luckily I waited to pull the trigger on Ryzen. Now just wait and see how the 1900x gets along. The Vega seems to be a clunker. The 1080 has been around too long now for AMD to upset that market. And now with the ridiculous power requirements. 1000w gpu needed to run just the Vega? A Threadripper build with A Vega card is going to cause so much heating problems inside of cases. As someone else stated you will need a separate power company account to run the computer! An overclocked Threadripper, an overclocked Vega card, you will be able to pop popcorn on top of your rig. That's o.k. I guess if you watch Netflix on your computer. This will also cause degradation of all the electronics in your rig. THREADRIPPER YES! VEGA NAH NOT FOR ME.
Valken
Senior Member
Posts: 1459
Senior Member
Posts: 1459
Posted on: 07/31/2017 01:30 PM
8 Core TR with 64 PCIe channels and Quad ram channels?!
8 Core TR with 64 PCIe channels and Quad ram channels?!
Ryu5uzaku
Senior Member
Posts: 6769
Senior Member
Posts: 6769
Posted on: 07/31/2017 01:38 PM
I am not in the least disappointed really. I got my cpu 3 months ago and it has been running great. Threadripper build would have cost more no doubt. And would have had higher memory bandwidth but it should be roughly the same else so I am all fine.
Wow how disappointed are Ryzen 1700/1800 builders right now? A threadripper with 8/16 got snuck in. I'm sure they kept that quiet to keep selling the Ryzen. I had a sneaking suspicion they might do this and luckily I waited to pull the trigger on Ryzen. Now just wait and see how the 1900x gets along. The Vega seems to be a clunker. The 1080 has been around too long now for AMD to upset that market. And now with the ridiculous power requirements. 1000w gpu needed to run just the Vega? A Threadripper build with A Vega card is going to cause so much heating problems inside of cases. As someone else stated you will need a separate power company account to run the computer! An overclocked Threadripper, an overclocked Vega card, you will be able to pop popcorn on top of your rig. That's o.k. I guess if you watch Netflix on your computer. This will also cause degradation of all the electronics in your rig. THREADRIPPER YES! VEGA NAH NOT FOR ME.
I am not in the least disappointed really. I got my cpu 3 months ago and it has been running great. Threadripper build would have cost more no doubt. And would have had higher memory bandwidth but it should be roughly the same else so I am all fine.
AlmondMan
Senior Member
Posts: 475
Senior Member
Posts: 475
Posted on: 07/31/2017 02:01 PM
What's different from a few years ago? Other than that we had one generation or so of less powerhungry mid-spec cards?
Wow how disappointed are Ryzen 1700/1800 builders right now? A threadripper with 8/16 got snuck in. I'm sure they kept that quiet to keep selling the Ryzen. I had a sneaking suspicion they might do this and luckily I waited to pull the trigger on Ryzen. Now just wait and see how the 1900x gets along. The Vega seems to be a clunker. The 1080 has been around too long now for AMD to upset that market. And now with the ridiculous power requirements. 1000w gpu needed to run just the Vega? A Threadripper build with A Vega card is going to cause so much heating problems inside of cases. As someone else stated you will need a separate power company account to run the computer! An overclocked Threadripper, an overclocked Vega card, you will be able to pop popcorn on top of your rig. That's o.k. I guess if you watch Netflix on your computer. This will also cause degradation of all the electronics in your rig. THREADRIPPER YES! VEGA NAH NOT FOR ME.
What's different from a few years ago? Other than that we had one generation or so of less powerhungry mid-spec cards?
cryohellinc
Senior Member
Posts: 2572
Senior Member
Posts: 2572
Posted on: 07/31/2017 02:04 PM
This, plus am4 socket will be there for a while, as a result you can upgrade to a new CPU down the road without switching to a new mobo.
I am not in the least disappointed really. I got my cpu 3 months ago and it has been running great. Threadripper build would have cost more no doubt. And would have had higher memory bandwidth but it should be roughly the same else so I am all fine.
This, plus am4 socket will be there for a while, as a result you can upgrade to a new CPU down the road without switching to a new mobo.
labidas
Senior Member
Posts: 223
Senior Member
Posts: 223
Posted on: 07/31/2017 02:25 PM
I'm buying Intel.
Someone needs to support the competition too
I'm buying Intel.
Someone needs to support the competition too
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4340
Senior Member
Posts: 4340
Posted on: 07/31/2017 02:57 PM
So much for the almighty HBM2, it has the same bandwidth as a Ti, except you know like most of us my Ti is running at 12ghz memory so that's well over 500gb of bandwidth. If HBM1 is any indication it won't OC very well and end up being worse than GDDR5x.
Unless HBM3 is leaps and bounds ahead then I'd say GDDR6 is the future.
HBM isn't the problem, I'm betting the GPU itself is the bottleneck. GNC isn't aging so well - Vega has more serious problems than memory bandwidth and overclockability. Don't forget - Nvidia is also interested in HBM, so whatever negative speculation you have of it clearly isn't true. It isn't often Nvidia follows the footsteps of a competitor so obviously.
Wow how disappointed are Ryzen 1700/1800 builders right now? A threadripper with 8/16 got snuck in. I'm sure they kept that quiet to keep selling the Ryzen. I had a sneaking suspicion they might do this and luckily I waited to pull the trigger on Ryzen. Now just wait and see how the 1900x gets along.
Maybe 1800X users (who didn't get the sale price) are disappointed, but definitely not 1700 users. Ryzen 7 is for a completely different market. You get fewer memory channels, but from what I recall, frequency has a bigger performance impact. You get fewer PCIe lanes, but most people only want 1 GPU, and any other expansion cards can easily be handled by the chipset. You get more M.2 slots, but most people are better off with just 1 (for performance) with a separate SATA drive (for mass storage). Ryzen 7s also have the advantage of more heatsink availability and ITX form factors. 1900X is currently limited to full ATX with almost no coolers to choose from.
So all that being said, the only people who would've regretted their purchase are 1800X owners who wanted a little bit extra but settled for less.
So much for the almighty HBM2, it has the same bandwidth as a Ti, except you know like most of us my Ti is running at 12ghz memory so that's well over 500gb of bandwidth. If HBM1 is any indication it won't OC very well and end up being worse than GDDR5x.
Unless HBM3 is leaps and bounds ahead then I'd say GDDR6 is the future.
HBM isn't the problem, I'm betting the GPU itself is the bottleneck. GNC isn't aging so well - Vega has more serious problems than memory bandwidth and overclockability. Don't forget - Nvidia is also interested in HBM, so whatever negative speculation you have of it clearly isn't true. It isn't often Nvidia follows the footsteps of a competitor so obviously.
Wow how disappointed are Ryzen 1700/1800 builders right now? A threadripper with 8/16 got snuck in. I'm sure they kept that quiet to keep selling the Ryzen. I had a sneaking suspicion they might do this and luckily I waited to pull the trigger on Ryzen. Now just wait and see how the 1900x gets along.
Maybe 1800X users (who didn't get the sale price) are disappointed, but definitely not 1700 users. Ryzen 7 is for a completely different market. You get fewer memory channels, but from what I recall, frequency has a bigger performance impact. You get fewer PCIe lanes, but most people only want 1 GPU, and any other expansion cards can easily be handled by the chipset. You get more M.2 slots, but most people are better off with just 1 (for performance) with a separate SATA drive (for mass storage). Ryzen 7s also have the advantage of more heatsink availability and ITX form factors. 1900X is currently limited to full ATX with almost no coolers to choose from.
So all that being said, the only people who would've regretted their purchase are 1800X owners who wanted a little bit extra but settled for less.
thesebastian
Member
Posts: 83
Member
Posts: 83
Posted on: 07/31/2017 03:33 PM
Maybe 1800X users (who didn't get the sale price) are disappointed, but definitely not 1700 users. Ryzen 7 is for a completely different market. You get fewer memory channels, but from what I recall, frequency has a bigger performance impact. You get fewer PCIe lanes, but most people only want 1 GPU, and any other expansion cards can easily be handled by the chipset. You get more M.2 slots, but most people are better off with just 1 (for performance) with a separate SATA drive (for mass storage). Ryzen 7s also have the advantage of more heatsink availability and ITX form factors. 1900X is currently limited to full ATX with almost no coolers to choose from.
So all that being said, the only people who would've regretted their purchase are 1800X owners who wanted a little bit extra but settled for less.
As long as the technology keeps advancing as fast as possible, I don't really care about this. Too many years with CPU market stuck with tiny yearly performance bumps.....
0% exciting!
Maybe 1800X users (who didn't get the sale price) are disappointed, but definitely not 1700 users. Ryzen 7 is for a completely different market. You get fewer memory channels, but from what I recall, frequency has a bigger performance impact. You get fewer PCIe lanes, but most people only want 1 GPU, and any other expansion cards can easily be handled by the chipset. You get more M.2 slots, but most people are better off with just 1 (for performance) with a separate SATA drive (for mass storage). Ryzen 7s also have the advantage of more heatsink availability and ITX form factors. 1900X is currently limited to full ATX with almost no coolers to choose from.
So all that being said, the only people who would've regretted their purchase are 1800X owners who wanted a little bit extra but settled for less.
As long as the technology keeps advancing as fast as possible, I don't really care about this. Too many years with CPU market stuck with tiny yearly performance bumps.....
0% exciting!
pages 1 2
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Junior Member
Posts: 4
Ughhh... How many events? Waiting for your review HH. Thanks.