WYP
News Guru
Will these increased clocks offer much of a real-world performance boost?
Read more on ASUS' RX Vega 64 Strix OC.
Read more on ASUS' RX Vega 64 Strix OC.
Specifications for ASUS' RX Vega Strix Gaming OC have been released
- Thread starter WYP
- Start date
The_Governour
New member
Well we all know that it wont. As not even under water can it do miracles. A turd is a turd even though you try and spray it with perfume.....
Too expensive, too hot, too late. A shame a real shame as i wanted amd to do well.
Too expensive, too hot, too late. A shame a real shame as i wanted amd to do well.
too expensive - tell that to the people who got it for msrp
too hot - i havent seen people complaining of this
too late - when is irrelevant to the consumer. its available and offers a certain performance for a certain price.
Surfie
New member
For the performance that Vega is, AMD are pricing it too high.
The biggest problem with this card, is not the card, but AMDs marketing around it. They set consumer expectations too high, they hyped the bejesus out of the card for months before release, and set expectations to be great card, reasonable price.
For mine: the performance is acceptable, if they price the cards at around the gtx1070 mark or lower. But they didn't. The prices are closer (at least here) to a 1080 (which is faster), and only a fraction lower than the much better performing 1080ti.
This then made the card irrelevant. And it's a pity. I specifically held off of buying a gpu for almost a year because of the jerkaround.
I honestly don't see much of a market for this, except people joining the pc community without having seen the rubbish of the launch.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
No. The people that hyped this was definitely the community. AMD never ever hinted at Vega being more than a 1080ti killer.
Only thing AMD messed up was the fact that they should have shipped all the cards with the default BIOS set as power saving mode and just called it default. Then choose the other BIOS as performance. It would really have changed the perception of Vega. Not massively, but enough to make it not be such a reason for Nvidia Fanboys to get all high and mighty about Pascal. I switched to Pascal BTW from Polaris before anyone gets all offended (I'm not talking about anyone here)
Dicehunter
Resident Newb
I honestly prefer the bog standard reference air cooled Vega 64, Looks nice and clean, Fits in perfectly with my builds theme, Plays all my games and does VR very well 
The_Governour
New member
No one expected vega 64 to be a 1080ti equal as it was shown that vega 64 would compete with the 1080.
For the price, power consumption, and performance then there is no reason to get a vega 64 unless you have a free sync monitor sitting around.
As I have stated before, I waited too long for VEGA and in the end got a 1080ti.
For the price, power consumption, and performance then there is no reason to get a vega 64 unless you have a free sync monitor sitting around.
As I have stated before, I waited too long for VEGA and in the end got a 1080ti.
Last edited:
AngryGoldfish
Old N Gold
Except the promotional video containing the irresponsible phrase 'Poor Vega', insinuating that Vega could beat Pascal, which the 1080Ti is a part of. So in a roundabout way they did. But I'm chalking that up to other aspects, such as Vega 11 being competitive in the midrange space next year against Volta, or the fact that their marketing team had no idea what AMD engineers were building. Apparently that happens. That's Nvidia blames the 3.5GB VRAM thing on: miscommunication.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
Except the promotional video containing the irresponsible phrase 'Poor Vega', insinuating that Vega could beat Pascal, which the 1080Ti is a part of. So in a roundabout way they did. But I'm chalking that up to other aspects, such as Vega 11 being competitive in the midrange space next year against Volta, or the fact that their marketing team had no idea what AMD engineers were building. Apparently that happens. That's Nvidia blames the 3.5GB VRAM thing on: miscommunication.
Your example makes no sense, and sounds more like people assuming something out of what they wanted to hear. There is a reason months and months before launch AMD tried bringing hype levels down. The community was out if control
AngryGoldfish
Old N Gold
Sorry, I meant to say 'Poor Volta', not 'Poor Vega'.
NeverBackDown said:
They did hint: suggesting that Vega could beat Volta insinuated that Vega had already beaten Pascal, and seeing as the 1080Ti is a part of the Pascal lineup, the boot fits.
However AMD said barely anything about Vega in terms of its placement in the market; they explained its topology more so than anything. Lisa Su was quoted as saying "very competitive" at one point, but that's far too cryptic and vague of a statement to consider, and it was ballooned out of context by the media and fanboys. She could have been referring to price to performance for Vega 56, compute for the Frontier Edition, or for Vega 11 which could be competitive against Volta's midrange.
Again, I'd chalk all of those points up to possibilities we cannot confirm. So I agree with you; Vega was hyped by the masses, not by AMD. I simply said that AMD have done at least one thing to hype Vega beyond what it should have been. And even that could have been a misunderstanding, which again falls back to the consumers. So no matter how you look at it, the consumers and the media are to blame. AMD could have quelled the rumours by giving us more benchmarks instead of letting the hype build to explosive levels, but you can't exactly blame AMD for not reigning in the Rottie when someone else let it off.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
Ok that clears that up. It originally made no sense.
I can't be bothered to check if she actually said that, It's been talked about for years, but I do agree with you that the masses overhyped a cryptic message. I don't even think overhyped is a strong enough word as to how it happened. Then having a successful Zen launch really fueled the fire because of the "AMD IS BACK!" being pasted everywhere
The_Governour
New member
All this talk about who hyped up the Vega hype train etc does not matter at all now. What matters is if Vega 64 here is a good buy? Is it competetive and a smart buy for the money?
No. Vega 64 is not a good buy at all NOW with the current gpu market at all. Only reason would be if u had a free sync monitor. Other than that a 1080 can do the same for less power, cooler, OC higher etc etc.
Before fan boys start saying that the 1080ti is also not a good buy as of price...... then its the BEST gaming GPU that there is for now. If you want the best and there is NO competition then you pay what is asked.
No. Vega 64 is not a good buy at all NOW with the current gpu market at all. Only reason would be if u had a free sync monitor. Other than that a 1080 can do the same for less power, cooler, OC higher etc etc.
Before fan boys start saying that the 1080ti is also not a good buy as of price...... then its the BEST gaming GPU that there is for now. If you want the best and there is NO competition then you pay what is asked.
I do agree with this. I noticed on Guru3D forums, the hype was getting out of hand and even Hilbert stepped in at one point trying to de-escalate it. We had nothing to go on except some market driven power point screens.
I suppose AMD wanted the hype to flow, until it really got out of control. Had Vega been released in the 1080 era, it would truly have been a contender. Maybe even justify the price during that time. Now though??? sorry but it is flawed.
Since i have not used an AMD card in a gajillion years (yes i am old), how are the limitations on AMD cards vs Nvidia, 1080ti has very little playroom because of voltage limits for example. But can a VEGA be tweaked heavily and show high end performance?
Last edited:
AngryGoldfish
Old N Gold
That added so much unwarranted hype to Vega. One of the biggest reasons Ryzen has been so successful is because Skylake wasn't a 6-core CPU when it should have been. If Intel had released Coffee-Lake two years ago, Ryzen would be birthed into a very competitive market, which is basically what happened with Vega; it came out late into a market that was swamped with excellent GPUs. The fine print for the claim "AMD IS BACK!" is, "AMD is largely responsible for success because of Intel's lack of innovation."
Tolemac
Active member
Well although I have a freesync monitor I went and bought a 1080 and tbh I don't really miss freesync
AngryGoldfish
Old N Gold
Well although I have a freesync monitor I went and bought a 1080 and tbh I don't really miss freesync
Me neither. Well, I miss it a little, but in general I'm quite contented.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
Well although I have a freesync monitor I went and bought a 1080 and tbh I don't really miss freesync
I miss it. After doing some blind testing turns out over the long while I've used FS, I can notice the difference. Fast Sync helps but it's not as good. The performance I gained is less impressive than what I would have liked too. Overall for the money I paid it was worth it. But a 1080 for retail prices? Not really
