5 ms·

https://img.purch.com/radeon-rx-vega/o/aHR0cDovL21lZGlhLmJlc3RvZm1pY3JvLmNvbS9HLzEvNjk3ODI1L29yaWdpbmFsL3BlcmYuanBn https://img.purch.com/radeon-rx-vega/o/aHR0c

https://img.purch.com/radeon-rx-vega/o/aHR0cDovL21lZGlhLmJlc3RvZm1pY3JvLmNvbS9HLzEvNjk3ODI1L29yaWdpbmFsL3BlcmYuanBn https://img.purch.com/radeon-rx-vega/o/aHR0cDovL21lZGlhLmJlc... So basically $700 dollar card is worse then 1080. You can buy 1080TI for around ~$900 which would completely destroy this AMD "beast". Not sure where the hype comes from, or am I missing something?

dragontamer 9y ago
The RX 64 is a $500 card. If a $500 card is roughly the same as a 1080 (currently $550), I think that's fair. The $700 liquid-cooled Vega should overclock better, but I have my doubts for its efficiency. Overclocking isn't very good for heat and noise and reliability.
- Dylan16807 9y ago
  Water cooling is pretty effective at fixing heat and noise problems, and heat is one of the big factors in reliability too.
- romanovcode 9y ago
  The $900 mark was also for a card that is not stock. I was talking about ASUS Strix version which is after-market with 3 coolers.
bryanlarsen 9y ago
You're linking to a graph that claims that a $500 card is better than a 1080. 53 fps is bigger than 45.
- romanovcode 9y ago
  The $900 mark was also for a card that is not stock. I was talking about ASUS Strix version which is after-market with 3 coolers.
- ac29 9y ago
  And 78 > 76, in favor of Nvidia. But they don't list average or 99%ile performance, and manufacturer-provided benchmarks are notoriously biased, so we'll have to wait and see the independent reviews before anyone can claim performance superiority.
- yohui 9y ago
  The GTX 1080's current MSRP is also $500, though, and it's been on the market for over a year already. Also, those numbers only represent the "minimum FPS range" for select titles. While minimum FPS is important, the picture is incomplete without other figures such as average FPS. Plus, AMD clearly cherry-picked one of the benchmarks (Deus Ex MD, presumably using DirectX 12) just to lower the GTX 1080's range in that comparison: https://www.pcper.com/files/review/2017-07-30/vega-35.jpg https://www.pcper.com/files/review/2017-07-30/vega-35.jpg It's marketing's job to shine the best light possible on their product, of course, but it says something when Vega still doesn't look terribly impressive despite that effort.
cestith 9y ago
If you have a Micro Center you can get GTX 1080 Ti cards starting around $700 if you can find them in stock. I know I did. Newegg seems to have similar pricing. https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&IsNodeId=1&N=100007709%20601294835 https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&I...
noncoml 9y ago
You can get a 1080 TI fo $709: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1332743-REG/asus_turbo_gtx1080ti_11g_geforce_gtx_1080_ti.html https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1332743-REG/asus_turb...

dragontamer 9y ago

The RX 64 is a $500 card. If a $500 card is roughly the same as a 1080 (currently $550), I think that's fair. The $700 liquid-cooled Vega should overclock better, but I have my doubts for its efficiency. Overclocking isn't very good for heat and noise and reliability.

Dylan16807 9y ago
Water cooling is pretty effective at fixing heat and noise problems, and heat is one of the big factors in reliability too.
romanovcode 9y ago
The $900 mark was also for a card that is not stock. I was talking about ASUS Strix version which is after-market with 3 coolers.

bryanlarsen 9y ago

You're linking to a graph that claims that a $500 card is better than a 1080. 53 fps is bigger than 45.

romanovcode 9y ago
The $900 mark was also for a card that is not stock. I was talking about ASUS Strix version which is after-market with 3 coolers.
ac29 9y ago
And 78 > 76, in favor of Nvidia. But they don't list average or 99%ile performance, and manufacturer-provided benchmarks are notoriously biased, so we'll have to wait and see the independent reviews before anyone can claim performance superiority.
yohui 9y ago
The GTX 1080's current MSRP is also $500, though, and it's been on the market for over a year already. Also, those numbers only represent the "minimum FPS range" for select titles. While minimum FPS is important, the picture is incomplete without other figures such as average FPS. Plus, AMD clearly cherry-picked one of the benchmarks (Deus Ex MD, presumably using DirectX 12) just to lower the GTX 1080's range in that comparison: https://www.pcper.com/files/review/2017-07-30/vega-35.jpg https://www.pcper.com/files/review/2017-07-30/vega-35.jpg It's marketing's job to shine the best light possible on their product, of course, but it says something when Vega still doesn't look terribly impressive despite that effort.

cestith 9y ago

If you have a Micro Center you can get GTX 1080 Ti cards starting around $700 if you can find them in stock. I know I did. Newegg seems to have similar pricing. https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&IsNodeId=1&N=100007709%20601294835 https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&I...

noncoml 9y ago

You can get a 1080 TI fo $709: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1332743-REG/asus_turbo_gtx1080ti_11g_geforce_gtx_1080_ti.html https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1332743-REG/asus_turb...