AMD does not manage to replicate the success of the AMD Ryzen in its AMD RX Vega graphics cards, which have an acceptable performance, but a completely absurd consumption and a price equal to that of NVIDIA's GTX 1080.
Is it too premature to talk about failure in the new AMD RX Vega 56 and AMD RX Vega 64, given their performance, consumption and temperatures? Well, the truth is that it seems not, because it is a term widely used in recent hours. Up to 500W of consumption in the Liquid Edition and more than 400W in the air-cooled Vega, point to being a failure, at least in energy efficiency and the performance of these graphics, very similar to the NVIDIA GTX 1070 and NVIDIA GTX 1080, respectively. .
Talking about failure of entry seems quite hard, but if we consider that the RX Vega 64 are sold for a starting price of € 615 in most stores in Spain, yes, we are talking about an absolute failure. We must bear in mind that for that price you can find several models customized by manufacturers, such as MSI, Gigabyte or KFA2, for a similar or lower price and that they consume less than half and therefore the heat is much less. Not only that, we must take into account the cost of the power supply, something that we already analyzed in the past in a specific entry.
We add to this energy inefficiency the heat generated, which must be expelled from the box, with which we will need better cooling of our chassis, to expel excessive heat. All these costs must be added to the price of the RX Vega 64, which is already quite expensive. Only in the power supply, they are about € 20 and for cooling, well at least € 20 more, to improve the cooling of our chassis, in addition to that it must be of good quality.
THE CONSUMPTION OF THE NEW AMD RX VEGA WOULD LEAVE THE PERFORMANCE / PRICE RATIO
Two years of development, we could say that they have culminated in a true failure for AMD, who has not been able to repeat the success of Ryzen in the processor segment. It is clear that the GNC architecture is more than obsolete and extremely inefficient and that for Navi, AMD must take a substantial leap and stop the nonsense at once. The NVIDIA CEO, I am not surprised that he has said that he delays Volta for next year and that there will be no rehash of Pascal because it is an unbeatable architecture, nor do they need to remove aces from their sleeve, seen what was launched by AMD.
Honestly, I have been warning about this for weeks and it is that it had come from afar, but the general rally towards AMD has made many try to make up the data and blur the information, but it is clear that AMD has released a poor graphics, not in performance Although we want to, it is good that they can compete with the GTX 1080, but in terms of performance and price, it is a real joke and I am talking about the RX Vega with air heatsink, if we go to the RX Vega with RL, that it is already an absurdity, because up to 500W of consumption… Are we crazy?
I have seen many benchmarks and yes, in DX 12 and Vulkan they perform better than NVIDIA, but let's not be fooled, that's the usual game, selling two technologies that are hardly implemented in a few games. The other lie is 4K, a resolution that hardly a few players use, since 4K monitors are absurdly expensive and most mortals play at 1080p and it is more than enough, therefore insist on 4K, in the face of Well, the gallery is very good, but the reality is different.
Can these graphics cards lead to other problems? Yes and little is said about them. The RX Vega 64 Liquid Edition reaches up to 500W of consumption, this means that taking into account that two PCIe 8 + 8 connectors can give between 300-350W, at most and that the PCIe connector can give up to 75W, there is a Difference in power supply that somewhere must pass and will pass through the motherboard and the power supply cables, generating a thermal distress that can break the motherboard or melt the insulation of the power connectors. We must not rule out that the models customized by the manufacturers, in all the AMD RX Vega 64 models add three PCIe connectors in 8 + 8 + 8 configuration, like some more extreme GTX 1080 Ti, like the KFA2 GTX 1080 Ti HoF that we have in the workshop.
We are facing the second wave of the Fury and we can practically speak of failure. Right now the Vega are blocked not only for overclocking, as TechPowerUp has said, who has not been able to improve the frequencies of this graph due to a driver blocking, but there is also a blocking in mining, as the Claymore developers have said that is dragged from the Frontier Edition, which limits the mining power to just 30MH / s in Ethereum mining. This makes them useless for mining, simply because the consumption is a real stupidity and the power is ridiculous, there are better options on the market than these very expensive heaters that AMD has developed in the form of a graphics card.
AMD products are not a failure at all because there is always someone who will buy them no matter how bad they are, otherwise AMD would have disappeared a long time ago.
The really bad products from Nvidia and Intel are counted on the fingers of the hand, the regular and bad products from AMD are missing fingers to count.
In the end, Ryzen affected Vega because many people were made with false expectations and it is not that the Ryzen are bad, but that they arose from a weakness of Intel, Nvidia does not show weaknesses for now even when seeing the analysis of Vega it becomes evident The good work of Nvidia with the Geforce 980Ti that accumulates 26 months that hit the market and stands up to products launched in 2017 by AMD, watch out for that.
Those AMD fans who complain so much about anti-AMD posts now is the time to show your support, go out there and buy what AMD has to offer.
AMD doesn't need cheerleaders it needs to sell because it's been in the red for a long time.
The owner of the article has great appreciation for Intel and its extremely expensive processors, so it is not enough for him to say more than 5 times failure to try to limit his adversity towards AMD.
There is another well-known review page, which AMD likes a lot, more than anything so that there is competition and lower prices. And it also beats these new graphic toasters.
It's obvious that sloppy-style pages do that.
Nick Furia's favorite site, alias juanma miguelin2500k, Mr Phisix (botched runs?), Keeps repeating the same song that intel this and that, its processors with more cores consume more and it has a stove PDT makes it laugh to see that new i3 k which is an i5 with a 91 w tdp and overclocked from the factory and it will surely be just as expensive, it is clear that the segment is from the Ryzen, so take a bite out of vega, you can see that you wanted
Red numbers? HAHAHAHAJ Ryzen has been selling quite a bit, the RX 470/480/570 and 580 are sold out and may be joined by the Vega (because of the miners); besides that the consoles have AMD.
my dear AMD brought out a stove on the market, the truth is unfortunate, but hey they say they are good for mining and maybe that's why they were launched anyway. I do not buy an AMD Vega or fart and not for the price but for the consumption.
sell gpu for consoles is what is left to amd sell gpu vega to sony so that they get a ps5 or ps4 pro 2
If I agree that AMD released some graphics cards very late and very high consumption… Hopefully with Navi they fix that… But hardware sphere only sat on the consumption that …… But when INTEL brings out the i9 with high consumption and heat they don't say nothing ... They only say that they are the best processors ... ... .. Etc ... .. In my opinion AMD with Vega I muddle it but with Ryzen quality, exceptional price is .... And unfortunately for consumers, Nvidia are the best graphics and can set the price of what Eran and Volta leave it for next year ... Too bad Vega was not much superior to Nvidia with that they lower the price and continue to improve with new architectures ... … Too bad that sphere hardware supports the INTEL and Nvidia monopolies…. Hopefully AMD will continue ahead because otherwise Nvidia and Intel set the prices they want and take out refried from refried and we are paying for that ..... come on AMD ...
Roberto SOle has an inerranible hatred for AMD and it shows too much, it should lower his tone everyone notices it.
Unfortunately this site is like that, just look at all the other posts and you will notice.
I think it is Dnuke because it reflects the same hatred that he has because he burned a graph and I blame AMD since then, chance and that's where I hit him: p.
The creator of the post has several multis .. that's for sure
Is too much visible. He is like a child, something happens to him that he does not like and he does not want anymore (something would happen to him with AMD for sure). He listens to AMD and he has a tantrum.
Reminds me of the PS4 POWER
AMD placed prices that they wanted, being at a disadvantage and being a product to run away from, why should you take that right away from nvidia, which is the only one that is doing things well? What's more, it did them well and for a long time. year.
The slap that I would give to those who say that ryzen is bad uff it would not be nor normal, small false envious in the end ..., the vegas are garbage
OH ONE MORE THING RYZEN 5 1400 BOUGHT FROM ALTERNATE FOR 153€ 4 CORES 8 THREADS IN CINEBENCH AT 3,7GHZ 798 POINTS 153€ (I gave my i5 6600 to my brother, it's a good processor but it doesn't let you do oc and I love to fiddle with those things....) I recommend and buy Ryzen to all my friends... bye bye Intel... https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/39833ae3a1ae50d63e05855fa434d945ec47caffd6daa4e48f6db9cf20159ee0.jpg
Congratulations on the mid / low range processor now enjoy what you have.
Be careful, Ryzen is not bad, it is an interesting solution with an internal construction based on the modularity of the processors. It is clear that AMD has touched the key, but it remains to be polished, everything is said. In the first instance Ryzen had serious problems with RAM, which are things of the past. The XFR does not work, but it is normal, since it is a technology that can be somewhat green. I also need to polish the Infinity Fabric, for my taste. The Ryzen 7, maybe they are more for the professional segment, I do not see them for gaming, but the Ryzen 5 and the Ryzen 3, can be a great solution, but I want to see the Raven Ridge APUs, which will carry Ryzen cores and Vega GPUs, Those processors can tear it apart and destroy Intel. That Ryzen is a good solution is undeniable and that it forces Intel to move its ass, after two years of being lazy, is also undeniable.
Exactly, by the way be CAREFUL with the r3 that is difficult to find a compatible board, the asrock does not recognize the r3, the msi yes, the aorus nor have I tried it yet, the r5 if the asrock and the msi recognize it…
The same can be said for the person who has a Ryzen and now an Intel comes out with the same cores but greatly improving the IPC of the Ryzen 😀 since Ryzen has the IPC of an Intel from 2014.
Pd: We are talking about graphics and not processors and do not ever compare a Ryzen 1400 with an i7 that makes me sad to hear you.
It is a pity that they have such energy consumption. And with regard to performance, being hbm2 a powerful memory, couldn't they get more performance than that? × _ ×
The problem is that the bandwidth once stops limiting the gpu, no matter how much you increase it, it does not offer any improvement.
It's like if you take the basic 65 hp wv polo with its basic chassis, it makes you a circuit in 1:30 minutes, you put that engine in the gti polo chassis, and maybe you go down to 1:25 in the circuit with a huge chassis Better yet, the engine would go full throttle in all corners because it does not suppose speeds that the chassis cannot support, and there you have the limitation: the engine.
In this case hbm is the gti chassis, and vega64 the 65hp engine, which if it had 80 the improvement would have been substantially greater than using hbm instead of gddr5x
With games that use directx 11 what performance do you expect
According to the fact that AMD is behind with the graphics, and so much delay did not predict anything new, now it will only remain to compete for price / performance, however repeating failure so many times and so badly spoken that you are from AMD leaves much to be desired from your post.
Here they are a bit unbiased, but just a bit.
He's always badmouthing AMD, even though it's a miner. If AMD is that bad, don't buy the RX470/480 or the RX570/580. If they weren't like this on this page, more people would follow them.
This guy is only dedicated to attacking AMD and that leaves a lot to be desired from this site which is totally unbiased. Just look at the popular news on the right hand side and you will see pure anti-AMD and pro Intel / Nvidia articles all written by the same author calling themselves hardware and technology experts, what a big lie! But hey, let's leave this fanboy to keep showing his hatred for AMD and keep paying thousands of euros for intel cpu's and nvidia gpus.
Taking into account that 90% of the news and almost 100% of the reviews are mine, well man, if you start looking there is everything. There is an entry, well, several, where I criticize the temperature of the i7 7700K and also reflect it in the review, but of course, it is better to enter to defame and show ignorance trying to defend the Vega at all costs when they have no possible defense. If you read below you will see that I comment that the Ryzen modular processors are a good solution, which have small flaws that I think will be solved in future reviews of these processors, but nothing, you do your thing.
To be honest and I am not hiding, an AMD processor or graphics does not come into my house, I already had a negative experience with an AMD graphics and that is enough for me. Now, I like Ryzen because it has made Intel move its ass, since for two years it was in the fool's soup, being lazy, because it had no competition in the market. Unfortunately two years wasted in the trash by AMD, who can not overshadow the Pascals, brutal graphics cards, which is reflected in the GTX 1080 Ti. Yes the price and blah, blah, blah, everything you want, but the RX Vega 64 are worth € 615 and a GTX 1080 can be found, with an assembler heatsink below that price and consuming half. It seems that the price of AMD graphics only matters to you when they are worth € 50-100 less than NVIDIA solutions, then, that's it.
I wish AMD had released some competent graphics and not these toasters, so we would have seen the Volta for gaming before, but unfortunately NVIDIA goes from launching new graphics and burning excellent architecture, as Volta surely is, for some graphics of average hair, which have been in development for two years, they consume an aberration and perform just like a GTX 1080 Founder Edition, because they don't even compare to custom models. So majete, to sleep.
I still hope that you put numbers in costs for the purposes of high consumption. That a feeder costs € 50 more seems to me very indifferent when if you spend € 800 on a graph you will buy an 80+ bronze feed, at least. At least if you are fairly consistent.
Also a study of the average consumption of the graph would not be bad. That you are impartial is more than clear, but be sure to arm yourselves with something more than words on those issues.
And it is very clear that the € 600 + vega is dealer speculation and not the final price (or at least I do not buy it at that price and I do not think it is the only one).
It is clear that Vega is nonsense and the data is what it is, but you need to launch rockets in the news and put celebratory audios, one thing is to give data and say that it is a disappointment and another very different to celebrate that it is a disappointment.
By the way, if you put the same effort in celebrating the good work of Ryzen and you take your chest out of the great performance of the 1200 1300x, well of course that should not be celebrated.
Che, and the RX Vega 56? Did the cat eat it? At the beginning of the article he mentions her talking about her supposed performance, consumption and temperature, but from then on she is never mentioned again, making total emphasis on all the problems of her older sister. I read that it is precisely this that looks the most attractive, having a similar performance and sometimes superior to the GTX 1070, its counterpart, for a consumption slightly higher than that of the RX 580.
I would like to know the point of view of an AMD hater on this card, as the aberration that happens to be the RX Vega 64 was seen even in the articles made by the company's fanboys.
The post is sad, at least it counteracts the information, they already said that those 500 W are for a purposely consumed envelope of 50% to see how he behaved in stress and OC issues. Normal reaches 345W which is quite a lot, but it is a consumption that does not matter, especially if it has a 20% overclock in memories
And above it has been seen that the voltage can be lowered and thus reduce consumption. I think they haven't said anything about that either
The same of heaters the new Intel processors. Let's better use other terms and don't leave a product just launched on the market on the floor. That everything finally seems to be that it is to compete between the only two companies that exist, that if we disqualify ourselves, what a strategy Intel has made by withdrawing the much acclaimed G-series processors from the market.
They both do things really well and others sometimes don't embroider them. Something is always said that has not even taken a single day, providing poor results according to the article.
That they continue to be analyzed, and if after a recommended average time they continue as they have been initially launched, we could speak of a regrettable product.