YouTube’s ‘DudeRandom84’ has tested AMD’s Radeon Vega Frontier Edition in DOOM and compared it with both NVIDIA’s GTX1080 and GTX1080Ti graphics cards. And the results fall in line with what we are basically expecting from the gaming/consumer variant of the upcoming Vega GPU.
AMD’s Radeon Vega Frontier Edition runs DOOM faster than the NVIDIA GTX1080, but noticeably slower than the GTX1080Ti. The performance difference between the GTX1080Ti and the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition is around 23%, so in this particular title we might see the RX Vega coming close to NVIDIA’s flagship (that is if AMD will be able to offer a 20% faster performance).
Now as we’ve already said, the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition graphics card is not meant for gamers, but for workstation users. Still, this can give us a slight idea of what we can expect from its consumer counterpart.
In related news, GamersNexus tested the “Gaming” mode that AMD introduced to its drivers for the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition, and the results were underwhelming.
In case you didn’t know, this mode makes available the full suite of gaming features of Radeon Software to those owning an AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition.
As AMD has stated:
“To playtest and optimize the gaming experience, the exclusive ability of the Radeon Vega Frontier Edition to switch from Radeon Pro Settings to Radeon Settings and back with a couple of clicks enables rapid switching between software features for faster iteration during development workflows.
When in “Gaming Mode” the full suite of gaming features of Radeon Software are made available, including Radeon Chill 5 and Radeon WattMan 6.
Game developers can also use the wealth of no-cost open development tools and software found on GPUOpen.com to optimize their next-generation gaming experiences for the pinnacle of AMD graphics technology.”
In theory, this should improve performance in games. However, and according to GamersNexus, there weren’t any real performance differences between the “Pro” and the “Gaming” mode. Whether this is due to immature drivers or not remains to be seen.
John is the founder and Editor in Chief at DSOGaming. He is a PC gaming fan and highly supports the modding and indie communities. Before creating DSOGaming, John worked on numerous gaming websites. While he is a die-hard PC gamer, his gaming roots can be found on consoles. John loved – and still does – the 16-bit consoles, and considers SNES to be one of the best consoles. Still, the PC platform won him over consoles. That was mainly due to 3DFX and its iconic dedicated 3D accelerator graphics card, Voodoo 2. John has also written a higher degree thesis on the “The Evolution of PC graphics cards.”
Contact: Email
Again, wait a second, you are watching a video and comparing a year old card with a new AMD that costs more than double of what the year old 1080 card does, on VULKAN DOOM that has always performed better on AMDs, and come to the conclusion that maybe the consumer gaming version of the card might get closer to the 1080ti in general?… I don’t get how can possibly come to that conclusion, nor see how a much more expensive AMD card perform a bit better on VULKAN than a 1080 and a bit worse than 1080ti, can be a good thing?
This is a productivity card. You’re paying for a lot of features and such that do not benefit gaming in any way. It doesn’t make sense to look at the price of this thing and compare it to any gaming card. It’s like comparing an indie car to a rally racer and complaining that it performs worse on dirt but costs considerably more. They’re made for different things. Comparing this to other productivity cards, and it’s actually a very good deal.
I suspect the final Vega card to be a good deal, in comparison to the cards that it performs well against. It’s not going to be a 1080ti, but it’s not going to be a slouch, or a 1000 dollar card either.
Indeed, but there you go, you suspect, but no one knows yet, speculation and funfair is pointless atm, as what is being shown and compared is just what I described, a new non gaming focused 1200 euros AMD card performing marginally better than a year old NVIDIA card that costs half the price running on VULKAN that always performed better on AMDs.
One can make solid assumptions based on past trends. It’s been the same song for years now with AMD. That’s simply how they’re operating right now. It’s not much of a stretch…
Productivity card? amd alredy has on for develper work with, thats a gaming ” enthusiast” card, it should be at least higher than gtx 1080.
From the article, which you obviously didn’t bother to read:
“Now as we’ve already said, the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition graphics card is not meant for gamers, but for workstation users”
Is that simple enough for you to understand?
From that same article
AMD
““To playtest and optimize the gaming experience, the exclusive ability of the Radeon Vega Frontier Edition to switch from Radeon Pro Settings to Radeon Settings and back with a couple of clicks enables rapid switching between software features for faster iteration during development workflows.
When in “Gaming Mode” the full suite of gaming features of Radeon Software are made available”
And?
My Saturn Ion has a “sports mode”. It doesn’t make it a sports car.
Yup, because Sports =/= sportscar
Well, RX Vega’s 3DMark 11 benchmarks put it slightly over the GTX 1080. I know it’s a synthetic benchmark, but still, it scores higher than the 1080.
It’s also not a gaming card and despite it having a gaming mode it’s not going to perform as well as the gaming variant, mark my words. If I’m wrong I’ll buy you the GPU of your choice.
There is also a driver but that hasn’t been fixed that’s cutting the memory speed in half and can only be fixed via full reboot of the PC. Even if it says it’s at normal speed any attempt to overclock even the core will mess with the memory in a bad way. I’m sure that will be taken care of soon but I still say the gaming variant will perform better than this card.
So your bet is what? the gaming variant of this card that no one has yet seen, will outperform your GTX 1080FE, by the same margin as the 1080TI but cost less? I’m sorry, but just like you, I have the 1080FE and play on the best gaming monitor atm, the ROG SWIFT PG279, and not even the 1080Ti seem worth the upgrade, as for now, any game worth playing runs perfectly fine at 1440p, and on the competitive shooters plays at that res at 120-144 FPS, with G-sync on and great colours, and no graphics game is running great, maxed out at above 60 fps at 4k on any card, and there still is not 4k 144 fps g-sync monitor with HDR worth upgrading to.
But you want to upgrade your FE just a year after the release, yet you don’t want to buy a Ti, so you are wishing that the AMD VEGA gaming version will be what? performing better than the Ti and cost quite a bit less?
I’m hoping it will perform at least as well but I’m not going to be fanboy unrealistic about it.
I don’t mind buying a new gpu every year provided there is a reason. I bought the 1080 when I was still playing on a 1080p display. I bought it during the free gears 4 promo so I’m not sure how close to launch that was but not long after I got a nice 65 inch OLED HDR 4k tv and while I’m losing overall potential refresh rate I’m gaining a stunning image on a large display.
Going back to Vega and based on prior experience with AMD I don’t think specs tell the whole story due to the differences in architecture. It will also take time for developers to take advantage of those changes from prior versions of GCN and it will take the driver team who are amazing yet admittedly alot slower than nvidia to really tighten everything up and also run their own optimizations on games.
I’m being optimistic but cautious however with that said again based on prior experience I think what we see at launch will be quite different from what we see later.
lol all that being said there will be new hardware announced, hinted at and rumors for so who knows. I don’t really care who makes my GPU as long as it meets my needs
Agreed! 😉 I’m pretty happy atm and I doubt I’ll upgrade on the next Nvidia family, but most likely will on the one after the next, we’ll see.
I’m fairly happy as well, like I said most things run at 4k60 provided I overclock. Really only 2 games have caused me to need to either lower the resolution or adjust settings and they are Mass Effect Andromeda and Ghost Recon Wildlands. So I’m right on the edge but I know upcoming games aren’t going to run at 4k60, they might not even do it on a 1080ti so it’s definitely a wait and see attitude.
I’d prefer not to spend more than $600-700 if possible and if it wasn’t for the fact that I’m looking for 4k I wouldn’t need to worry about it at all. At 1080p I’m at overkill levels for the next couple of years at least but I couldn’t resist going for 4k especially with content besides games finally coming out at a regular pace whether it’s Netflix or uhd Blu-ray.
Me too.
My 1080 is great and I will not upgrade for at least another year or so.
You totally outed yourself as a clueless blowhard when you claimed the ROG PG279 is the best gaming monitor right now. It is crappy IPS technology as well as being only half 1440p, not 3440. Nothing else you said even needs to be read by anyone as you proved your ignorance.
Aren’t you the smart one. First lets start off by the fact I did state that the monitor is 1440p, not 4k, and the rest of what I said was why I think its still better to be at 1440p at 144/165 fps than at 4k 60 fps. It has also been the best gaming monitor choice of PC Gamer(just one example) for quite a few months now.
About the IPS, appart from the new HDR monitors (only some of them are actually true HDR), IPS is considered by just about EVERYONE as a much better quality in terms of brightness, contrast and colour, compared to the most common TN panels, and the one down side of IPS was the slow response times only, that on this particular monitor is not the case seeing its the fastest response IPS, at a maximum of 4ms, which is outsanding, and many shooter pro gamers have monitors with that response time.
Then there’s the backlight bleed that can be a bit a matter of luck, but the latest batch of these monitors were all double checked, and I tested mine before accepting it, and there’s barely if any backlight bleed…
The question here is, why would I even waste my time responding to a clueless insulting troll, but some times, I just can’t help it.
I actually downgraded(from higher res) to a PG279 a while back and am far happier(at least until 4k 144hz HDR comes along)! 😉 Make it at least 32 inch you b$stards, Hate all these 4k 27-28inch monitors all wasted at that size.
Ultra wides are garbage with black bars although it is getting better with support and wasn’t happy with my 4k either. I was an early adopter and had to put up with scaling crap early on with Win 8,Text was unreadable and 3rd party programs didn’t scale much at all.
Also the 60hz was giving me eyestrain on 4k.
Each to their own but I would agree with them and say the ASUS and ACER 1440p 165hz are still currently the best.
Curved and Ultra wide is a gimmick the way 3d was in my opinion, Good for content creation but that’s about it.
Give me my vertical lines back! lol
I’m really interested to see the gaming variants performance come the holiday season when games are actually optimized for the changes in architecture over previous generations of AMD GPUs because the changes are quite significant so just like the 2xx series it might take a little while before we see the real numbers. I know at launch(of the GPU and if the game had existed) the 290x wouldn’t have been able to max out Witcher 3 at 60 fps but it can easily today even with hairworks on.
It’s also going to take amds driver team time as well. Alot of people don’t know they will actually rewrite shader code for certain games to achieve the same quality but with much higher performance. Alien isolation is a great example. When it launched it ran fine at 1440p maxed out at 60fps but 3 weeks later after another driver update it was able to run at 4k60 even with a visual improvement hack that added planar reflections, 4k shadows and more.
I was planning on buying Vega (gaming variant) day 1 to replace my gtx 1080 fe because I play on a 4k display and it’s having trouble running newer games at 4k60 even with a major overclock that pushes the core to around 2160mhz with no thermal throttling thanks to some fancy fan work I’ve done.
Of course currently it looks like it will sit between the 1080 and 1080ti and I wanted at least ti levels or performance… which we could potentially see a few months after it launches. If that doesn’t come to pass and the fine wine aspects of amd hardware doesn’t apply to Vega I guess I’ll just wait for Vega 2 and pick up a cheap and used 1080ti while I wait.
One of the issues right now is the memory speed. There seems to be a bug where when overclocking, gamernexus talked about it in a video. Essentially the memory speed is being cut in half even when only playing with the core. It’s a pretty obvious bug
in other words you are ok to wait 2year+ to get the best out of your card? this argument is pointless really. it should give the max performance within the month of launch. amd will need to up their driver’s else it will be similar story always.
btw can you share where u get 60fps on witcher 3 on amd 290x? i cant get stable 60 on 1070 with hairworks on.
No I’m not lol. I said by the holidays when devs have been able to implement optimizations for the new architecture and the driver team has hide more time to squeeze more performance out of it.
I also said if it doesn’t meet my needs I would rather wait for a Vega 2 of whatever they would call it.
I ALSO said I would look at both Nvidia and AMD once more concrete details start flying about both their next offerings and buy whatever meets my needs.
There are multiple posts here about this subject. Don’t cherry pick what you want to try and make me look foolish…. And if you didn’t cherry pick actually read all the posts. There’s quite a bit of info in there about how amd manages to have performance that gets better over time and why that happens.
Oh and yes I’ll definitely take my 1080 out, go pull the 290x from my kids PC, put it back in mine and capture for you…are you serious?
Btw the 290x can also run the Witcher 3 at 4k max settings minus hairworks at a locked 30. Of course you won’t believe that either but…not much I can do for you other than say I have zero reason to lie about it. I’m sorry but it’s not my job to prove to rando guy online that a 290x can run Witcher 3 maxed at 60fps. I’m sure you can find a video somewhere. Hell just search the steam forums.
sorry but i was right, please dont post lies on internet. also 290x cant get locked 30fps on 4k heck 1070 cant get that lol. avg on 290x will be around ~24 fps @4k ultra. check the video below.
/watch?v=3KN2_n9j2FE
also why to stick and wait for amd why not volta if its better? i had used HD6850 and 280x both were absolutely best at the time considering price/perf but now im with nvidia with 1070 and i dont want to stick to any vendor as long as im getting performance for reasonable price.
another massive disappointment
Still here wasted sperm ?? 😀
He’s just salty due to the abysmal AMD Jaguar having crippled performance on his beloved console.
Jaguar was a perfectly fine CPU when it was released. It outperformed Atom and Anandtech said there was nothing that could compete with it in the space it occupied.
The problem is not that Jaguar is a bad design. The problem is that it’s outdated. It’s also debatable whether it should have been used for the consoles in the first place, rather than a down-clocked and harvested Piledriver.
AMD – Advanced Macro Disappointments
Nope. Zen was a triumph. But, I suppose you think VIA is the hero in the land of x86.
I’ve been disapointed in the vega ever since the first benchmarks. I was really hoping for a 1080Ti killer but instead we got something in between 1080/1080ti + more expensive. I’m done clicking on the vega articles from now on.
The FE is expensive because it’s not a gaming card. Rumor has it that gaming Vega will be 8 GB and be quite a lot cheaper.
Let’s hope this is true. For the sake of the customers…
We can hope but we all know 8GB of HBM does not make such a difference in price.
We also know that the hardware on a Quadro board doesn’t fully account for its higher price.
Yep. It has actual professional lifetime technical support. Vega FE does not.
That’s a red herring given the price difference especially.
ehm, actually no. Those are actually very expensive helpdesks and services to maintain for such extended times,tech level and volume of products. That is kinda the reason why you dont get them on your gamer card.
“We also know that the hardware on a Quadro board doesn’t fully account for its higher price.”
Phone support desks are not hardware on a Quadro board.
And?? You think we should all limit ourselves to your little imagined walled garden of discussion rules?
Those thing are Most Definitely calculated into pricing such cards. You have a lot to learn.
That’s nice.
Im noticing you ran out of thoughts but still have a desperate need for the last word.
Fascinating analysis there.
I know, we already established that i am very capable of bringing forth fascinating things but you seem to be a bit slow on the uptake that my last comment was pointing out that you lack such talent, creativity and IQ.
Wow… I didn’t know Kasowitz posts here.
And that is supposed to mean ….
Fascinating.
I know i am but what are you ?
I doubt 8GB will save them $400
They also charge hundreds for just a AIO water cooled Vega tho so who knows they may as well have been overcharging the memory as well from the get go.
There is more to it than manufacturing costs. Pro level cards go through extensive certification and driver perfection to ensure consistent, error-free performance in critical applications.
I am not the one using 8gb less as a argument for a $400 price drop here..
Because it delivers less performance since it has less cores AND less memory and is not sold as a Pro-sumer card.
You still this slow ?
Vega FE is the exact same GPU.
ehm , no sorry for you. It is called value. Which is nowhere to be found on Vega FE. It is $1000 and will be slower then the RX. Wanna bet the RX will be just as slow as the FE at pro-sumer software?
The fact that there are clear performance benefits ON THE MORE EXPENSIVE nvidia GPU says it all. It is not the same GPU, it is literarly a different version of the arch. Something that Vega is not in any form. And thus it costs more, duh. It is called market value. What value will the FE have for anyone once the RX drops? 8GB more? I thought HBC was the godlike solution to that??
Who in their right mind would lay down $1000 for slowga ?? Or slowga with AIO watercooling for ONLY $1400, ..lol. Which is again THE EXACT SAME GPU WITH NO DIFFERENCE AT ALL xD
Well yeah , there is a $50 AIO on it for only $400 more of course but the GPU is not 1 bit different and will again also be slower then RX vega. (Through drivers….)
That my friend. Is the definition of GIMP & Milk.
Nope, RX will do what FE does just as easy. FE buyers got screwed and milked. Lets not even talk about the AIO ones lel.
Consensus suggest that the 8gb of HBM2 will make it almost impossible to make the GPU cheaper than a 1080 without taking a loss.
It doesn’t need to be cheaper than a 1080. It needs to be cheaper than a 1080 Ti.
It would do if was competition for 1080ti, but it isn’t. So far benchmarks indicate rx vega will compete against overclocked 1080.
So it needs to be cheaper or it has no real selling point.
It is performs slightly above the 1080 then it doesn’t need to be priced lower than it. AMD could use a game bundle to sweeten the deal if the card is priced at the 1080 level.
Mining could be the big wild card when it comes to pricing.
Dude you’re delusional.
Have you ever seen how far behind Nvidia in the market?
Nvidia has got away with not even having to price competitively for years because of brand strength. Simply price matching a 1080 whilst having greater power draw won’t cut it. They are that dominant. Expect Nvidia to respond with price cuts too.
Being slightly ahead in Doom in vulkan is also not a surprise. The game heavily favours AMD. It’s other dx 11/12 games that will really give better indication of it’s overall place. Benchmarks indicate close to an oc’d 1080.
If miners start buying up rx vega that will just be worse still for AMD, but seems unlikely due to likely cost and power draw. Miners want cheap cards that offer most bang per buck.
“Dude you’re delusional.”
That’s nice.
“Being slightly ahead in Doom in vulkan is also not a surprise.”
I wasn’t referring to Doom. I was referring to the 15% better score in 3DMark.
Doom isn’t optimized for Vega’s new technologies either.
“If miners start buying up rx vega that will just be worse still for AMD”
No, it certainly is not. If AMD can sell as many Vega cards as it produces it’s a huge win for the company, especially given the way selling prices have been raised.
“Expect Nvidia to respond with price cuts too.”
We’ll see.
Nvidia can easily do price cuts, They already had their FE cards boosting 1000 series $100 more than they should of been becuase there was stuff all competition, Not only that it’s been a year already!
Price cuts are good for consumers. Nvidia’s time of big fat margins might be over for a while?
How terrible.
It needs to be cheaper or if it’s more expensive then it needs to be a lot faster, They are a year behind the competition already!
By the time you can buy these Vega cards in a few months Nvidia will be close to announcing next gen.
Let them announce. Announcing something and selling it in the market are two very different points in time, often enough.
lol
Even AdoredTV is saying VEGA is well behind where it should be. Maybe the RX version will be worth getting if it’s really competitive in price, but at this point I’d wait for Volta unless you really can’t hold out.
Adored didn’t say that. He said that he expected it to perform between 1080 and 1080 Ti and this was months ago and that the prediction is coming true.
Somehow I doubt that considering it couldn’t even run crysis.
nothing will ever change the nvidia bias in the pc gaming market.i just like to see how the bias nvidia crowed fakes benchmarks to make nvidia better.
yes i have seen a few and called them out but like i said nothing will ever change nvidia bias.
The fact that its all ready July and we STILL don’t know much about Vega is pathetic. Nvidia wins yet another generation.
What’s pathetic is that AMD is expected to save capitalism in the x86 and GPU spaces at the same time.
That’s what’s pathetic.
Instead of blaming AMD, maybe people should ask themselves why there are so few players in these spaces.
Probably has something to do with Intel, holding onto x86 like their balls.
“What’s pathetic is that AMD is expected to save capitalism in the x86 and GPU spaces at the same time.”
You’ve got that wrong, AMD is expected to save US from capitalism, not save capitalism.
What a stupid post.
AMD’s biggest problem is they have been letting Nvidia have the lead since the HD 6000 series GPU’s. When you give a company like Nvidia 8 months to a year plus as GPU crown holders you are only setting yourself up for failed product launches.
It’s not even about fanboys buying up products. It’s about people sick of waiting just to play the games they want to play. I mean I still have my 970’s in SLI. And I was thinking okay I will give AMD a chance with Vega.
And here I have been waiting a year plus now just to find out it might have performance between a card that has been out for a year plus three months and a card that has been out for 5 months by the time it comes out? And that’s on their to go to game for performance.
It’s kinda a no it is a let down.
Zen was a massive victory. We’re fortunate that AMD was able to execute that so well. Considering how much lost ground they managed to recover in such a short span of time in the CPU space, given their weak position when compared with Intel and the lack of profits in the GPU space, tech enthusiasts should be happy, really, for any AMD GPU that’s better than Polaris right now. Yeah, Vega has taken a long time but AMD is a small company trying to do big things in two very different market spaces.
When Nvidia has to compete with Intel in CPUs as well, especially with a weaker position in both of its key markets – then it’s fair to expect AMD to offer exactly the same GPU power as Nvidia can. It’s only natural that AMD is playing catchup to a company that can focus on one thing and which has been raking in the profits for quite some time.
Just as they allocated a ton of resources from various endeavors (and my thought is VEGA R&D seeing its a shrunk fiji with alleviated bottlenecks) and are going to allocate R&D from the CPU division back to Navi as its supposed to be their major card they’re already teasing. Just a hunch but I wouldn’t doubt its so seeing Zen 2 and Zen 3 (7nm and 7nm+ respectively) will be primarily tweaks as the foundation is layed out.
Still hoping to see B2 stepping or equiv for RyZen consumer segment in the near future.
True. Biggest problem of AMD, they try to play catch up with Nvidia instead of trying to get ahead of them.
It’s not like they have much of a choice, AMD’s R&D budget is no where near Nvidia’s.
Not much of an excuse really when they now have a winner with their cpu’s.
Their R&D was no where near Intel’s either yet all these new AMD cpu’s are really starting to hurt Intel’s bottom line, even more so when the server cpu’s are out.
Thanks to mining, Vega might be the only sensible option.
But that’s only because they were ahead on the launch schedule and they were beating nvidia’s previous generation instead. As soon as nvidia came out a bit later with their new stuff they were knocked off the hill again. After that they were no longer able to beat nvidia, at best they could try to match them.
The Fury and Fury X cards beat the 970 and 980 but after that AMD went after the low and mid range tier market so we’ve been waiting forever for a new card.
Vega looks like HD2900 from 10 years ago all over again. Biggest AMD GPU failure since then.
Far too late, too slow, too hot and power hungry.
That was before the major driver overhaul and optimizations, year on year, we’ve seen since 2014 no less.
I had a R9 290 and it was a wonderful card. i unloaded it on ebay once the miners went crazy for it and made a nice profit but for the two years i had the card it was amazing for the money even if the 970 was around 5-10% faster on average.
Didn’t Gamers Nexus or PCPer talk to AMD, who said there currently is absolutely no difference between Pro and Gaming modes? If so, why bother testing on “Gaming Mode” if nothing actually happens?
AMD
““To playtest and optimize the gaming experience, the exclusive ability of the Radeon Vega Frontier Edition to switch from Radeon Pro Settings to Radeon Settings and back with a couple of clicks enables rapid switching between software features for faster iteration during development workflows.
When in “Gaming Mode” the full suite of gaming features of Radeon Software are made available”
Because AMD says it matters a lot.
It SHOULD matter a lot.
After the benchmarks were run, one of those two asked an AMD rep about that, and that person admitted there is currently no difference between the two modes right now.
Uh..where did who admit anything ?
So nowhere huh.
Already knew that but hey , thought i’d ask where that happened first.
If all fanboys thought like that AMD would have no costumers left.
lol thats not true. AMD has the better product on the low and mid range ends. All AMD has to do is release Vega (the legit gaming card) have it be better than the 1080 but $100 cheaper and they lock up the high end also. Only leaving the enthusiast market… the .5% that would waste $700-800 on a gpu.
that assuming if nvidia not responding to AMD price cut. what’s stopping nvidia to drop 1080 price further? even when there is no direct competition in the market nvidia still drop 1080 price by $100 back in march when they launch 1080ti.
also even if AMD dominate the low end and mid range they still lose market share against nvidia.
But even that they dont. 970 matching the RX580 and the 1060 is the most sold GPU. And thats even with all those miners buying 480’s and 580’s.
If they did that i think it would be great. however even if the cards are the same price the AMD gpu will be better in most games outside of GTA V lol.
Nvidia has the low , mid and high end. AMduh is just tagging along with RX580’s that get matched by GTX970’s that were midrange 3 YEARS ago…
Better product… They cant even surpass 3 year old midrange Nvidia GPU’s with their 2017 releases.
The RX 460/560 is the best price to performance card for under $100 the 550 beats the 1030 by a mile. The 470/570 kills the 1050ti, the 480/580 beats the 1060 6gb in 8 out of 10 new AAA games released due to its 8gb vram. Where is Nvidia better here? the 1050? its way more expensive than the 460/560 and prices itself out of that bracket by $30.
All AMD has to do is release a card thats better than the 1070 and 1080. and they take the high end. Only enthusiast and tech yt channels with an agenda waste cash on a $800 gpu like the 1080ti
a 1060 is ffaser then a 970 a OC’ed 970 matches a RX580, So no.
Go fanboy more :*)
No its not and i own a 1060 moron im no fanboy. i happen to find the 1060 6gb on an insane deal for under $170 before rebate so i bought it. 8 out of 10 new AAA games that release run better with the 580 by 5-10%
Ehm, it is actually slower then the 1080 in that video…
i’m waiting for a mid range card from nvidia that beats 1080ti, something between $400-500
You have to wait 2 years for your dream to become true.
i can upgrade to whatever i want whenever i want but i’d rather not spend too much on a card that i know is going to be beaten by a cheaper card next year
Buy a RX580. Its matched by a GTX970
WAHID is 100% on point. wait 2 to 3 years to see AMD reaching the same performance point that Nvidia has.
amd is garbage my current card is 1080TI why would i get an inferior card like RX580?even if didn’t have my current card, why the hell would i go with a trash card like rx580, are you out of your mind or just a shilling around?
l2r
With the 1080 not the 1080TI.
garbage, still a 1000$ card which underperforms the 1080TI which is 700$
more dust.. more disappointment…
AMD is made with poor people in mind, I salute them for their efforts, but they will always be in last place.
No it doesn’t i have a 1060 6gb rig lol. the RX 580 is the better card for new games if only slightly.
And once again, DSOGaming shows its click bait writing style. There was zero mention of the testing using Vulkan, which has been the only way Fury X was able to get close to the GTX 1080. Not OpenGL, not DirectX, just Vulkan.
how is RX being 1080GTX performance n price not being 1 year behind?
What did you “rekt” moron? one game on some site? the 580 has been owning the 1060 for the last year… and this is comong from a guy that owns a 1060 and wants it to be better lol sadly amds drivers are superior and their cards are supported much longer.
Not one game you 1diot. You think im gonna upload and post all of them only for a fangirl like you to stick her fingers in her ears and go “NO CANT BE TRUE LALALALALALA” ?
You seem to ignore the fact that i actually use and prefer nvidia products. you constantly glaze over this fact. ffs the only fanboy here is you. the 580 is the better card right this second and it will only get better im honestly ok with this because the difference in most games is only like 5+ fps. an example would be Dirt 4 i set dirt to max and im seeing 80-90 fps… who cares if the 580 plays the game at 3-5 fps more if im locking the damn fps to 60 anyway lol.
ITs not the better card when it gets matched by a GPU that 3 years ago was already mid range.
lol the 1060 is a match for the 970 fanboy… the 960 was a match for the 770 and so on. this is how gpus work… the 580 is a match for the r9 290x your crapping on amd as a fanboy but nvidia is the same.
Yeah the benches showing a 970 matchhing a RX580 in 2017 games like prey and MEshould be ignored right ?
A 3 year old mid range card against the fastest thing AMD had in 2017 at the time.
Denial is your first name.
Also no matter how you try to spin it. The fact that a card that was mid-range 3 YEARS AGO matches a RX580 today is really the end of it all. If the RX580 was so much faster , which it should have been 3 years later then a 3 year old mid range GPU like a 970 should not be able to match it in any way, shape or form, duuh.
Sleep well.
the 970 was a higher tier of card with a MSRP of what? over $400? The RX 580 had a msrp of $250… ffs the 970 is as good as the 1060 as well. Look at the 1070 right? when nvidia releases the 2060 in a year or so the 1070 will still hang with it yet the 1070 msrp is $380+ and that 2060 will probably be in the $250 range max.
mid range, 3 yyears ago.
Keep crying. Im enjoying this 🙂
970 was mid range.
RX580 was AMD’s top card at the time.
Cry moar pls 🙂
If a 970 was mid range so is a 1070. please start making sense or stop typing. honestly what you believe is trolling is getting old and tired. either bring a legit discussion or stfu.
You really are a idiot aren’t you. Yes, you are finally catching up. the x70 series is and always has been the mid-range series
l.o.l
So yes i have been talking sense and your last response only proves you are incapable of comprehending sensibility and rationality. So now that you know this , Please check in to your nearest mental hospital asap.
I’m the idiot yet you just called the 1070 mid range lol ok stop typing man.
Facepalm.
Tell me little princess. When has the x70 series of Nvidia Not been their mid range…
i’l be waiting for your answer and proof to the contrary. lol :*)
when they started releasing the x60 line.
Thats a desperate and bold move.
But no , nice try though.
1060 is low end. 1070 is mid range. always will be. Ask Nvidia themselves.
“In theory, this should improve performance in games.”
LOL!
This is not even a reading problem, is just extrapolation of people’s minds, i read it once and understood it correctly, why people try so hard to not understand is beyond my imagination…
“Regarding miners, it’s awful news if they pick up vega as gamers won’t get hands on them as prices will go sky high, leaving them to buy Nvidia gpu instead”
Miners are buying Nvidia GPUs as well.
If miners buy all the Vegas AMD can produce that’s better for AMD than selling to the gaming market. Like it or not, that’s the fact.
“If miners buy all the Vegas AMD can produce that’s better for AMD than selling to the gaming market. Like it or not, that’s the fact.”
are you really this incapable of understanding facts?
No one is buying high end Nvidia GPU for mining as they too expensive and not that good for it. 1080 and 1080ti are unaffected.
So if AMD rx Vega is good for mining, actual gamers will simply buy Nvidia high end cards instead.
Prices will go artificially high on rx Vega as with 480/580 and gamers give up waiting for Vega and buy Nvidia.
The market later gets flooded with lots of cheap used vega cards after miners have used them to hell and back.
Not good for AMD at all.
Nope. If miners buy all the Vegas then it’s great for AMD. Some gamers think the whole world revolves around them. It doesn’t.
Only in Bizzaroland does someone argue that demand causing a sellout of a product is a bad thing.
You’re special needs case.