feel like upgrading to vega 64 so i was curious what 2 amd fury xs would sell for with ek blocks? stock coolers and everything
I see alot of people asking 200-300 usd but not alot of bites. You may have a hard time getting our of them what they are “worth” in the performance stack. I would also recommend waiting on the vega 64. The cheapest ones ive seen where 70$ over MSRP. And at that price you may as well get a 1080 and save the difference.
ill never support nvidia. if i could get 400usd from both the cards ill be happy
By supporting a bad product you aren’t helping the industry, but that is your choice, best of luck with that.
1 Like
hows it bad? its a wonderful card… its beating 1080ti in quite a few games… but hey its a bad card
What ever you say man.
The only thing bad about Vega is that it’s overpriced. It’s not a bad GPU, just not a great option for the price. Some people want it regardless, and those people will overpay but still have a solid high-performance GPU that compares well to the GTX 1080 and sometimes the 1080 Ti (in certain applications).
2 Likes
Paying 20% more for something that is neck and neck and in occasion beats it isn’t something im going to support or recommend. The card it self isnt bad, but its beyond power hungry and is a very poor deal right now.
2 Likes
but u support a company that causes their drivers issues crippling performance… so it makes users feel as if they need to upgrade… good on ya… some of us dont enjoy that
Can you show proof that they are doing this? I have both old and new nvidia and AMD cards and I have never had a driver that has lowered performance in an application that wasn’t a bug.
1 Like
Performance wise in windows games a 1080Ti is running circles around Vega, no question. 1080 and Vega64 are on the same level, 56 is close,1070 comes after that.
There are legitimate reasons to not like a company. In nvidias case there is the shitty linux support, locking you into G-sync wile Freesync has support from AMD and Intel, paying studios to use gimpworks, driving prices higher and higher while delivering less and less performance increase from generation to generation… There is a lot, is what I’m saying.
That kind of stuff is influencing a decision for a lot of people. Is it the best price to performance right now? No, it isn’t. But it is the fastest alternative to nvidia and we are not exactly headed towards a Radeon monopoly, so …
2 Likes
I have both AMD and NVIDIA cards I have owned since release until old enough to be space junk… never has performance dropped on either thanks to a driver where its actually stayed down in the next release… such bugs get fixed. So if you load up your old NIVIDA 9300GS, GT260 or the like it will do better on the games you used to play than ever before, just don’t expect modern titles to magically have become playable as these are weaker cards without modern direct X support… but same goes for an AMD card of that age.
Vega64 is a good card, but its not a good deal unless your mainly running one of a few very particular applications or you demand an open source driver. Vega56 on the other hand can be a GREAT deal if you where going gtx1070 and G-Sync, as you save almost the price difference between the cards going with an equivalent Free-Sync display.
All in all its a very competitive market between two large firms, and has been for many years. Yes AMD is smaller market share, but its no David and Goliath, they are both massive corporations, and just as good or bad as each other morally. People complain about hair works, but this is just the most modern example of something both firms do, support a game development somehow (money, man power ect) to ensure it runs on their cards better, Technologically they are also very close, no generation in memory has AMD not had a card thats capable of hanging with modern games, but your doing yourself a huge disservice only considering one of the brands.