Vega64

[icon_of_sin]

Is a vega64 a good gpu choice if im going for a 1440p gameing pc build with a freesync monitor?
And dont want ti pay £700+ for RTX

[Sapph]

Escrito originalmente por icon_of_sin:

quick question of opinion

vega64 with a 2k g-sync monitor possibly 120hz or 144hz
or
2080rtx with 4k 60hz monitor - no g-sync

GSync is not something you should invest on.
And just forget about Vega 64 completely.

4K is still too demanding for proper 60hz gaming use.

And RTX is good only if you want to have early access on the Ray-Tracing.


I would go with GTX 1080Ti with 1440p 144hz non-GSync monitor. (If one of such exists)

[AbedsBrother]

Escrito originalmente por icon_of_sin:

quick question of opinion

vega64 with a 2k g-sync monitor possibly 120hz or 144hz
or
2080rtx with 4k 60hz monitor - no g-sync

Why would you pair a Vega 64 with a g-sync monitor?

Escrito originalmente por Sapph:

And just forget about Vega 64 completely.

Disagree, especially if investing in a Freesync monitor.

Escrito originalmente por Sapph:

4K is still too demanding for proper 60hz gaming use.

1080Ti can handle 4k 60hz. Not max settings, though. Is that your definition of
"proper"?

Escrito originalmente por Sapph:

And RTX is good only if you want to have early access on the Ray-Tracing.

Unknown at this time. Benchmarks for non-ray-traced games' performance on the RTX 2080 have not been released yet.

[icon_of_sin]

Escrito originalmente por AbedsBrother:

Escrito originalmente por icon_of_sin:

quick question of opinion

vega64 with a 2k g-sync monitor possibly 120hz or 144hz
or
2080rtx with 4k 60hz monitor - no g-sync

Why would you pair a Vega 64 with a g-sync monitor?

sorry, meant to say vega64 with freesync

Escrito originalmente por AbedsBrother:

Escrito originalmente por Sapph:

1080Ti can handle 4k 60hz. Not max settings, though. Is that your definition of
"proper"?

What is the point in playing in 4k if your going to have lower textures?

[AbedsBrother]

Escrito originalmente por icon_of_sin:

What is the point in playing in 4k if your going to have lower textures?

Textures are not usually what needs to be lowered for 4k. Usually it's more resource-intensive settings like Shadows and Anti-Aliasing.

[Monk]

As long as you don't mind adjusting settings the vega64 is a great card, matches a 1080 in most things and the extra power it needs doesn't really have any impact in the real world, it may cost an extra fiver a year, oh noooo.

I'm currently using mine to play wow on my couch at 4k, and while, it's hardly the most demanding game, it keeps in the 59-60 range most of the time, as for other games, it can sit at 60 with some tweaking happily.

At 1440p, go with a 144Hz and fee sync will be great, even at 80-100fps it's a hell of alot smoother than 60.

Though, if you are considering a 2080, I'd suggest a 1080ti with a 1440p 144 gsync panel instead, gsync makes a world of difference and is worth every penny.

It will likely have very close performance to a 2080 but without the early adopter tax that is ray tracing.

Most hating on Vega have never used one.

[🦊Λℚ𝓤ΛƑΛᗯҜᔕ🦊]

Escrito originalmente por Monk:

As long as you don't mind adjusting settings the vega64 is a great card, matches a 1080 in most things and the extra power it needs doesn't really have any impact in the real world, it may cost an extra fiver a year, oh noooo.

I'm currently using mine to play wow on my couch at 4k, and while, it's hardly the most demanding game, it keeps in the 59-60 range most of the time, as for other games, it can sit at 60 with some tweaking happily.

At 1440p, go with a 144Hz and fee sync will be great, even at 80-100fps it's a hell of alot smoother than 60.

Though, if you are considering a 2080, I'd suggest a 1080ti with a 1440p 144 gsync panel instead, gsync makes a world of difference and is worth every penny.

It will likely have very close performance to a 2080 but without the early adopter tax that is ray tracing.

Most hating on Vega have never used one.

Vega64 water cooled and overclocked uses exactly twice the power as a single GTX 1080, according to the early release day footage recorded by gamer's nexus folks. It depends on how much you game per day actually. If you're playing games 10-12 hours per day every day, that's more like an extra $10 - $15 per month. If you're only gaming a few hours each day between getting home from work and sleep and on the weekends (most folks) then it wouldn't effect anything. Depends on your habits and it's something to think about.

[Revelene]

Escrito originalmente por Sapph:

Escrito originalmente por Revelene:

Why exactly would he be limited to a 60hz monitor? He can use a 144hz monitor just fine.

He doesn't have to maintain 144 fps with a 144hz FreeSync monitor...

Because there is only few games where Vega 64 could keep up around or above 100fps at 1440p.
For anything under 100fps, might as well have 60hz monitor instead of 144hz.
And if they want 144hz, it should be 1080p.

I think you are missing the point of FreeSync. Having the extra range for FreeSync to function is ideal. Lowering down to 60hz is counter productive.

Escrito originalmente por Impending Rentacle Tape:

And no you don't -HAVE- to maintain 144 FPS with a 144hz monitor. But if you're -never- going to hit 144 FPS, and stay at 90-100hz 98% of the time, then it's a waste of money.

You've definitely misunderstood how FreeSync works. FreeSync allows for the refresh rate to be synchronized to the frame rate. Having a higher range to operate is ideal. Having frames around 90-100, is an ideal situation where FreeSync is fully effective and active.

-

So many people overlook the key advantages of FreeSync and Gsync. Even going as far as trash talking them. In reality, they are the best types of frame synchronization technology to date. I have the feeling that these two have never used FreeSync or Gsync before. For most, once they use these technologies, they just cannot go back to anything else.

[🦊Λℚ𝓤ΛƑΛᗯҜᔕ🦊]

Escrito originalmente por Revelene:

You've definitely misunderstood how FreeSync works. FreeSync allows for the refresh rate to be synchronized to the frame rate. Having a higher range to operate is ideal. Having frames around 90-100, is an ideal situation where FreeSync is fully effective and active.

-

So many people overlook the key advantages of FreeSync and Gsync. Even going as far as trash talking them. In reality, they are the best types of frame synchronization technology to date. I have the feeling that these two have never used FreeSync or Gsync before. For most, once they use these technologies, they just cannot go back to anything else.

I totally understand how freesync works, as well as Gsync. I own a freesync monitor, even though I don't use AMD on it anymore it still goes up to 80hz even without an AMD card.

The thing though is facts: Even if freesync, a 144hz screen is going to cost more than say a 100hz or 120hz screen. If you're never going to use the upper range, freesync or not, it's quite literally a waste of money to spend more for something you never can use.

But hey, that's okay. It's only money. Just buy a 144hz screen anyway. May as well go ahead and buy a 240hz screen while you're at it. You'll never use that either but that doesn't matter, buy it anyway.

[愛と愛]

Escrito originalmente por icon_of_sin:

Is a vega64 a good gpu choice if im going for a 1440p gameing pc build with a freesync monitor?
And dont want ti pay £700+ for RTX

get AMD APU for FreeSync and do same thing as i do.
APU for Display
GPU for Video Proccesing and Rendering.
Get a nvidia gpu

[Revelene]

Escrito originalmente por Impending Rentacle Tape:

Escrito originalmente por Revelene:

You've definitely misunderstood how FreeSync works. FreeSync allows for the refresh rate to be synchronized to the frame rate. Having a higher range to operate is ideal. Having frames around 90-100, is an ideal situation where FreeSync is fully effective and active.

-

So many people overlook the key advantages of FreeSync and Gsync. Even going as far as trash talking them. In reality, they are the best types of frame synchronization technology to date. I have the feeling that these two have never used FreeSync or Gsync before. For most, once they use these technologies, they just cannot go back to anything else.

I totally understand how freesync works, as well as Gsync. I own a freesync monitor, even though I don't use AMD on it anymore it still goes up to 80hz even without an AMD card.

The thing though is facts: Even if freesync, a 144hz screen is going to cost more than say a 100hz or 120hz screen. If you're never going to use the upper range, freesync or not, it's quite literally a waste of money to spend more for something you never can use.

But hey, that's okay. It's only money. Just buy a 144hz screen anyway. May as well go ahead and buy a 240hz screen while you're at it. You'll never use that either but that doesn't matter, buy it anyway.

Okay, so you put the static refresh rate to 80hz. You do understand that does not make it sync'd and that you'll need to use another form of sync, which will have more latency than FreeSync, right?

It isn't just a 144hz monitor. We're talking about a 144hz monitor with adaptive sync tech. The higher the range, the better. No sense in making the experience worse on purpose by nerfing yourself to 60hz from the getgo, especially if you can manage 90-100 FPS. 90-100 FPS, sync'd with FreeSync or Gsync, will be a lot better of an experience over 60hz with any other type of vertical sync.

And besides all of that, it is better in the long term to have a monitor that will be able to go through multiple upgrades and builds.

[🦊Λℚ𝓤ΛƑΛᗯҜᔕ🦊]

Escrito originalmente por Revelene:

Okay, so you put the static refresh rate to 80hz. You do understand that does not make it sync'd and that you'll need to use another form of sync, which will have more latency than FreeSync, right?

It isn't just a 144hz monitor. We're talking about a 144hz monitor with adaptive sync tech. The higher the range, the better. No sense in making the experience worse on purpose by nerfing yourself to 60hz from the getgo, especially if you can manage 90-100 FPS. 90-100 FPS, sync'd with FreeSync or Gsync, will be a lot better of an experience over 60hz with any other type of vertical sync.

And besides all of that, it is better in the long term to have a monitor that will be able to go through multiple upgrades and builds.

Running a 144hz screen @ 100hz is the exact same experience as running a 100hz screen @ 100hz, adaptive sync or not. You just spend more money for the 144hz screen. But by all means, continue suggesting this to people. It's not your money. Why do you care if they're wasting it for something they'd never use. You probably make $4000/month and buying a screen that's -$100 to -$200 cheaper just because it's a 100hz one vs 144hz one doesn't even matter to you.

[Revelene]

Escrito originalmente por Impending Rentacle Tape:

Escrito originalmente por Revelene:

Okay, so you put the static refresh rate to 80hz. You do understand that does not make it sync'd and that you'll need to use another form of sync, which will have more latency than FreeSync, right?

It isn't just a 144hz monitor. We're talking about a 144hz monitor with adaptive sync tech. The higher the range, the better. No sense in making the experience worse on purpose by nerfing yourself to 60hz from the getgo, especially if you can manage 90-100 FPS. 90-100 FPS, sync'd with FreeSync or Gsync, will be a lot better of an experience over 60hz with any other type of vertical sync.

And besides all of that, it is better in the long term to have a monitor that will be able to go through multiple upgrades and builds.

Running a 144hz screen @ 100hz is the exact same experience as running a 100hz screen @ 120hz, adaptive sync or not. You just spend more money for the 144hz screen. But by all means, continue suggesting this to people. It's not your money. Why do you care if they're wasting it for something they'd never use. You probably make $4000/month and buying a screen that's -$100 to -$200 cheaper just because it's a 100hz one vs 144hz one doesn't even matter to you.

No, it is not the same. If you think having sync is the same as no sync, then you clearly do not have the knowledge, nor experience, to be giving advice about this subject.

144hz with FreeSync or Gsync syncronizing 100hz with 100 fps, will be a smooth experience with no tearing. 120 fps on a static 100hz will not be smooth and will have partial frame delivery (tearing). FreeSync and Gsync do more than simply change the refresh rate.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

Just stay away from AMD; they dont have anything good for extreme Gaming, period.
All they have are cheap GPUs focused around 1080p gameplay, nothing more.

Look for the sales on NVIDIA GTX 10 series

[Malygos]

Escrito originalmente por Bad_Motha:

Just stay away from AMD; they dont have anything good for extreme Gaming, period.
All they have are cheap GPUs focused around 1080p gameplay, nothing more.

Look for the sales on NVIDIA GTX 10 series

🍿

[Val]

1070ti or 1080 is better in terms of preformance, heat and power draw. Vega was a failure imo, hopefully navi works out better.