Would a Vega 56 age better than a 1080ti?

Would a Vega 56 age better than a 1080ti?

Attached: vega.jpg (2400x1800, 156K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=w_FJyfttrwU&t=439s
youtube.com/watch?v=RzOuIbIIsQE
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

not on raw performances but probably on price per performance

better than your mom

A Vega 56 is never going to touch 1080 Ti performance, no matter how much you age it. You can't buy a 1080 Ti for a sane price any more though, so it's a better purchase on price to performance.

If NVIDIA in the future neglects Pascal just like they did with Kepler, it could. Have you seen the 780 Ti lately? An RX 470 consistently slaughters it.

>A GPU released in 2016 beats a GPU released in 2013.
Go on.

My 64 sure rocks still.

Attached: 1534702979955.png (1920x966, 2.54M)

Come up with a more original response. I saw that one coming.

>Come up with a more original fact. I am retarded.
No, amdjeet. You can't compare a 5yr old GPU with a 2yr old GPU unless you're specifically comparing a GPU with a newer one of the same line.

not sure if retarded

youtube.com/watch?v=w_FJyfttrwU&t=439s

You may not be sure if I'm retarded, but I'm sure you are.

Will it ever be faster than a 1080ti? Probably not.

Will it's relative performance over the years probably be better? Yeah.

>2023
>have to switch to legacy nvidia drivers
>no fixes, no performance improvements
>2028
>drivers are dropped from all repos
vs
>2023
>excellent performance on the in-kernel driver
>maintained and kept up to date, even if nobody much is interested in them now
>2028
>vega cards still passable for a number of older games
>in-kernel driver quiet but it still works

A 280 also performs on par...

Have you seen the Fury X recently, my dear little shill? Not only has it still not gotten anywhere near the 980 Ti, but it's now pretty much on par with a 580. A card itself on par with a 390X at launch... except the 390X is now mysteriously way off the pace of the 580 in newer titles.

So much for FineWine™ eh? More like GimpTime™ for anything that's not a current model.

Attached: 1080p.png (1328x2537, 160K)

Finewine is a meme. It's the newer tech in the engines that don't run as well anymore on the 2013 hawaii chips. Fiji is a fucking guinea pig abortion that AMD hopefully will kill for good soon. The 390x only aged well when compared to the 900 series.

>not gotten anywhere near the 980 Ti
>literally right underneath it in the chart and only 8 frames less on the average and 6 frames less on the 1% low
We see who the real shill is. How much is Ngreedia paying you to shill on Jow Forums?

So what you're saying is that it's still well behind a stock 980 Ti, even in Battlefield V, which is an absolute best case scenario game for AMD cards? Glad we got that cleared up. Good thing the 980 Ti isn't making use of its 30% overclocking headroom (compared to the Fury X's LOL%) or things might get REALLY embarrassing!

Imagine shilling this hard for Maxwell. Turing is out, Nvidiot. Although I'm sure you shill for that too. Man, Nshittia must be paying you big bucks to not only shill for their current shit, but also their older shit.

Attached: KAPLEMc.png (1278x770, 569K)

I just bought a 2700x + ASRock taichi x470 board and plan to go with the current $400 Vega 64. I really hope this fucking card is good. My wife has a 8700k + gtx 1080 so I will have something to compare it easily.

Also, someone share some good ram deals for my Ryzen build.

When the Vega 64 loses to the GTX 1080, it loses by a little. When the Vega 64 beats the GTX 1080, it gets into 1080 Ti territory. FineWine is real.

Source: youtube.com/watch?v=RzOuIbIIsQE

Vega was never a super-solid product, due to being factory overclocked to the limit to compensate for never fixing GCN's geometry throughput due to busted primitive discard acceleration.

GCN is clearly long overdue for a massive overhaul, so Vega is a lot less early to get "fine wine" treatment in comparison to things like early-mid GCN.

That is a valid comparison, however from what I've seen that's not true. A 780ti is on par with a 290x according to what I've seen. However, let's also not forget that the 780ti is far more efficient.

I'm buying a Vega 56 due to this comment.

Should I get a reference 64 for 400 bucks instead of a 1070ti for 380 bucks?

I still don't know if I believe this...his 2070 died. So maybe those shit scores is related to that.

Attached: 2018-11-17 12_15_30.jpg (907x555, 329K)

Wonder if his was a TU104-400 or 400A die?

theres no way to compare a vega 56 to a 1080ti. theyre entirely different leagues
with that said vega 56 has been holding up breddy gud as long as its not a game from ubisoft which run shit for everyone anyway
also its not a very plug n play friendly hard like a 1080ti would be. you really gotta tweak it to your liking because stock profiles are shit
protip: undervolt and oc vram

IMO they're going to age better as soon as we hit 7nm, since will be only 5/3nm in a long way ahead. And this is the part where they milk most of performance.
So next year for AMD at least.

I just bought a 1070ti for $390 and kind of wondering the same thing. Have until early February to return it so will just use it until then.