add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube

Vega 64 or Vega 56 1440p

RowanJ22

7 months ago

Hello everyone, I am tied between getting a 64 or 56. I’m pretty sure that they are only within %10 performance of each other, making the 56 the better buy. I’m just not too experienced with Vega, especially with the new 2019 drivers. Already had Nvidia so I don’t need anyone telling me to buy GTX or RTX. I wanted a really nice 1440p freesync monitor so the goal is to have a decent refresh rate at this resolution, I mainly play BFV but will love to play more AAA titles as well, all inputs are welcome, thank you.

Comments

  • 7 months ago
  • 1 point

The 64 performs similarly to a 1080, but the 56 performs more like a 1070.

  • 7 months ago
  • 1 point

Yup already new that, looking for more on how the new performance is with the new drivers, people experienced in undervolting or OC, and is the price difference justifiable for the performance difference.

  • 7 months ago
  • 1 point

looking for more on how the new performance is with the new drivers,

Things that have not been acknowledged as broken are still broken, things that are fixed are fixed, bugs are still bugs.

people experienced in undervolting or OC

Very specific to the card itself the 64 I had needed every bit of voltage or issues started popping up like crazy but others have had good luck with them.

and is the price difference justifiable for the performance difference.

The price for them hasn't been worth it with how the market has changed unless you are getting a aftermarket 64 in the $325 or lower range.

  • 7 months ago
  • 1 point

Thank you for your reply.

  • 7 months ago
  • 1 point

56 but make sure it has a good cooler.

  • 7 months ago
  • 2 points

word, thanks.

  • 7 months ago
  • 1 point

With prices right now, I'm not seeing any cheaper Vega 56 on the new market, and many of those come with Hynix memory that doesn't allow for flashing Vega 64 BIOS or other tweaks to really make it shine. My sample has Hynix memory that can barely overclock at all, no matter the voltage. So at the $400 price point, you have some better cooled Vega 56 units and some reference cooler Vega 64 units. Between the two, I'd generally lean toward the Vega 64, then tweaking it especially in terms of undervolting and fan curve.

The competition would be the RTX 2060, which can be overclocked to perform closer to the 2070. Overall in games like BFV I'd expect it to be fairly similar or slightly slower than the Vega 64 even when both are tweaked. Vega 56 would depend on the Samsung memory lottery, and would max out at slightly slower than RTX 2060 when overclocked or slightly faster than a stock Vega 64. This is based on benchmarks I've seen of both cards. The other downsides of Vega would be power consumption and slightly higher price, but the upside would be 2GB more VRAM.

  • 7 months ago
  • 1 point

Appreciate the information, I have seen a few benchmark videos myself, and almost all of them have the Vega 56 running just behind the 64 with in a %10 margin, they both outperform the 2060, I don't know how true this is but it was from a few benchmarks I have seen on the tube, I have been researching the Vega 56 for a few months now and have not seen too many board partner cards get too hot, as long as undervolted properly, I work on Aircraft electronics so I don't mind tinkering with things. I am just looking for people who have seen both of the Vega Cards performance in person at 1440p, I would love to take their opinions into account, because so far what I am seeing is that if I can over clock/ undervolt the Vega 56 to stock 64 or higher, then why should I spend an extra $100 for minimal performance, Liquid cooled 64 is out of the question, because they are still too expensive, and really not going to get any reference 64's, sure they are cheaper but at the cost of higher thermals and noise. Hope you can see where I'm coming from.

  • 7 months ago
  • 1 point

My point with the Vega 56 cards is that you will actually spend about the same or slightly more than a reference Vega 64, and you would not be guaranteed to hit those tweaked performance numbers unless you are sure a particular model comes with Samsung memory. So at that point, you would be better off tweaking a reference Vega 64 to perform only slightly better than stock but improve the thermals.

  • 7 months ago
  • 1 point

I guess I will do more research on Reference 64’s, thanks for the input.

Sort

add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube