I got a Vega 64 as a gift, can a 600W PSU handle it or do i have to shell out for 750W. i have a ryzen 1600(no OC yet)...

I got a Vega 64 as a gift, can a 600W PSU handle it or do i have to shell out for 750W. i have a ryzen 1600(no OC yet), and 16gb of ddr4, every PSU calculator shows it at about 580W peak but is it worth risking

Sell or trade it for a GTX-1070.

That calculator is retarded wrong. Vega 64 averages 290W max on furmark and 1600 65W max on prime95. You'll get nowhere this power draw in gaymen and very few things require the GPU AND CPU on 100% maximun load.

fuck off you retard

not in a million years mr.goldberg, it has the same performance as a 1080 and with some overclocking it will surpass it

what about overclocking, will it still keep in reasonable wattage, with an undervolt ofcourse

ye, that power consumption was at stock. vega should able to undervolt a nice 100-200 mV

Sell it to some minerfag and buy a 1080ti.

thanks for the huge ammount of help, do you know where i can find typical OC,undervolt results and also i have never undervolted how should i go about it? like 10-20mv until i notice drop in performance?

Just undervolt for cooler performance and lower wattage for the same power

What the hell is going on here.
I thought VEGA was shit?


(also, fuck tripfags :^) )

thread OP here, the card looks fucking amazing and for the price the person bought it for i dont think there was a better alternative, even a 1080 was more expensive than it(infact the MSI 1070 Gaming X was just as much)

sell it to a miner

buy 1080 ti

im not buying goyvidea

your loss. i sold my 390 for $400 and bought a 1070 for it.

oc and uv benches

enjoy your gimping experience

> (You)
>thanks for the huge ammount of help, do you know where i can find typical OC,undervolt results and also i have never undervolted how should i go about it? like 10-20mv until i notice drop in performance?
pretty much, then run furmark for an hour each undervolt to confirm that it's stable. I recommend doing 100mV from the start to speed things up, it's most likely stable.

used to be, see primitive shaders on vega

Also it turns out most cards were overvolted, which is why miners hogged them

can't be worse than the crimson drivers experience on the 390

well atleast the 390 didnt have 3.5/4 right, oh and it was destroying the 970 in no time, nvidia's NEW AND AMAZING MAXWELL was getting rekt by a rehash of the r9 290, the 390 hold strong almost 3 years later while the 970 is wheezing even in 1080p

whats the worst that can happen if it turns out its not stable? same as OC?(driver resets and resets your settings to default)

>5% faster on average
Wow so all that hype and this is what we end up with.

and also as a previous owner of an R9 390(which is currently held by my brother) i can tell you that i've never had any problems with it(moved to a 980 as a place holder in april this year)

why 750? buy a 850W already and you're done

take a look at those 1070 prices and i assure you you can find a vega 56 for the same or even less price and also both vegas beat a 1080 while undervolted and overclocked, which even a retard can do

600W is fine, unless you're running an FX9590 or an i9

yea i might aswell buy a 1000W and be done

R9 290 here
Drivers are great right now
Much better than nvidia

>buying a 750 watt psu
bait

don't know what you're reading or why you're being a paid shill but both cards are neck and neck even in 2017. there's no "destroying" being done on either side. just oc both and they're perfect 1080p60 graphics cards.

i'm actually in the process of buying this palit 970 for a 2nd uni pc i'm building with a ryzen 3 1200

There are people unironically defending vega, even though Raja was fired for it

Hey, r/amd

>neck and neck
sure bud

>i assure you you can find a vega 56 for the same or even less price

can't tell if bait or just stupidly uninformed

and some green favoring benchmarks incase you dont believe me

There is a $90 price difference between the cheapest 1070 and cheapest vega 56. While vega is a bit faster the $90 higher cost is hard to justify. Price to performance is just not there.

well tough luck cunt, i found a vega 56 for 425 euros in the good ol EU

>2 games

woahh

woahhhhh

HUB did testing on both just a few months ago and they were literally the exact same performance in minimums and average across like 30+ games. the differences were the regular 50%+ power usage of amd gpu but that's expected anyway. i don't know why you're getting so riled up about 2 cards being the same.

you started talking about 2017, i know these cards dont do a lot current year, i was talking more about how fast AMD caught up and killed the 970 at a point considering how the 970 was highly shilled by nvidia and was their pearl and the r9 390 was a beefed up 290

funny, because i also live in europe. your statement was relating to the present. it's false.

i will not give you the site i got it from(since i plan to buy more) but i am totally honest its 425, no need to believe me, i got a vega 56 you got a 1070 both cards are great choices and will last years

ok amd shill

>caught up

what? it released like 8 months after the 970 and was competitive throughout. considering it had like 75% more shader cores and all this extra other fancy tech, it should actually be better on average than it is now. it wasn't a logical buy anyway. when 2 gpu are the same, the one with the lower temps and power to achieve the same as the other one with the same performance is always the better buy.

i don't fully regret paying more for the 390 but there were better options now that i think back. that's why i'm buying a 970 for my second build

oh yea mate im so shilling for AMD considering i care only about performance doesnt matter who delivers maybe instead of using the retarded pc parts picker you should have actually looked around

>my dad works at nintendo

lol say what you want, grapes are always sour when you cant reach em

yeah dude i bought a 1080ti for $5 the other day! i will not give you the site i got it from but i am totally honest its $5

oh yea i totally need to lie on an anonymous basket weaving forum

If it's a polish site, i know it

>Prime95
>For testing CPU power
Get a load of this guy.Swift

nope not polish

>claims something
>gets proven wrong with multiple pieces of evidence
>doesn't provide any counter evidence which anyone with a brain will do
>"P-PLS BELIEVE M-M-ME!!!"

yeah nah fuck off

grapes are sour when you cant reach them, read that story its pretty interesting

greek

nope

You basically fucked

...

we know, no need to rub it in. don't know how anyone can defend this

as someone who went from a 390x to a 1080 i can say your full of shit

AMD monumentally fucked up with Vega

Ryzen on the other hand is excellent

i cant its why i went with this

As someone with a 290X 8GB now, you're full of shit.

>fuck off you retard

Rude

Also, OP didn't specify his goal here other then reducing energy consumption. A GTX 1070 consumes less power and is still good, so that's what I do.

>total system power
That's the entire system's power use at the wall. How about posting the full system specs?

is this bait? the point being made is that with all the other components being a constant, the gpu is the only changing factor and the 1080 uses significantly less power whilst currently being faster

and also a lot more expensive compared to the vega MSRP and actual price in some places, power consumption is a meme that ammounts to a few dollars on your bill yearly, point is im too lazy to buy a new PSU and was wondering if it was possible to go with my existing 600W

>AMD cards
>overclocking

buying a 750W isnt a problem for me and it doesnt matter on my bill either way

oh boy i see how good you researched your RX Vega before coming to shitpost here

>and also a lot more expensive compared to the vega MSRP

holy shit how uninformed are you? the msrp of vega 64 and gtx 1080 is the same at $499. the actual price of vega is insanely more expensive than 1080

Enjoy 500watts of usage from the GPU alone meanwhile my 1080 oc used 200 watts oc

who gives a shit cunt, if you have to care about power usage you shouldnt get into PC gaming

A 290x uses like 30W more than a 1080

more future proof

Power consumption should be going down. This isn't 2005 any more

not nessesarily, back in 2005 shit sucked because PSUs were unefficient as fuck and components were hot as fuck +
everything actually good had horrible power effieciency so there was no choice, in the current year there is plenty of components to choose from so you can go with an efficient pc or a total power house, and power supplies are pretty great nowadays

>not nessesarily
Oh, fuck off. RTG is the only one putting out super high power consumption parts.

no one is making you buy it, if you have the money to throw on 4K the power draw wont make much difference to you, if not then there are tons of budget/mid-high tier cards with great power draws and you have the choice to buy any of them

I care about thermals you stupid fuck

A 180 watt card runs cooler and has higher boost clocks than a 300+ monster

Vega is dogshit as well as Hawaii xt it's just so slow and outdated

3xx and Vega 64 is a fucken horrid abortion

600W is fine.

>Any discussion involves GPUs
>Turns into AMD vs Nvidia fanboy fights within 5 posts every time

Just because it's easier to overclock than your overly complex nvidia shit, doesn't mean it can't overclock.