TR Forums

Vega seems to game just fine so far. I have no intention of mining with it.

At $400 +$7 shipping for the Radeon RX Vega56 graphics card and $650 + free shipping for the Samsung C32HG70 monitor (31½", 2560x1440, 144 Hz, FreeSync2, HDR, Quantum Dot VA, etc.), I'm satisfied with the value. If I had continued to use my old 60 Hz fixed refresh rate monitor, a $750 GeForce GTX1080Ti, a $565 GTX1080, a $475 GTX1070 or a GeForce GTX980Ti would have been fine, but the high price of proprietary G-Sync monitors is very unattractive.

Unfortunately, the mining craze is not helping gamers right now:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/why-bitcoin- ... 47899.html

Airmantharp wrote:

Wattage is more like 240W, but that's the kind of return that miners have been banking on.

It is actually less than that. The user was underclocking and undervolting the crap out of the chip trying to find a sweet spot. Vega chip doesn't consume that much power if you tone things down. HBM2 memory was overclocked but it hardly consumes any power by comparison. You can get similar results if not better with any of the Pascal chips if you are adventurous with underclocking and undervolting. It is a commonplace among the near-silence/silence PC gaming crowd.

It only means that Vega might be attractive to miners who are adventurous in the short-term before difficulty wall makes GPU mining untenable.

JustAnEngineer wrote:

Vega seems to game just fine so far.

At $400 +$7 shipping for the Radeon RX Vega56 graphics card and $650 + free shipping for the Samsung C32HG70 monitor (31½", 2560x1440, 144 Hz, FreeSync2, HDR, Quantum Dot VA, etc.), I'm satisfied with the value..

Nice combo.

JustAnEngineer wrote:

C32HG70

ooh I could've asked you apparently. I just ordered a C32HG70, how is it? I noticed my HDR TV (which sucked as a monitor for various reasons) had so much better blues and general color accuracy than this Omen 32, but the TV only did 1440p@30 (or 4K@60) and flaked out when the vidcard switched back to SDR for stuff so that didn't work for me.

JustAnEngineer wrote:

I'm satisfied with the value.

Your only requirement is for it to have AMD stamped on the silicon, that's not a high hurdle.

If I had continued to use my old 60 Hz fixed refresh rate monitor, a $750 GeForce GTX1080Ti, a $565 GTX1080, a $475 GTX1070 or a GeForce GTX980Ti would have been fine, but the high price of proprietary G-Sync monitors is very unattractive.

The latter is kind of irrelevant since you'd never buy the former any way. I'd also note that FreeSync2 is proprietary (as is HDMI FreeSync) and AMD is pinky swearing they'll make it open. Sure they will.

Radeon FreeSync 2 is an AMD proprietary standard, but they will eventually push for it to be an open standard.

There's a reason that monitor is so cheap. FreeSync2 has numerous issues. Issues that fit with the old saying of you get what you pay for. That monitor doesn't meet either HDR standard (HDR10 or Dolby Vision). No where in the manual or on the official website does it ever say it's HDR10 or Dolby Vision, it just says HDR. Technically FreeSync2 can't use HDR10 or Doly Vision, so there's a reason Samsung did this. So when you quote those specifications, you really should put some air quotes around that HDR.

Optimised for HDR gaming, Radeon FreeSync 2 is a compromise between the wider colour gamut of HDR10 / Dolby Vision, and the low input lag of sRGB.
It offers a limited HDR colour gamut that is over 2X the perceivable brightness and colour volume of sRGB. The FreeSync 2 game can then tone-map to the display’s native colour space. This allows the monitor to skip the tone mapping step, which greatly reduces the input lag.

This HDR issues also leads to this next problem.

Games that do not integrate the AMD FreeSync 2 API, or use game engines that support it, will not be able to automatically switch to HDR mode, or use the FreeSync 2 transport.

Oops.

Sauce:
http://www.techarp.com/articles/amd-freesync-2-qa-2016/
https://www.techarp.com/articles/radeon ... -report/2/

Ryu Connor wrote:

So when you quote those specifications, you really should put some air quotes around that HDR.

That pretty much covers at least 90% of HDR displays available from anything I've read...the tech isn't quite there yet.

Personally, I'm OK with that. Seems like it'd just serve to be blinding on a monitor.

Ryu Connor wrote:

Games that do not integrate the AMD FreeSync 2 API, or use game engines that support it, will not be able to automatically switch to HDR mode, or use the FreeSync 2 transport.

I should also mention that I doubt that'll cause any more problems than 'you have to click a button instead of have it turned on automatically.' We'll see.

LostCat wrote:

That pretty much covers at least 90% of HDR displays available from anything I've read...the tech isn't quite there yet.

Personally, I'm OK with that. Seems like it'd just serve to be blinding on a monitor.

That's why Windows 10 CU maps HDR monitors back into sRGB when enabled.

Impressive would be the minimum panel specs NVIDIA has decided that they want for G-Sync HDR. QLED, full HDR10 display with a minimum of 384 LED zones, 4K, and 30-144Hz. That's a much better monitor than the C32HG70 in every category (even refresh rate) and I'm sure the price will match. The purchase of FS2 supports a proprietary standard, removing a bastion of smug superiority. AMD likes money, who knew?

I should also mention that I doubt that'll cause any more problems than 'you have to click a button instead of have it turned on automatically.' We'll see.

Aye, we'll see.

Ryu Connor wrote:

I'm sure the price will match.

Match what? Two or three of the 1440p non G-Sync version? hah.

I'd love to see the details on win10s HDR remapping though. I know I saw them somewhere...

HDR and VRR have two completely different goals in mind.

HDR10 and Dolby Vision are meant for the A/V-videophile market, while VRR is meant for the framerate-junkie gaming market. I doubt they are going to be converging anytime soon.

Krogoth wrote:

HDR and VRR have two completely different goals in mind.

HDR10 and Dolby Vision are meant for the A/V-videophile market, while VRR is meant for the framerate-junkie gaming market. I doubt they are going to be converging anytime soon.

They kinda already have. Windows 10, Xbox One S, X, PS4, and PS4 Pro support HDR with more than a few games.

Xbox One X also supports Freesync 2/probably HDMI 2.1 VRR

AMD said they think HDR with 1080p will be more impressive than 4K (or something, I read it a while ago.)