Sapphire Vega 64 Nitro+: I don't know why this card has 1200 RPM as a minimum fan speed. By default, semi-passive mode is enabled, but it can't stay in passive mode for a long time. So it's like a few minutes of silence, then a few seconds of 1200 RPM horrible vacuum cleaner sound. On previous driver versions I was able to decrease minimum fan speed to ~700 rpm. The new driver (with new wattman interface for fan tweaks) doesn't allow me to do that, I can't move any point lower than 28-30% - 1200 RPM. Is there any solution other than downgrading the driver?
I also have a Sapphire Vega 64 Nitro+ (11275-03)
They have broken the fans with 18.12.2
Fanless mode at low temps is totally broken with this even at stock settings it runs at 1255 at the lowest (reset to default in wattman)
Its default fanprofile is
Minimum 300 rpm
Maximum 1500 rpm
Target Temp 70
it runs at 1255 rpm min now with and like 2700 rpm at 70 the 70 target
maybe you lot should test your best 3rd party card before rolling this crap out
RX Vega 64 Liquid 'owner' here.
Fan profiles in Wattman to set RPM are working fine for me. Must be a problem with the Sapphire Vega 64 Nitro+
However I cannot set a temperature target anymore.
Here is a screenshot.
I cannot move that Max Temperature Target at all.
I normally use the max temp Target after running benchmarks I set it to minimum and fans to max and the gpu cools down fast without changing other GPU Parameters.
Hope that helps somewhat.
Have not loaded the driver on my RX580. If they removed the temp limit there it will kill my stability. I have to set a custom limit or it throttles and crashes every time. Even just browsing the web.
Same problem here, zero RPM feature doesn't work
min fan speed is 29% no matter what
Sapphire Vega 56 Pulse
Understood. I do not know why they keep doing things like this.
Removing useful features and adding nonsense in it's place.
I predict you will have fun with the auto-overclocking feature. For me it's an instant Black Screen and System hang.
I guess it saves time actually launching a game to only have it happen anyhow though.
The auto undervolt seems to just set the undervolt to the default value ...
The auto memory overclock does seem to do something. It sets the memory overclock on my RX Vega 64 Liquid to 1080. I was running at 1100 anyhow.
I bought an RTX2080 OC 2 weeks ago. It cost only 20 more than the RX Vega 64 Liquid if I include the cost of a free copy of BFV and the difference between it and the RX Vega 64 Liquid is night and day. Running Adrenalin 18.12.1 with the RX Vega 64 Liquid, at least 1-3 Black Screen and system hang crash a day. I have not had a single crash with the RTX2080 OC. It is about 20-30% faster in DX12 in 3DMark TimeSpy at 2K/4K and the real world running at stock clocks versus the RX Vega 64 Liquid overclocked and undervolted to the limit. DX 11 performance in 3DMark Firestrike/Ultra/Extreme is closer, at 1080p/2K/4K 8/4/1% but the actual game performance is better in DX11 on the RTX2080OC.
Fair enough I need to check Firestrike with the Adrenalin 18.12.2 drivers.
If you do move to 18.12.2, do not use incremental update. It is broken. Download and run 18.12.2 installer. Thenm Disconnect from internet. Run DDU in safe mode to remove AMD Drivers. Reboot into normal mode. Run 18.12.2 installer. Then connect to Internet.
When I used the incremental installer, ReLive was totally broken, I could not record anything.
I still have to look at OpenCL performance between the 2 cards.
Having said all of the above I am hoping I do not get hit with a free copy of 'space invaders' on the RTX2080OC. The GPU has a 2 year warranty though.
I forgot to mention. The above performance figures for comparison in 3Mark were run on the following system:
CPU i7-4790K running at stable +15% OC (4.6GHz.)
Asus Z97 Deluxe Motherboard.
Ram = 32GB DDR3 running at 1600MHz.
GPU 1 = Palit RTX 2080 OC Gaming Pro.
GPU 2 = XFX RX Vega 64 Liquid.
SSHD = 2TB Firecuda.
OS = Windows 10 64 Bit version 18.03 updated to latest patches.
I was surprised at how close the RX Vega 64 Liquid was to catching the RTX 2080 OC in DX11.
However I am only running a Devils' Canyon I7-4790K, and Intel's latest Desktop GPU's are significantly faster now (i7-8700K).
Those i7-8700K are used in majority of gaming performance benchmarks, and using those may extend the lead of the RTX2080OC card.
Just out of curiosity a lot of the Vega complaint I see here complain of, even at acceptable frame rates they perceive stuttering and overall choppiness. Is this something you have experienced and how does the general fluidity of game play compare between both makes flagship products?
RE: Just out of curiosity a lot of the Vega complaint I see here complain of, even at acceptable frame rates they perceive stuttering and overall choppiness.
I do not think I have ever mentioned this.
If you discuss BF1 and BFV in DX12 though ... Both the RTX2080 OC and the RX Vega 64 Liquid suffer from stutter and choppiness in DX12 in these games.
The RTX2080 OC seems a bit worse overall in terms of stutter and choppiness in DX12 in some parts of BFV and BF1 but it has significantly higher overall frame rate in DX12, and best of all, it has not crashed or black screened or frozen my PC once in either game. So although sometimes it will get stutter or choppy, at least it does not require a PC Reboot, and driver reinstall...
Also here is the kicker. If the DX12 choppiness and stutter in DX12 does get annoying with the RTX2080 GPU, just switch over to DX11 instead and I get a comparable framerate to the RX Vega 64 Liquid in DX12 but much smoother gameplay. If I run the RX Vega 64 Liquid in DX11 the framerate is much lower.
When the RX Vega 64 Liquid does run in BF1 or BFV it runs at lower frame rates overall with Adrenalin 18.12.1. It just about manages 60 FPS in BF1 DX12 Ultra at 4K with 120 degree horizontal FOV. The RTX 2080 OC runs at ~ 80 FPS with same settings.
The problem is the RX Vega 64 Liquid crashes with a black screen and system hang after 5-10 minutes of gameplay, usually during one of those DX12 stutter choppiness events - so perhaps the difference is that the Nvidia Driver doesn't crash during these events, but the AMD Driver does?
I am running the RX Vega 64 Liquid GPU in Turbo Mode + some custom settings - mild 0.5% OC on the GPU with 50mv undervolt on top state and running the HBM2 at 1100 with a 25mv undervolt. Fans maxed out. Temp and fan targets maxed out. Adrenalin 18.12.1. Not had enough experience with 18.12.2 but looking like I will be rolling back until 18.12.2 is actually ready for release. It is buggy as hell and should not have been released from what I see so far.
As for 'FreeSync' on the RX Vega 64 Liquid via Display Port versus RTX2080 OC over HDMI.
The RTX 2080 OC maintains 60 FPS so I can turn Vsync on. Other than that I can use Nvidia fast sync or adaptive sync ... you can look up what they do.
Screen tear has not been an issue running at 4K. I have set the Nvidia color range to full, and I am running the Nvidia GPU in performance mode.
Running the Nvidia GPU with the Freesync monitor has not been an issue at all.
I bought the RTX 2080OC instead of a GTX1080Ti Mini, because of the deal I got. The RTX 2080OC worked out cheaper because of the free copy of BFV.
Never said you mentioned it said I have read it before, no I don't think it was you. Thanks for the information. I am only asking as I have been seriously thinking of getting a Vega 64 as one is cheap on New Egg, but I keep running into more and more reasons not to. Was hoping you could negate or confirm one of them for me. I know you test the heck out of this stuff and I value your opinion, so thanks!
The funny thing is I had really already decided to stay with RX 580 as you just confirmed the choppiness in BFV. This game is my chief concern as I play that series more than any other. My RX 580 plays smooth as butter in DX12 so anything else is a downgrade in my book. My monitor maxes at 76 hz and I am getting right at 60 most the time and it is a 60 native screen at 1440p. I mostly wanted to future proof a bit, and make some other games that do dip lower better. None of those however are unplayable and all still well enough over 30fps.
So it is sounding more and more that for me, best to just wait for a future card from either maker at a future date that improves performance and I can afford.