[SOLVED] FreeSync, Worth it? Vega 64 v/s 1080/2070/1070ti

Jan 10, 2019
14
0
10
0
Hey guys,
For my setup, i'm running Ryzen 5 2600x, 16 GB RAM, 250 SSD, 2TB HDD, 650W PSU and MSI Mobo and i have MSI MAG27CQ monitor which is freesync enabled.

My question is whether freesync is worth it? Also, what is adaptive sync? I mainly play games like Rainbow Six Siege, Battlefield, FPS games.
Based on calculations, the Vega 64 is going to cost me £40 more per year compared to Nvidea GPUs, so is freesync worth it?
 

tiaan_strauss

Proper
Jan 12, 2019
62
0
160
25
I used my Vega 64 since AMD launched it up until November 2018. I got the RTX 2070 because I helped my kid brother build his first pc & gave him the Vega.

I would not bargain on g sync working perfectly on every freesync & this needs to be considered. Thus far Nvidia have only 'certified' 12 monitors - you can try g sync on every freesync but according to nvidia there are 12 out there which they believe are the best.

In my opinion its not worth going out there & buying a g sync monitor + an nvidia card. If youve got the money by all means but it is a very expensive investment. I would only do this if I had the money & was able to sell the Freesync for a good price.

Like ive said, ive owned both freesync & g sync - they are very similar at the high end.

Whether you go for Vega 64 or 56 is up to you, but from experience I can tell you that a 56 is the better option between the two. Even just a quick overclock will bring the 56 to a stock 64 performance.

Watch to see what a heavily tweaked Vega 56 can do https://youtu.be/w6gpxe0QoUs

Watch to see vega 64 vs rtx 2070 https://youtu.be/gLgBHo-N1rA

One thing to note that is important, with vega cards you dont need to enable performance mode when gaming, the cards will consume significantly more power but dont offer much performance, I usually used power saving or balanced modes - performance changes were very minimal but power savings were drastic.

The vega 56 is the better value vega to go for, if you have the money get a 64 but the performance difference is marginal.

(Your power usage / cost figures are inaccurate, I can tell you from experience that I never noticed my electricity bill being more expensive, definitely not to the point of £50 :) )
 
Ok, one at a time.
FreeSync or GSync a.k.a. adaptive sync is a true solution to screen tearing and will help smoothen up games on lower FPS.
GSync monitors costs a lot more (€150-200 more) due to NVidia tax. GSync monitors are to be used only with NVidia cards and FreeSync monitors only with AMD cards.
There is an announcement from NVidia during CES 2019 about supporting FreeSync monitors, but this is still in need of real live testing.
The question one about getting an adaptive sync, the answer is yes, I would go for this.

Now, about Vega 64, I am not a big fan of Vega cards, they are hotter cand cost a bit more than the NVidia alternatives. I would rather go for NVidia cards for anything above RX580/GTX1060 6GB.

Vega 64 is more expensive and power hungrier but FreeSync monitors are cheaper.
Your call here!
 
Jan 10, 2019
14
0
10
0


Thing is, i already own a freesync monitor, now with the Nvidia announcement, maybe it's worth waiting a while before making the decision on GPU? Because on paper, Vega 64 seems lackluster due to its higher power requirements (£46 per year more than Nvidia system) and running hotter (potentially shorter life cycle).

Ignoring the startup costs, is freesync only really advantageous in low FPS situations? Or maybe take a punt and go for Nvidia, hoping they adapt to my freesync monitor?

In short, does freesync offer enough to offset the disadvantages of using Vega 64 compared to Nvidia?
 

tiaan_strauss

Proper
Jan 12, 2019
62
0
160
25
Freesync or any adaptive sync monitor is definately worth it.

One thing to note about Freesync is that you will get good & bad Freesync implementations at lower budget monitors, this is largely due to manufacturers of the monitors & not freesync itself.

Going up in budget you will find Freesync 2 monitors which have been officially certified by AMD to provide the best Freesync performannce. A Freesync 2 high end monitor & a high end g sync monitor perform almost identical & I caouldnt really tell any difference. Ive owned both high end freesync 2 & gsync.

Nvidia plan to enable g sync setting on all freesync monitors, but will only approve certain freesync monitors. (Basaically, you can enable g sync on any freesync monitor but the performance will be varied, only g sync certfied monitors will be the ones that passed nvidia testing. Essentially, nvidia plan to certify the high end Freesync 2 monitors as g sync certified).

On the Vega 64 question, ive had a vega 64 & I would rather recommend you get a Vega 56. Theres no need for a 64 & the 56 performs almost identical when overclocked. You can watch some review comparisons between the cards & see for yourself.

I had no problems with my Vega 64 & it crushed 1440p gaming, with time the Vega cards performance have improved greatly due to driver optimizations. If you go search youtube now 'vega 64 vs rtx 2070' you will find the 64 can beat the 2070 in a bunch of games.

I have a rtx 2070 right now & its hard telling the performance apart from a 64, especially because I heavily tweaked my 64.

I will say this though, the majority of people out there dont understand Vega cards. Vega is a tempramental GPU & not a plug & play GPU. With Vega you need to go to reditt & youtube for some overclocking guides - a tweaked vega 56 is easily capable of delivering an additional 30% performance (of course power consumption goes up as well)go. Ita because the Vega 56 can unleash an.extra 30% performance that the 64 really isnt worth it.

Go nvidia if you want plug & play, go vega if you want to tweak a gpu & fiddle around with it a bit.
 
Jan 10, 2019
14
0
10
0


Quick math using calculator tool on a website, where my setup was constant, the only variable was the GPU between 1070ti/1080/2070/Vega 64, calculated for 8 hours use twice a week and 4 hours use 5 times a week at 20p per unit rate.
 
Jan 10, 2019
14
0
10
0


Well it's my first ever build so maybe i should keep it simple? Really tempted with freesync however, like you said, possibly getting compatibility between Nvidia and Freesync monitors, so maybe that's worth a punt? I really only care about playing FPS games at 1440p 144Hz so yeah, seems like a bit of a dilemma, how long did you use your Vega 64 for overclocked and otherwise? Thanks.
 
Taking a reading of 200w extra power draw over a 2070, which is unrealistic unless you're wildly overclocking.

200w in the uk depending on your provider costs between 2 and 3 pence per hour.
So your estimated usage for 36 hours per week, assuming the gpu is running full tilt is £1.08 per week or £4.50ish per month max.

Your initial assumption of £40 per year would be a lot closer to the mark.
 

tiaan_strauss

Proper
Jan 12, 2019
62
0
160
25
I used my Vega 64 since AMD launched it up until November 2018. I got the RTX 2070 because I helped my kid brother build his first pc & gave him the Vega.

I would not bargain on g sync working perfectly on every freesync & this needs to be considered. Thus far Nvidia have only 'certified' 12 monitors - you can try g sync on every freesync but according to nvidia there are 12 out there which they believe are the best.

In my opinion its not worth going out there & buying a g sync monitor + an nvidia card. If youve got the money by all means but it is a very expensive investment. I would only do this if I had the money & was able to sell the Freesync for a good price.

Like ive said, ive owned both freesync & g sync - they are very similar at the high end.

Whether you go for Vega 64 or 56 is up to you, but from experience I can tell you that a 56 is the better option between the two. Even just a quick overclock will bring the 56 to a stock 64 performance.

Watch to see what a heavily tweaked Vega 56 can do https://youtu.be/w6gpxe0QoUs

Watch to see vega 64 vs rtx 2070 https://youtu.be/gLgBHo-N1rA

One thing to note that is important, with vega cards you dont need to enable performance mode when gaming, the cards will consume significantly more power but dont offer much performance, I usually used power saving or balanced modes - performance changes were very minimal but power savings were drastic.

The vega 56 is the better value vega to go for, if you have the money get a 64 but the performance difference is marginal.

(Your power usage / cost figures are inaccurate, I can tell you from experience that I never noticed my electricity bill being more expensive, definitely not to the point of £50 :) )
 
Jan 10, 2019
14
0
10
0


I pay approximately 20p per unit. i used this website to approximate my power consumption (https://outervision.com/power-supply-calculator)

Vega 64 (Weekly) : 8 hours x2 = £1.95 and 4 hours x5 = £2.421 == £4.375 per week or £228.38 per year
1080 (Weekly) : 8 hours x2 = £1.556 and 4 hours x5 = £1.93 == £3.486 per week or £181.969 per year

Hence, £46 difference between the two cards. This is all worst case scenario anyways, cause i don't envision myself using my PC for that many hours most of the time.
 
Jan 10, 2019
14
0
10
0


I shall take what you said on board, i should really do some research into OC tbh, i only just got my freesync monitor a couple weeks ago so it's not going anywhere soon, be interesting to compare Vega 56 to 64, as i really want to get into 1440p 144Hz gaming on AAA titles, so OC is something i might have to consider.

For the electricity estimates, look at my answer to another comment, atleast you'd be able to see my justifications, thanks for your help and opinion anyways!
 
Vega 56 and 64 are considered as power hungrier but I also do not think they will go to £50 more than GTX1070, 1070ti or 1080 per-month.
I am living in Europe, I do not think it will go this different.

I would wait a bit tho'., if possible. See how NVidia cards will run GSync on those FreeSync monitors, before buying anything. Monitor type decision tied up to GPU is one big b*ll-sh*t anyway in my opinion.
If waiting is not an option, Vega 56 looks more interesting in price/performance.
 
Jan 10, 2019
14
0
10
0


Not per month, its £50 more per year, anyways, just getting a preliminary build going, i don't plan on buying it for a month anyways, but it's better to do some research and reading into the unknown (AMD GPUs)!
I was actually wondering if you could even run Nvidia GPUs on any Freesync monitor with adaptive sync, as i've seen that term get thrown around a lot
 
Jan 10, 2019
14
0
10
0


i blame it being monday for this! Thanks for pointing it out though, i've corrected my mistake, so would you say Freesync is worth £46 more than Nvidia expenses, in the long run? I worry about the working temperatures so might have to use extra fans in the setup (worst case scenario )
 

BurgerandChips66

Reputable
Jan 11, 2016
681
0
5,360
141
I doubt it would even be £46 per year. A bit of under-volting and a Vega 64 will easily draw < 200W in gaming and will clock higher. I know this from experience. The GPU power draw is reported on screen by the driver, meaning you can be confident that your tweaking has worked. If you use Radeon Chill then the power draw is even less.

But I'd also agree to the comments above. Pick up a Vega 56. :)

I recently built a Vega 56 based system for a friend. With some under-volting and over-clocking it is hitting ~1610MHz and pulling ~150W in games on average. Performance is up vs. factory settings and power draw is less.
That's without using Radeon Chill. Vega 56 is a great card!
 
Jan 10, 2019
14
0
10
0


The difference between Vega 56 and 64 where i live is only about £50-70, so in the interest of futureproofing am i not better off with Vega 64?
 

Well, GSync running on FreeSync monitors is that one thing NVidia announced on the CES last week.
GSync should be able to run on many FreeSync monitors (not all).
How well this will look like, only time will tell and I am really holding my eyes on this topic.
 

BurgerandChips66

Reputable
Jan 11, 2016
681
0
5,360
141
Well if the price difference is that small for you right now, I guess you might as well.
But Vega 56 with FreeSync and a manual under-volt is going to be quite close in most games.
The scaling from 56 to 64 CU's is often not as much as you would expect, depending on the game ofc.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS