AMD Vega Hardware Reviews
- Thread starter ArkeoTP
- Start date
http://www.anandtech.com/show/11717/the-amd-radeon-rx-vega-64-and-56-review/8
It looks like the vega 56 soundly beats the 1070 and sometimes the 1080 fe the few times the 1070 wins its at only 1080p . The one exception is GTA 5 where the 1070 craps all over even the vega 64 .
Vega 64 performs similar to the 1080fe where sometimes it can stretch to come close to a 1080ti with it typicly staying at about the 1080fe speed.
One interesting thing is that in some tests its within in a frame or two of the 56 edtion . Whats going on here that in Dawn of war 3 its 1-3 fps diffrent ? Thats the margin of error .
Anyway it seems like the 56 is a good card to pick up. Its priced the same as the 1070 and performs mostly better than it.
For me the power usage would drop down from my 290 and performance would sky rocket . So if prices don't sky rocket for mining and I can get it for $400 on amazon with my discount knocking it to $360 i think its a solid choice for me to get. But again i will see how hard they are to get
It looks like the vega 56 soundly beats the 1070 and sometimes the 1080 fe the few times the 1070 wins its at only 1080p . The one exception is GTA 5 where the 1070 craps all over even the vega 64 .
Vega 64 performs similar to the 1080fe where sometimes it can stretch to come close to a 1080ti with it typicly staying at about the 1080fe speed.
One interesting thing is that in some tests its within in a frame or two of the 56 edtion . Whats going on here that in Dawn of war 3 its 1-3 fps diffrent ? Thats the margin of error .
Anyway it seems like the 56 is a good card to pick up. Its priced the same as the 1070 and performs mostly better than it.
For me the power usage would drop down from my 290 and performance would sky rocket . So if prices don't sky rocket for mining and I can get it for $400 on amazon with my discount knocking it to $360 i think its a solid choice for me to get. But again i will see how hard they are to get
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
Tomshardware did.
31MHash/s, clearly not worth the miners' money.
Though anandtech did discuss it a bit and suggested these are still unoptimized results and miners are bound to explore even bios hacks to increase the mining performance.
Consumer Pascal was pretty much the same over Maxwell. The exception was that Pascal had a much better base to grow on.
DavidGraham
Veteran
Komplett.no and .se just listed their prices, they're actually what they should be (4999 norwegian kronor / 5090 swedish kronor cheapest, which is about 533 euros, prices include VAT)
Anarchist4000
Veteran
Stop what? Just because you don't like the facts doesn't make them wrong. What I said is indicated in the first review linked and it doesn't take a genius to reach a similar conclusion or not reject the evidence.
At 250-275W with balanced settings Vega LE is around 1080ti performance in Battlefield 1. Maybe 5% under. Stick 20-30% more on that from FP16 and the math is real simple. That doesn't even account for the inevitable driver fixes as obvious there are still some issues in places.
Not sure about similar power, but the faster card may be using a bit more power in that case. Explained the math above, but doesn't seem much of a stretch based on what devs have ave achieved so far. Only a problem if buying Vega to play old games at really high framerates.
In current titles sure, but upcoming titles that actually use the new features? With no other changes the FP16 alone would make them equal.
It'd be an even better deal for consumers.
But it'd still be a 484mm2 chip with HBM that competes against one that's 315mm2 with GDDR5X and still a bad chip, Jerry, very very bad.
Fury X was released shortly after the 980Ti, with almost equal perf and perf/mm2. Vega is in R600 territory.
Forget about Navi, Vega simply has no business performing the way it does. They should fix whatever bottleneck bug there is and relaunch in 9 months or so. Though power may issue if it runs at full perf/mm2 efficiency.
Err, it's the biggest change in architecture since first GCN
Why forget about Navi ? AMD should be putting all its resources in getting Navi out the door . If they can have navi out in 9 months its best for them especially if its not based on GCN but something new. Leave the old stuff behind and just forge foward. In the anand review sometimes the 56 is 1-3 frames behind the 64 so its obvious something isn't scaling anymore in GCN on certian engines
Are you really being serious?
DavidGraham
Veteran
In one game with botched up API support? What about the dozens where it's actually only 1070 level of performance? What about the weak 1080p performance across the board?
Where are the facts? I don't see them, link please!
First there was the magic drivers, then DSBR, then now of course FP16. Yeah just like Async Compute, we all know how well that one turned out. (hint: not well).
Rootax
Veteran
I guess he said forget about Navi because AMD need a faster card before Navi arrive. Navi is, what, 1,5 years away ? Best case scenario ? So...
Rootax
Veteran
(Well async gave a nice small free boost for my Fury X. But yeah I agree, this "there is a secret sauce somewhere" stuff need to stop)
Best case scenario it's about exactly 1 year away, not 1,5 (glofo claims they're ready for mass production in 2nd half of 2018 with the 7nm "Leading Performance" -process)
DX11 is almost 10 years old. Only outdated and re-hashed franchises are still using it. Vega is for the new era..
AMD had to once again clock their cards way higher than the process really allows
Powersaver mode gives about 31 - 34 % better perf/watt depending on BIOS while losing only 6 - 8 % (at 4K, TPU https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Radeon_RX_Vega_64/32.html / https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Radeon_RX_Vega_64/31.html )
Powersaver mode gives about 31 - 34 % better perf/watt depending on BIOS while losing only 6 - 8 % (at 4K, TPU https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Radeon_RX_Vega_64/32.html / https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Radeon_RX_Vega_64/31.html )
Yes. That and the fact that a quick incremental fix is much lower risk to pull off. They should also move to TSMC because that will give us an apples to apples comparison wrt clocks and perf/W.
Similar threads
