Subject: Graphics Cards | January 12, 2019 - 08:17 AM | Jim Tanous
Tagged: vega 64, Vega, RX VEGA 64, radeon vii, gpu, benchmarks, amd, 7nm
After announcing the Radeon VII this week at CES, AMD has quietly released its own internal benchmarks showing how the upcoming card potentially compares to the Radeon RX Vega 64, AMD's current flagship desktop GPU released in August 2017.
The internal benchmarks, compiled by AMD Performance Labs earlier this month, were released as a footnote in AMD's official Radeon VII press release and first noticed by HardOCP. AMD tested 25 games and 4 media creation applications, with the Radeon VII averaging around a 29 percent improvement in games and 36 percent improvement in professional apps.
AMD's test platform for its gaming Radeon VII benchmarks was an Intel Core i7-7700K with 16GB of DDR4 memory clocked at 3000MHz running Windows 10 with AMD Driver version 18.50. CPU frequencies and exact Windows 10 version were not disclosed. AMD states that all games were run at "4K max settings" with reported frame rate results based on the average of three separate runs each.
For games, the Radeon VII benchmarks show a wide performance delta compared to RX Vega 64, from as little as 7.5 percent in Hitman 2 to as much as 68.4 percent for Fallout 76. Below is a chart created by PC Perspective from AMD's data of the frame rate results from all 25 games.
In terms of media creation applications, AMD changed its testing platform to the Ryzen 7 2700X, also paired with 16GB of DDR4 at 3000MHz. Again, exact processor frequencies and other details were not disclosed. The results reveal between a 27% and 62% improvement:
It is important to reiterate that the data presented in the above charts is from AMD's own internal testing, and should therefore be viewed skeptically until third party Radeon VII benchmarks are available. However, these benchmarks do provide an interesting first look at potential Radeon VII performance compared to its predecessor.
Radeon VII is scheduled to launch February 7, 2019 with an MSRP of $699. In addition to the reference design showcased at CES, AMD has confirmed that third party Radeon VII boards will be available from the company's GPU partners.
Subject: General Tech | June 20, 2018 - 01:47 PM | Jeremy Hellstrom
Tagged: gaming, vega 64, 1080 ti, metro 2033, metro last light, Crysis 3, tomb raider
[H]ard|OCP recently revisited a few older games which proved more than a match for the GPUs of that time, to see if the current models can manage 1440p and 4k with all the graphical bells and whistles cranked up to 11. Metro 2033 and Last Light featured PhysX, tessellation and depth of field options which the GPUs of 2010-13 had trouble with, Tomb Raider sported nicer hair than a bearded Geralt and Crysis 3 offers as much of a challenge as its siblings. Can you now play these games at 4k, with full graphics settings when armed with a GTX 1080 Ti or Vega 64? Check out the full review to see.
"It is time once again to play some older PC games on the latest GPUs of today using the latest drivers. We pull from three 5-year-old games and one 8-year-old game today and see if we can maximize the IQ settings in those games at 1440p and 4K. The theme of the day: Older games that still hold up today in terms of IQ."
Here is some more Tech News from around the web:
- PUBG goes on sale to celebrate 50 million sales @ HEXUS
- MechWarrior 5: Mercenaries delayed until 2019 @ Rock, Paper, SHOTGUN
- Top 5 CPUs for Gaming @ Techspot
- Cyberpunk 2077: everything we know so far @ Rock, Paper, SHOTGUN
- The top ten games from E3 2018 @ Ars Technica
Subject: Graphics Cards | December 15, 2017 - 09:00 AM | Scott Michaud
Tagged: vega 64 liquid, vega 64, vega 56, Vega, sapphire, radeon, amd
SAPPHIRE has just launched a pair of custom cooled, factory overclocked, RX Vega-based graphics cards. As you might guess: the SAPPHIRE NITRO+ Radeon RX Vega 64 uses the Vega 64 chip with its 4096 stream processors, while the SAPPHIRE NITRO+ Radeon RX Vega 56 uses the Vega 56 chip and its 3584 stream processors. Both cards have 8GB of HBM2 memory (two stacks of 4GB). The cooler design uses three fans and vapor chambers, with separate heat pipes for the GPU+Memory (six pipes) and VRMs (two pipes).
It also has a back plate!
The clock rate is where it gets interesting. The NITRO+ RX Vega 64 will have a boost clock of 1611 MHz out-of-the-box. This is above the RX Vega 64 Air’s boost clock (1546 MHz) but below the RX Vega 64 Liquid’s boost clock (1677 MHz). The liquid-cooled Radeon RX Vega 64 still has the highest clocks, but this product sits almost exactly half-way between it (the liquid-cooled RX Vega 64) and the air-cooled RX Vega 64.
The NITRO+ Radeon RX Vega 56, with its 1572 MHz boost clock, is well above the stock RX Vega 56’s 1471 MHz boost clock, though. It’s a clear win.
As for enthusiast features, this card has quite a few ways to keep it cool. First, it will operate fanless until 56C. Second, the card accepts a 4-pin fan connector, which allows it to adjust the speed of two case fans based on the temperature readings from the card. I am a bit curious whether it’s better to let the GPU control the fans, or whether having them all attached to the same place allows them to work together more effectively. Either way, if you ran out of fan headers, then I’m guessing that this feature will be good for you anyway.
The SAPPHIRE NITRO+ Radeon RX Vega 64 and 56 are available now.
Subject: Graphics Cards | December 4, 2017 - 10:10 PM | Tim Verry
Tagged: vega 64, vega 56, rx vega, ROG Strix, ASUS ROG, asus
ASUS is launching two new factory overclocked graphics cards with all of the RGB in the form of the ROG Strix RX Vega 64 and ROG Strix RX Vega 56. Measuring 11.73" x 2.58" x 2.07" these graphics cards are beastly 2.5 slot designs with large triple fan coolers. On the outside, the graphics cards have a black shroud with RGB LEDs around the fans, on the Strix side logo, and the ROG backplate logo. Asus is using a massive heatsink that is divided into two aluminum fin stacks that connect to a copper baseplate using five heatpipes each. The baseplate is reportedly 10% flatter for improved contact with the GPU. There are three fans to push air over the heatsinks that are of the dust resistant Wing-Blade variety.
The cards have two 8-pin PCI-E power connectors feeding ASUS' Super Alloy Power II VRMs. Other connectors include hybrid fan headers for system fans and an Aurora Sync RGB LED header. Display outputs are "VR Ready" and include two HDMI, two DisplayPort, and a single DVI output.
While ASUS has not yet revealed clockspeeds on the RX Vega 56 card, eTeknix has gotten their hands on the ROG Strix RX Vega 64 graphics card and figured out the clocks for that card. Specifically, the Vega 64 card clocks its 4096 GPU cores at 1298 MHz base and 1590 MHz boost. The site further lists the memory clockspeed at 945 MHz which doesn't appear to be overclocked as it matches the referece Vega 64 HBM2 clocks of 1890 MHz. Users can use the GPU Tweak II software to push the card further on their own though.
ASUS has not yet revealed pricing or exact availability dates but expect them to sell out fast and over MSRP when they do surface thanks to the resurgance of GPU mining! With that said it is promising that we are finally seeing factory overclocked cards being announced!
Subject: Graphics Cards | November 29, 2017 - 03:20 PM | Jeremy Hellstrom
Tagged: windows 10, vega 64, RX 580, microsoft, linux 4.15, linux, amd
With a new Linux kernel out, Phoronix revisited the performance of two of AMD's new cards running on that kernel as well as the current version of Windows 10. GPU testing on Linux has gotten more interesting thanks to the upsurge in compatible games, this review encompasses the recent Deus Ex, Shadow of Mordor, F1 2017 and GRID Autosport. The tests show there is still work to be done on the Mesa Radeon graphics driver stack as in all cases the performance lagged behind on Linux even though the hardware was exactly the same.
"As we end out November, here is a fresh look at the current Windows 10 Pro Fall Creator's Update versus Ubuntu 17.10 with the latest Linux 4.15 kernel and Mesa 17.4-dev Radeon graphics driver stack as we see how various games compete under Windows 10 and Linux with these latest AMD drivers on the Radeon RX 580 and RX Vega 64 graphics cards."
Here is some more Tech News from around the web:
- Civilization VI: Rise And Fall expansion out Feb 8th @ Rock, Paper, SHOTGUN
- Absolver Review @ OCC
- Black Mesa’s Xen chapters delayed again @ Rock, Paper, SHOTGUN
- Homeword: Deserts of Kharak gets its first update in over a year, adding tactical pause @ Rock, Paper, SHOTGUN
- Half-Life 2: MMod v3 Finally Has a Release Date @ [H]ard|OCP
- Humble Racing Bundle
- Deus Ex is “waiting its turn” for a new game @ Rock, Paper, SHOTGUN
- Destiny 2's Seasoning Is Off, But There's No Shortage Of Salt @ Techgage
Forza Motorsport 7 Performance
The first full Forza Motorsport title available for the PC, Forza Motorsport 7 on Windows 10 launched simultaneously with the Xbox version earlier this month. With native 4K assets, HDR support, and new visual features like fully dynamic weather, this title is an excellent showcase of what modern PC hardware can do.
Now that both AMD and NVIDIA have released drivers optimized for Forza 7, we've taken an opportunity to measure performance across an array of different GPUs. After some significant performance mishaps with last year's Forza Horizon 3 at launch on PC, we are excited to see if Forza Motorsport 7 brings any much-needed improvements.
For this testing, we used our standard GPU testbed, including an 8-core Haswell-E processor and plenty of memory and storage.
|PC Perspective GPU Testbed|
|Processor||Intel Core i7-5960X Haswell-E|
|Motherboard||ASUS Rampage V Extreme X99|
|Memory||G.Skill Ripjaws 16GB DDR4-3200|
|Storage||OCZ Agility 4 256GB (OS)
Adata SP610 500GB (games)
|Power Supply||Corsair AX1500i 1500 watt|
|OS||Windows 10 x64|
|Drivers||AMD: 17.10.1 (Beta)
As with a lot of modern console-first titles, Forza 7 defaults to "Dynamic" image quality settings. This means that the game engine is supposed to find the best image settings for your hardware automatically, and dynamically adjust them so that you hit a target frame rate (adjustable between 30 and 60fps) no matter what is going on in the current scene that is being rendered.
While this is a good strategy for consoles, and even for casual PC gamers, it poses a problem for us trying to measure equivalent performance across GPUs. Luckily the developers of Forza Motorsport 7, Turn 10 Studios, still let you disable the dynamic control and configure the image quality settings as you desire.
One quirk however though is that in order for V-Sync to be disabled, the rendering resolution within the game must match the native resolution of your monitor. This means that if you are running 2560x1440 on your 4K monitor, you must first set the resolution within windows to 2560x1440 in order to run the game in V-Sync off mode.
We did our testing with an array of three different resolutions (1080p, 1440p, and 4K) at maximum image quality settings. We tested both AMD and NVIDIA graphics cards in similar price and performance segments. The built-in benchmark mode for this game was used, which does feature some variance due to dynamic weather patterns. However, our testing within the full game matched the results of the benchmark mode closely, so we used it for our final results.
Right off the bat, I have been impressed at how well optimized Forza Motorsport 7 seems to be on the PC. Compared to the unoptimized disaster that was Forza Horizon 3 when it launched on PC last year, it's clear that Turn 10 Studios and Microsoft have come a long way.
Even gamers looking to play on a 4K display at 60Hz can seemingly get away with the cheaper, and more mainstream GPUs such as the RX 580 or the GTX 1060 with acceptable performance in most scenarios.
Games on high-refresh-rate displays don't appear to have the same luxury. If you want to game at a resolution such as 2560x1440 at a full 144Hz, neither the RX Vega 64 or GTX 1080 will do this with maximum image quality settings. Although these GPUs appear to be in the margin where you could turn down a few settings to achieve your full refresh rate.
For some reason, the RX Vega cards didn't seem to show any scaling in performance when moving from 2560x1440 to 1920x1080, unlike the Polaris-based RX 580 and the NVIDIA options. We aren't quite sure of the cause of this and have reached out to AMD for clarification.
As far as frame times are concerned, we also gathered some data with our Frame Rating capture analysis system.
Taking a look at the first chart, we can see while the GTX 1080 frame times are extremely consistent, the RX Vega 64 shows some additional variance.
However, the frame time variance chart shows that over 95% of the frame times of the RX Vega 64 come in at under 2ms of variance, which will still provide a smooth gameplay experience in most scenarios. This matches with our experience while playing on both AMD and NVIDIA hardware where we saw no major issues with gameplay smoothness.
Forza Motorsport 7 seems to be a great addition to the PC gaming world (if you don't mind using the Microsoft store exclusively) and will run great on a wide array of hardware. Whether or not you have a NVIDIA or AMD GPU, you should be able to enjoy this fantastic racing simulator.
Subject: General Tech | October 18, 2017 - 01:59 PM | Jeremy Hellstrom
Tagged: forza motorsport 7, amd, nvidia, vega 64, vega 56, gtx 1070, GTX 1080, gtx 1080 ti, gaming
[H]ard|OCP recently used Forza 7 in their GPU benchmarks and discovered that AMD's Vega 64 outperformed the GTX 1080 by a noticeable margin. NVIDIA responded by releasing two new drivers in quick succession, claiming performance improvements of up to 25% in this title, which prompted [H] to revisit there results with the newest drivers from both companies. They tested at both 1440p and at 4K and saw changes, though perhaps not as great as NVIDIA first announced. Take a look at the review here and consider the question they pose in their conclusions.
"Forza Motorsport 7 gaming performance has changed, video cards stack up differently when compared. We take Forza Motorsport 7 and apply new NVIDIA GeForce 387.92 and AMD Crimson ReLive 17.10.1 drivers to find out how these compare, what performance differences there are, and if AMD Radeon RX Vega is still king in this game."
Here is some more Tech News from around the web:
- Big-budget, single-player gaming isn’t dead (yet) @ Ars Technica
- Middle-Earth Shadow of War: PC graphics performance benchmark @ Guru of 3D
- Wot I Think – South Park: The Fractured But Whole @ Rock, Paper, SHOTGUN
- The Best PC Games (You Should Be Playing) @ TechSpot
- Total War’s free Mortal Empires DLC merges Warhammer 1 and 2 @ Rock, Paper, SHOTGUN
- Core i7 8700K vs. Ryzen 7 1800X For NVIDIA/Radeon Linux Gaming @ Phoronix
- Destiny 2 PC launch trailer and hardware requirements released @ HEXUS
- South Park: The Fractured But Whole secrets: find Mr Hankey, 'cheating' and more @ PC Gamer
- Humble Down Under Bundle
- PC Shadow of War players cheat to get around loot box grind @ Ars Technica
Subject: Graphics Cards | August 30, 2017 - 09:27 PM | Scott Michaud
Tagged: amd, Vega, vega 56, vega 64
Because so many different video cards are made from a handful of chip designs, there is a group of people who like to see whether a lower-end SKU can be unlocked to behave like a higher-end one. In this case, kdtree on the ChipHell forums has apparently flashed the new AMD RX Vega 56 with the vBIOS from an AMD RX Vega 64. Personally, I would find that a little sketchy, given the difference in stream processor count, but they’re the one with the graphics card.
Turns out, it did something, but it did not magically create an RX Vega 64. The extra 512 shaders are probably disabled at the hardware level, such as with a laser. Your first reaction is probably “well, of course it is...” but, if you remember Polaris, users have software-modified 4GB cards into 8GB cards... so there is some precedence for “maybe AMD put more on the card than they said on the box”.
Oh right, so what did it do? It apparently gave the card a significant overclock. It’s hard to tell under the watermark, but the modified Vega 56 was just a percent or so away from the Vega 64 on 3DMark. I’m guessing a conventional overclock might do the same, but who knows.
Subject: Graphics Cards | August 14, 2017 - 03:49 PM | Jeremy Hellstrom
Tagged: vega 64 liquid, vega 64, vega 56, rx vega, radoen, amd
The reviews of AMD's two and a half new cards are in and they have a lot to say about AMD's current focus for GPU development. They have not gone green with this new architecture; but be honest with yourself about how much think about the environment when absorbed in a gaming session on a 4k monitor. The Vega 64 and 56 do require far more energy than Pascal cards and do produce more noise, however keep in mind that third party air cooling or a better radiator may help mitigate the issue.
The real question is the price, while there will be some challenges with the two Vega 64 cards the Vega 56 is certainly a competitor to the GTX 1070. If the mining craze dies down to the point where the prices of these two cards approach MSRP AMD offers a compelling choice for those who also want a new monitor. Freesync displays sell at a significantly lower price than comparable G-Sync displays, even before you start to look at the new bundle program AMD has introduced.
Since we know you have already been through Ryan's review, perhaps you would be interested in what our framerating friends over at The Tech Report thought. If not, there are plenty of other reviews below.
"AMD's long-awaited Radeon RX Vega 64 and RX Vega 56 graphics cards are finally ready to make their way into gamers' hands. We go hands-on to see how they perform."
Here are some more Graphics Card articles from around the web:
- AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 @ [H]ard|OCP
- AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 8GB @ Guru of 3D
- AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 8GB @ Guru of 3D
- A Look At AMD’s Radeon RX Vega 64 Workstation & Compute Performance @ Techgage
- AMD Radeon RX Vega64 8GB (Air) @ Kitguru
- AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 @ Techspot
- AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 8 GB @ techPowerUp
- AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 8 GB @ techPowerUp
- Radeon RX Vega On Linux: High-Performance GPUs & Open-Source No Longer An Oxymoron @ Phoronix
- GTX 1080 Ti Overclocking Guide @ OCCE
- A Look At NVIDIA’s Workstation Performance Boosting 385.12 TITAN Xp Driver @ Techgage
- PNY GTX 1080 Ti XLR8 OC Gaming 11GB @ Kitguru
- Bykski FOUR Founders GTX 1080 GPU Waterblock @ techPowerUp
A confusing market
I feel like I have been writing about AMD non-stop in 2017. Starting with the release of Ryzen 7 and following through last week’s review of the HEDT Threadripper processor, AMD has gone from a nearly-dormant state in 2015-2016 to a wildly active and successful organization with more than a dozen new product launches under its belt. Today we will reveal the company's first consumer products based on the new Vega GPU architecture, thrusting the Radeon brand back into the fight at the $400+ price segments.
At this point, with architecture teases, product unboxings, professional card reviews, and pricing and availability reveals, we almost know everything we need to know about the new Radeon RX Vega 64 and RX Vega 56 products. Almost. Today we can show you the performance.
I want to be honest with our readers: AMD gave me so little time with these cards that I am going to gloss over some of the more interesting technological and architectural changes that Vega brings to market. I will come back to them at a later time, but I feel it is most important for us to talk about the performance and power characteristics of these cards as consumers finally get the chance to spend their hard-earned money on them.
If you already know about the specifications and pricing peculiarities of Vega 64 and Vega 56 and instead want direct access to performance results, I encourage you to skip ahead. If you want a refresher those details, check out the summary below.
Interesting statistics from the creation of this review in a VERY short window:
- 175 graphs
- 8 cards, 8 games, 2 resolutions, 3 runs = 384 test runs
- >9.6 TB of raw captured video (average ~25 GB/min)
Radeon RX Vega 64 and Vega 56 Specifications
Much of the below is sourced from our Vega 64/56 announcement story last month.
Though the leaks have been frequent and getting closer to reality, as it turns out AMD was in fact holding back quite a bit of information about the positioning of RX Vega for today. Radeon will launch the Vega 64 and Vega 56 today, with three different versions of the Vega 64 on the docket. Vega 64 uses the full Vega 10 chip with 64 CUs and 4096 stream processors. Vega 56 will come with 56 CUs enabled (get it?) and 3584 stream processors.
Pictures of the various product designs have already made it out to the field including the Limited Edition with the brushed anodized aluminum shroud, the liquid cooled card with a similar industrial design, and the more standard black shroud version that looks very similar to the previous reference cards from AMD.
|RX Vega 64 Liquid||RX Vega 64 Air||RX Vega 56||Vega Frontier Edition||GTX 1080 Ti||GTX 1080||TITAN X||GTX 980||R9 Fury X|
|GPU||Vega 10||Vega 10||Vega 10||Vega 10||GP102||GP104||GM200||GM204||Fiji XT|
|Base Clock||1406 MHz||1247 MHz||1156 MHz||1382 MHz||1480 MHz||1607 MHz||1000 MHz||1126 MHz||1050 MHz|
|Boost Clock||1677 MHz||1546 MHz||1471 MHz||1600 MHz||1582 MHz||1733 MHz||1089 MHz||1216 MHz||-|
|Memory Clock||1890 MHz||1890 MHz||1600 MHz||1890 MHz||11000 MHz||10000 MHz||7000 MHz||7000 MHz||1000 MHz|
|Memory Interface||2048-bit HBM2||2048-bit HBM2||2048-bit HBM2||2048-bit HBM2||352-bit G5X||256-bit G5X||384-bit||256-bit||4096-bit (HBM)|
|Memory Bandwidth||484 GB/s||484 GB/s||410 GB/s||484 GB/s||484 GB/s||320 GB/s||336 GB/s||224 GB/s||512 GB/s|
|TDP||345 watts||295 watts||210 watts||300 watts||250 watts||180 watts||250 watts||165 watts||275 watts|
|Peak Compute||13.7 TFLOPS||12.6 TFLOPS||10.5 TFLOPS||13.1 TFLOPS||10.6 TFLOPS||8.2 TFLOPS||6.14 TFLOPS||4.61 TFLOPS||8.60 TFLOPS|
If you are a frequent reader of PC Perspective, you have already seen our reviews of the Vega Frontier Edition air cooled and liquid cards, so some of this is going to look very familiar. Looking at the Vega 64 first, we need to define the biggest change to the performance ratings of RX and FE versions of the Vega architecture. When we listed the “boost clock” of the Vega FE cards, and really any Radeon cards previous to RX Vega, we were referring the maximum clock speed of the card in its out of box state. This was counter to the method that NVIDIA used for its “boost clock” rating that pointed towards a “typical” clock speed that the card would run at in a gaming workload. Essentially, the NVIDIA method was giving consumers a more realistic look at how fast the card would be running while AMD was marketing the theoretical peak with perfect thermals, perfect workloads. This, to be clear, never happened.