Review AMD Radeon VII review and availability thread

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
5,575
8,736
136
Availability
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As of the time of this post, In stock at newegg. (edit, and it's sold out).

Available straight from AMD.



Written Reviews
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Techspot
See post #2 for more

Video Reviews
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Last edited:

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
21,791
11,134
136
I know what’s the deal with everyone still over paying for cards. $1K for a video card that has a high probability of crapping out within 3 years is insane.
Are most still being sold for mining?

I will agree with @Arkaign that it's probably useful for some pro applications. It also may be used by some uni students/profs for deep learning experiments. Remember it's just an mi50 with 1/4 fp64 and disabled IF-over-PCIe functionality. If you don't need tons of PCIe bandwidth to the card - basically, you have a "write once and then compute" style GPGPU application - it really has no major penalties versus a $10k+ pro card. Hell AMD.com still sells mi25s for $10k, and mi25's from parted-out clusters routinely sell for over $8k. This thing is faster than one of those.
 

Dribble

Platinum Member
Aug 9, 2005
2,076
611
136
Traditionally a process node advantage like this would have sent the ATI card through the roof. It would have been a wrecking ball to Nvidia's performance. The problem here seems to be that this is a Vega card and Vega sucks. The reason for Vega sucking is precisely the same reason that I have no faith in Intel's future GPU's either. They come from the same source. Vega and Intel's new gaming GPU are two different smells coming from the same hot trash can that's been baking in the sun all day. Jokes aside, is there any reason to expect that Raja will product a better GPU than Vega now that he has some money working for him?
Vega was a great architecture when it came out, the problem is it hasn't really changed in a very long time. That's almost certainly because there was no money to develop it, not because the dev's didn't want too. That's almost certainly why Raja moved too - he went somewhere he'd get the money to do something.

Incidentally, you know it's not 1 person who makes a new gpu, it's a big team. They are all responsible for it's success or failure, not just some figurehead who you can easily single out.
 
Last edited:

linkgoron

Platinum Member
Mar 9, 2005
2,333
857
136
Vega was a great architecture when it came out, the problem is it hasn't really changed in a very long time. That's almost certainly because there was no money to develop it, not because the dev's didn't want too. That's almost certainly why Raja moved too - he went somewhere he'd get the money to do something.

Incidentally, you know it's not 1 person who makes a new gpu, it's a big team. They are all responsible for it's success or failure, not just some figurehead who you can easily single out.

How was Vega such a great architecture when it came out? At least for gaming, it's a huge disappointment. Parts of the architecture (NGG) are still not functioning correctly, more than two years later. It also appears as though Vega does not scale (except at the APU level), so AMD has had to refresh Polaris refresh twice. AMD hasn't had a top to bottom architecture in years. Maxwell, Pascal and Turing are all essentially the same thing top to bottom.

Looking at Vega's competitors, Pascal was significantly better in almost every parameter. Performance, perf/mm^2 or perf/watt. Vega 64 @ 486mm^2 has about the same performance as the 314mm^2 1080, has 50% more transistors (12.5B vs 7.1B) and worse perf/watt (Vega64 uses 70% more power than the 1080 for about the same performance, according to TPU). It's probably much more expensive to make, given its size, HBM2 and the interposer. The smaller 1080ti (12B transistors @ 471mm^2) beats it flat out by at least 30% at 4K.

I have a feeling that Vega 20's performance is about what they expected to get from Vega 10.

Traditionally a process node advantage like this would have sent the ATI card through the roof. It would have been a wrecking ball to Nvidia's performance. The problem here seems to be that this is a Vega card and Vega sucks.

It's not like Polaris (14nm) blew away Maxwell (28nm).
 
Last edited:
Reactions: SirDinadan

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
8,002
6,438
136
Vega was a great architecture when it came out, the problem is it hasn't really changed in a very long time.

I don't believe it was all that great. Maybe you could say it had potential, but a lot of the bells and whistles never panned out. Outside of some transistors that have been added for speeding up certain compute operations, very little has changed with Vega at all.

That's almost certainly because there was no money to develop it, not because the dev's didn't want too. That's almost certainly why Raja moved too - he went somewhere he'd get the money to do something.

I think it's well known that AMD didn't have the money to fully fund both the CPU and graphics development. I think that the bet on Ryzen obviously paid off. I'm not terribly heartbroken over Raja leaving either. I know there were a lot of people who liked him, but even with a lack of R&D he had a history of over-promise and under-deliver.
 

railven

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2010
6,604
561
126
Don't know where to post this, but Gamer Nexus did a great video looking at VRAM. The 3DMark results for me where the most interesting. I hope he hears back on this, I'd never expect the card with more VRAM to loose performance as MSAA is increased.

 
Mar 11, 2004
23,160
5,623
146
With the AT review setting similar clocks with Vega 10, I'm surprised that the memory bandwidth doesn't seem to be accounting for much of the performance improvement, seemingly refuting that Vega 10 was actually that limited by its Bandwidth. There are some cases where that seems to be the case, but by and large it wasn't as significant as I was expecting. Which that could point elsewhere as being a more probably bottleneck. I know many think the ROPs are but, I'm not so sure they are outside of AA (which we know is definitely an issue, would be interesting to see if it still is on Radeon VII or if maybe the bandwidth or software might have improved things). Geometry throughput maybe, but I think its more than that.

As a reminder, here's JHHs comments on the Radeon VII

https://www.techpowerup.com/251400/...the-performance-is-lousy-freesync-doesnt-work

"The performance is lousy and there's nothing new. [There's] no ray tracing, no AI. It's 7nm with HBM memory that barely keeps up with a 2080"

He was exactly right, AMD had a big process node advantage compared to RTX and still loses perf/watt badly to RTX (and GTX 10-series fabbed on 16nm). This is a very underwhelming product.

Except he's factually wrong on there being no ray tracing or AI. He's right that there isn't anything really meaningful over Vega 64 above the doubling of memory controllers and 7nm, and that its pretty lackluster for gaming but AMD made that known long ago when they made it known it would have the same graphics/raster setup as Vega 10.

they shoulda just slapped an AIO on it and been done with it like the last 2 high end Radeon's

That would have driven up the costs even more making it even less impressive.

I use Linux a lot for work and a decent amount in personal use as well so I'm always interested in any Linux hardware testing. Anyway, reading through phoronix's review, it looks like if you want to game on Linux and use an AMD GPU, then the Vega VII is far and away the card to use and actually matches it's Linux gaming competitiveness with it's Windows competitiveness. Probably the first time that's ever happened, which is interesting.

Also has a very strong showing for machine learning and compute performance and performance per watt, but I don't do anything in that area.

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=radeon-vii-linux&num=1

That's really interesting, but perhaps shouldn't be surprising, since it seems that AMD would need to focus on the Linux side of things for this card to be successful.
 
Mar 11, 2004
23,160
5,623
146
Don't know where to post this, but Gamer Nexus did a great video looking at VRAM. The 3DMark results for me where the most interesting. I hope he hears back on this, I'd never expect the card with more VRAM to loose performance as MSAA is increased.


Vega seems to have some issue with MSAA (people speculate its related to the ROPs, which, I think Vega 64 showed issues even considering that - Fiji/Fury didn't have the same level of drop even though it had similar ROP count and memory bandwidth but with half the memory). I was curious if the memory situation would change things and doesn't seem like it did (although it might have improved it over Vega 64, not sure).

Vega seems like its compute/shader heavy (as seen when they went with heavy shader use in that video). I'm still curious if that might actually be good for this new ray-tracing, but I doubt AMD puts a lot of resources into getting the software support for it on older hardware, and kinda even hope that they might be moving towards a big overhaul focused on future products (speaking purely of software, stuff like the NGG related things that allegedly got punted to Navi and won't be enabled on Vega). Heck, it seems like they put quite a bit of effort on improving their Linux related stuff, starting with Vega 20 (which makes sense as it was really targeting markets that would be important for).

I think the only thing that would really leverage Radeon VII's VRAM/bandwidth would be loading up on lots of crazy high quality textures. And even then, I think Nvidia's compression algorithms would make it difficult to even notice the difference. But I think a game that was designed around that idea (like id's Rage with its megatexturing). Since it seems like in modern games, when I notice some graphical thing for its poor quality, it seems like its often related to texturing, I could see big gains in visual quality if there was enough bandwidth/VRAM, to sustain it. I even wonder if you could pre-render high levels of ray-tracing affect (that would change depending on factors like lighting and environment - so time of day, weather like rain, etc) on the textures, and then use that as a cheat. This way you get the visual benefit of ray-tracing for most of the scene, but without the real-time hit. Couple it with doing some onboard NAND, where you'd load the entire game onto it, or at least things the GPU would need like textures so that it'd have the quickest streaming and capacity for lots of textures (you'd have several versions of similar textures for different situations).

Which, we don't hear a lot about texture filtering these days. I think last time I recall much of any scrutiny of it was like 10 years ago, when people were looking at differences in filtering between AMD/ATi and Nvidia on Trackmania.
 
Last edited:

ericlp

Diamond Member
Dec 24, 2000
6,133
219
106
I hear the second edition of drivers fixed the crashes and blank screens... But slowed down the card somewhat as well.

I think they haven't tweaked the drivers for this card out as much as they wanted and like everything else, maybe newer drivers will speed up they framerates.

The biggest take away from this is... For me, with nvidia "ONLY" making video cards... To have a competitor jump up to almost as fast as nvidia's top card... Is impressive for me. It only states that AMD has more work to do, and hopefully, the next card or two will be at the top of the heap... Maybe even surpassing Nvidia. The good news is, that there is some competition in the video card market. With competition comes better hardware for us all with hopefully more reasonable prices down the road.

I won't be upgrading my current GPU to ATI... But, I'll be looking forward to a faster card later...
 

Tup3x

Golden Member
Dec 31, 2016
1,008
996
136
I'm starting to wonder if it's actually Intel who is going to challenge NVIDIA rather than AMD. The fact that they released this now isn't a good thing. Not sure if they can release high end Navi this year after this. Next year Intel is supposed to launch their cards.

Well, if Intel can compete with NVIDIA it would be great for us but for AMD...
 

Wall Street

Senior member
Mar 28, 2012
691
44
91
Vega seems to have some issue with MSAA (people speculate its related to the ROPs, which, I think Vega 64 showed issues even considering that - Fiji/Fury didn't have the same level of drop even though it had similar ROP count and memory bandwidth but with half the memory). I was curious if the memory situation would change things and doesn't seem like it did (although it might have improved it over Vega 64, not sure)...

... I even wonder if you could pre-render high levels of ray-tracing affect (that would change depending on factors like lighting and environment - so time of day, weather like rain, etc) on the textures, and then use that as a cheat. This way you get the visual benefit of ray-tracing for most of the scene, but without the real-time hit. Couple it with doing some onboard NAND, where you'd load the entire game onto it, or at least things the GPU would need like textures so that it'd have the quickest streaming and capacity for lots of textures (you'd have several versions of similar textures for different situations).

Regarding the ROP count in Radeon VII, this is a limitation of all existing GCN cards which is that 64 ROPs is the maximum. This is an issue because at 1800 Mhz, the ROPs can only generate ~429 GB/s of data. Most of the bandwidth of the RVII is not needed to feed this few ROPs. nVidia does a much better job matching ROP counts to bandwidth. For example, the RTX 2070 has 64 ROPs and 448 GB/s of bandwidth. It also has more than enough bandwidth to let the ROPs go full speed, but not by a silly amount. The Radeon VII and RTX 2070 should have similar MSAA performance.

Regarding the lighting and texturing comment: texturing doesn't use much bandwidth at all. The 4096 shaders are the only thing that can generate 1 TB/s of data on that card.

Also, ray-traced lighting pre-baked into textures has been done since Quake II, it is called lightmapped textures. If you are running 16x anisotropic filtering, then the main problem with textures in today's games is that post-process antialiasing filters tend to smear them. The issue is that the post process AA performs very quickly, works OK on polygon edges and is the only thing which works on shader-based aliasing. There are also a ton of games which implement multiple lightmaps and fade between them to generate day/night cycles, onboard NAND not needed.
 

Stuka87

Diamond Member
Dec 10, 2010
6,240
2,559
136
I'm starting to wonder if it's actually Intel who is going to challenge NVIDIA rather than AMD. The fact that they released this now isn't a good thing. Not sure if they can release high end Navi this year after this. Next year Intel is supposed to launch their cards.

Well, if Intel can compete with NVIDIA it would be great for us but for AMD...

Why would selling the Mi50 as a consumer card have any impact on Navi? Your statement doesn't make much sense. The GPUs are entirely unrelated.

I don't see Intel being competitive out the gate. Drivers alone will hold them back some, as its hard to create brand new drivers for years worth of games in a short period. AMD and nVidia have had years of work for their drivers to mature.
 

Wall Street

Senior member
Mar 28, 2012
691
44
91
Why would selling the Mi50 as a consumer card have any impact on Navi? Your statement doesn't make much sense. The GPUs are entirely unrelated.

What he said makes a lot of sense. From a marketing perspective, AMD would not release this card if they planned to also release another card in the same price or performance bracket in the near term (next 6 months). If the most die-hard AMD enthusiasts pay $700 now, only for AMD to release another better high end GPU sometime soon, that would kill a lot of good will. This wasn't announced like the Vega Frontier Edition, where they told everyone that gaming version will be out in the future so hold tight.
 

Stuka87

Diamond Member
Dec 10, 2010
6,240
2,559
136
What he said makes a lot of sense. From a marketing perspective, AMD would not release this card if they planned to also release another card in the same price or performance bracket in the near term (next 6 months). If the most die-hard AMD enthusiasts pay $700 now, only for AMD to release another better high end GPU sometime soon, that would kill a lot of good will. This wasn't announced like the Vega Frontier Edition, where they told everyone that gaming version will be out in the future so hold tight.

It has happened before, although by nVidia, not AMD. The GTX Titan was launched in Feb of 2013, and then later than year the faster and cheaper 780Ti was launched.

AMD has stated Navi will launch this year. But I am thinking it will be the mid range cards, as they sell the most. But its quite possible an RX680(?) could match a Vega 10/20 in performance. Although we could equally be let down and it may not be what we hoped for.
 

linkgoron

Platinum Member
Mar 9, 2005
2,333
857
136
What he said makes a lot of sense. From a marketing perspective, AMD would not release this card if they planned to also release another card in the same price or performance bracket in the near term (next 6 months). If the most die-hard AMD enthusiasts pay $700 now, only for AMD to release another better high end GPU sometime soon, that would kill a lot of good will. This wasn't announced like the Vega Frontier Edition, where they told everyone that gaming version will be out in the future so hold tight.
This.

I also believe that the RX 590 was the same kind of statement. Why release a ~1060+10% for $280 when you're going to release a "1070+" level card for $250-$300 three months later?
 

railven

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2010
6,604
561
126
Vega seems to have some issue with MSAA (people speculate its related to the ROPs, which, I think Vega 64 showed issues even considering that - Fiji/Fury didn't have the same level of drop even though it had similar ROP count and memory bandwidth but with half the memory). I was curious if the memory situation would change things and doesn't seem like it did (although it might have improved it over Vega 64, not sure).

I thought this was fixed with a driver. But I don't have a Vega card and therefore I can't test/validate what I know. What made this important to me is it sort of defeats the purpose of the bigger VRAM. I'd hope this isn't an issue that carries over to games, it would really suck if you have so much VRAM but then it's MSAA crippling your performance in such a harsh way.

Vega seems like its compute/shader heavy (as seen when they went with heavy shader use in that video). I'm still curious if that might actually be good for this new ray-tracing, but I doubt AMD puts a lot of resources into getting the software support for it on older hardware, and kinda even hope that they might be moving towards a big overhaul focused on future products (speaking purely of software, stuff like the NGG related things that allegedly got punted to Navi and won't be enabled on Vega). Heck, it seems like they put quite a bit of effort on improving their Linux related stuff, starting with Vega 20 (which makes sense as it was really targeting markets that would be important for).

I think has been Vega's issue since inception. The balance is way off, AMD/Raja bet too much on the future of compute that their chip is too one-sided. NV is on the same hill with DXR. It failing makes Turing basically a money hole.

I think the only thing that would really leverage Radeon VII's VRAM/bandwidth would be loading up on lots of crazy high quality textures. And even then, I think Nvidia's compression algorithms would make it difficult to even notice the difference. But I think a game that was designed around that idea (like id's Rage with its megatexturing). Since it seems like in modern games, when I notice some graphical thing for its poor quality, it seems like its often related to texturing, I could see big gains in visual quality if there was enough bandwidth/VRAM, to sustain it. I even wonder if you could pre-render high levels of ray-tracing affect (that would change depending on factors like lighting and environment - so time of day, weather like rain, etc) on the textures, and then use that as a cheat. This way you get the visual benefit of ray-tracing for most of the scene, but without the real-time hit. Couple it with doing some onboard NAND, where you'd load the entire game onto it, or at least things the GPU would need like textures so that it'd have the quickest streaming and capacity for lots of textures (you'd have several versions of similar textures for different situations).

Which, we don't hear a lot about texture filtering these days. I think last time I recall much of any scrutiny of it was like 10 years ago, when people were looking at differences in filtering between AMD/ATi and Nvidia on Trackmania.

Gamer Nexus did that by running Superposition at max settings, 8K. The results was Radeon 7 handily beating RTX 2080, but at 4FPS to 1FPS.


I wonder how much of Vega will carry over to Navi? I would really hate for AMD to be short sighted (ala Rory) and go backwards. I don't have a crystal ball, but if new lighting technology takes off an AMD doesn't have the hardware for it, it will create another "but NV has..." argument. Granted, this would take stars aligning, and with NV hemorrhaging money/piece of mind, interesting to see if they can get Devs to use it more.
 

itsmydamnation

Platinum Member
Feb 6, 2011
2,860
3,407
136
With the AT review setting similar clocks with Vega 10, I'm surprised that the memory bandwidth doesn't seem to be accounting for much of the performance improvement, seemingly refuting that Vega 10 was actually that limited by its Bandwidth. There are some cases where that seems to be the case, but by and large it wasn't as significant as I was expecting. Which that could point elsewhere as being a more probably bottleneck. I know many think the ROPs are but, I'm not so sure they are outside of AA (which we know is definitely an issue, would be interesting to see if it still is on Radeon VII or if maybe the bandwidth or software might have improved things). Geometry throughput maybe, but I think its more than that.

I have a Vega 56 i think its geometry/front end as the major bottleneck. The key to me is that the games that run the worst also have by far the highest clocks(~300mhz) compared to games that run well. By worst/well i mean relative to a 1070.
 
Reactions: lightmanek

Tup3x

Golden Member
Dec 31, 2016
1,008
996
136
Why would selling the Mi50 as a consumer card have any impact on Navi? Your statement doesn't make much sense. The GPUs are entirely unrelated.

I don't see Intel being competitive out the gate. Drivers alone will hold them back some, as its hard to create brand new drivers for years worth of games in a short period. AMD and nVidia have had years of work for their drivers to mature.
They release really expensive card now only to make it obsolete after few months. That doesn't make sense to me and VII buyers would probably feel cheated. If they do release Navi this year I think it's going to be Polaris' successor.
 

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
5,575
8,736
136
Back in stock at amd.com

Add to Cart

Just a reminder, buying straight from AMD means only a 1 year warranty, so if you want a longer warranty, you have to hold out for partner branded models.
 

lightmanek

Senior member
Feb 19, 2017
399
798
136
Plenty of stock in UK since yesterday. I bought mine from Ebuyer.com but since then there is stock at OCUK as well at normal prices.
Hope to get my card tomorrow!
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
8,002
6,438
136
What he said makes a lot of sense. From a marketing perspective, AMD would not release this card if they planned to also release another card in the same price or performance bracket in the near term (next 6 months). If the most die-hard AMD enthusiasts pay $700 now, only for AMD to release another better high end GPU sometime soon, that would kill a lot of good will. This wasn't announced like the Vega Frontier Edition, where they told everyone that gaming version will be out in the future so hold tight.

AMD needed something for the CES keynote and Navi wasn’t in good enough shape.

Since AMD would rather sell these as MI50 parts, they do not care if in half a year they replace it. This is a stopgap product.

People who bought this are unlikely to be swayed so easily, just like NVidia customers who plonk down loads of dosh for a new Titan.

Also I think AMD will have better results rolling out the lower end Navi cards first. Unless they magically fixed all of the architectural problems that have been holding them back, their high end parts won’t be a massive improvement. Sure it will be better since there’s no need to spend transistors on ML junk, but it’s much better to get millions of customers access to a really good $200 card since NVidia isn’t targeting that segment with Turing yet.
 

GodisanAtheist

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2006
7,040
7,461
136
I highly doubt Navi will target performance above Vega 64 and GTX 1080. AMD stated that they are launching the 7nm stack at the high end, so all that leaves is performance below the VII for Navi.

Additionally, AMD needs to target the Vega 10 performance brackets with something a bit more affordable than giant HBM fueled Vega 10 dies.

I can definitely see AMD pushing put a Navi based or next gen high end part the year after (Late 2020) however.
 

linkgoron

Platinum Member
Mar 9, 2005
2,333
857
136
I highly doubt Navi will target performance above Vega 64 and GTX 1080. AMD stated that they are launching the 7nm stack at the high end, so all that leaves is performance below the VII for Navi.

Additionally, AMD needs to target the Vega 10 performance brackets with something a bit more affordable than giant HBM fueled Vega 10 dies.

I can definitely see AMD pushing put a Navi based or next gen high end part the year after (Late 2020) however.

If small Navi is launched at around July, why would big Navi be late 2020? If Navi ends up decent (it might), AMD could probably release their first top to bottom architecture since forever. IMO they will probably have an early 2020 (or very late 2019) launch. Once the top of the 20 series goes down in price (and it will, once Nvidia slashes the 2080ti prices), the Radeon 7 won't be viable even at $600. I assume that the 30 series will also launch early to mid 2020 as well.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |