AMD Vega (FE and RX) Benchmarks [Updated Aug 10 - RX Vega 64 Unboxing]

[railven]

This has really been one hell of a ride. So glad it will be "over" in a few days. So another curve ball regarding Primitive Shaders. And already the "is it active or not in drivers." I can't wait for the future article or confession that reveals what actually happened during Vega's development. It probably make for a damn good read.

Best. GPU. Launch. Ever.

 

[Snarf Snarf]

This has really been one hell of a ride. So glad it will be "over" in a few days. So another curve ball regarding Primitive Shaders. And already the "is it active or not in drivers." I can't wait for the future article or confession that reveals what actually happened during Vega's development. It probably make for a damn good read.

Best. GPU. Launch. Ever.

I'm still trying to get crowd funded so I can do a Drunk History with Raja about Vega's launch.

 

[railven]

I'm still trying to get crowd funded so I can do a Drunk History with Raja about Vega's launch.

Share the link, I'll toss in enough cash for a round of drinks! haha.

 

[ozzy702]

I dont think so..GTX1070 2140/9500 is still like 15% behind stock reference GTX1080 in 99% games.It should be around stock reference vega 56performance.AIB card will be 10% faster and maybe another 10% from OC thats 20%.
If vega 56 memory can be oc same way like on vega64 there should be pretty small gap vs vega 64 at same clock.Probably 5-8%.

Why would you waste money on Vega if you already own a 1070 that performs that high? Several hundred dollars for a few % points and significantly higher power consumption. Doesn't sound like a good move. Wait for Volta or pickup a 1070ti.

 

[Crumpet]

Vega with almost 2GHz? Although I doubt that tbh.

http://www.3dmark.com/spy/2205628

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/spy/2205628/spy/2177830/spy/1984947

Buildzoid comment on /AMD/

• "It's fake. Vega has a bug where you can set very very high core clocks but the performance ends up being worse than stock. I first ran into when testing my FE on LN2 but I also managed to make my card run at "2000MHz" core in later testing on air."

Which makes sense considering the performance shown here is roughly equal to 2x Rx470 crossfire. (thanks to Jaeger for pointing that out)

So what we can take from this is reference Vega performance @stock clocks, or worse.

 

[Elixer]

So can we all in unision agree Vega is DOA ?

DOA for whom exactly?
I do see a market for Vega, and if it has SR-IOV, tons of linux people will be getting the cards.

For the Windows gaming crowd? *shrug*.

Vega 64 and 56 are pretty much same cards you know.If you can OC HBM2 on 56 to or above vega 64level there will be almost zero difference in performance.thats why i waiting for vega 56 OC results

4096/3584=14% more SP

On nv side
2560/1920=33.3% more Sp and 25% more bandwidth

Well... your $$$, but it does seem like a sidegrade from what we have been hearing.
Don't think I would sell the 1070 just yet, and in 2 days, see just where we sit on Vega.

 

[psolord]

I dont think so..GTX1070 2140/9500 is still like 15% behind stock reference GTX1080 in 99% games.It should be around stock reference vega 56performance.AIB card will be 10% faster and maybe another 10% from OC thats 20%.
If vega 56 memory can be oc same way like on vega64 there should be pretty small gap vs vega 64 at same clock.Probably 5-8%.

My friend, save some time from the calculations and just wait for Volta.

I mean you have a 1070, not a 570. What's the hurry?

 

[Head1985]

My friend, save some time from the calculations and just wait for Volta.

I mean you have a 1070, not a 570. What's the hurry?

I game at 1440p.GTX1070 is too slow for 1440/max out.I think i should get nearly 30% performance bumb with vega 64 max oc.And far more in time(it will end up close to 1080TI in 1-2 years anyway-gtx2070 teritory)

 

[Hi-Fi Man]

I game at 1440p.GTX1070 is too slow for 1440/max out.I think i should get nearly 30% performance bumb with vega 64 max oc.And far more in time(it will end up close to 1080TI in 1-2 years anyway)

I think you are being a bit delusional if you think the increase will be that much, especially in regards to 1080 ti performance...

Not to mention it makes no sense to spend that much for such a small increase in performance.

 

[Tup3x]

https://mobile.twitter.com/ryszu/status/896327467987873793

Looks like maybe Primitive Shaders are automatically applied from the driver and don't require developer input?

I really hope so because manual developer work would have been really brain dead choice (it would have meant rather limited support). If those are working at the moment they do not quite live up to the hype. Though, I can't remember AMD giving any hard numbers so...

AMD made a real mess. Pretty much no one understood how those work... They should be way clearer in the future.

 

[Head1985]

I think you are being a bit delusional if you think the increase will be that much, especially in regards to 1080 ti performance...

Not to mention it makes no sense to spend that much for such a small increase in performance.

i am pretty sure if vega 64 reference is at GTX1080 level then non throttling AIB card will be abble oc +15% and thats alone is 30% bumb vs GTX1070 2140/9500 because that card is still 15% behind stock GTX1080.
Btw in eu used gtx1070 sells for more than official GTX1070 MSRP

Here are prices for new GTX1070.
https://www.alzashop.com/gf-gtx1070/18859192.htm

 

[PeterScott]

i am pretty sure if vega 64 reference is at GTX1080 level then non throttling AIB card will be abble oc +15% and thats alone is 30% bumb vs GTX1070 2140/9500 because that card is still 15% behind stock GTX1080.
Btw in eu used gtx1070 sells for more than official GTX1070 MSRP

Here are prices for new GTX1070.
https://www.alzashop.com/gf-gtx1070/18859192.htm

What do you think a Vega 64 is going to cost? Word is AMD prices are already up and they are selling the base model at the same price as the limited edition. So 599 Euros minimum:
https://videocardz.com/71776/amd-is-trying-to-sell-radeon-rx-vega-64-at-a-higher-price

 

[Konan]

Fudz - http://fudzilla.com/news/graphics/44283-amd-vega-shows-up-well-above-msrp

Update 1: AMD has reached out to us this morning that they have confirmed that Newegg and Amazon will have Vega 64 priced at $499.

Wonder on the stock levels for that price now....

 

[Head1985]

Vega should sucks at mining so AIBs/e-shops will be forced sell it for MSRP and not some fantasy mining prices.Its 599 because they think its very good at mining.Once everyone will know vega sucks at mining prices should be normal.

 

[Malogeek]

So can we all in unision agree Vega is DOA ?

It's missing the A since arrival hasn't happened yet.

 

[JDG1980]

Which of the features is increasing Geometry Throughput of Vega architecture to up to 11 Triangles per clock with 4 Geometry Engines?

That "11 triangles per clock" figure is basically a lie from RTG's notoriously dishonest marketing department. It appeared only in the old architecture preview slides, and was part of a footnote claiming "over 2x peak throughput per clock" comparing to Fiji, which had no Primitive Discard Accelerator (introduced in Polaris). Note the careful use of the term throughput, not rendering. What they really mean is that it can render 4 triangles/clock and discard another 7 via the Primitive Discard Accelerator. There is NO WAY that Vega can actually render more than 4 triangles/clock no matter what the programmer does.

Note that this tendentious claim does NOT appear on any of the release day slide decks. Here is the release day architecture overview slides - please try to find anything backing up the 11 polygons/clock claim. It's not there, because that claim was always dishonest marketing BS. The emphasis in Vega slides is trying to reduce the amount of geometry the card actually has to render. When these tricks run out, Vega is bottlenecked. It WILL NEVER and CAN NEVER match GP102 in geometry-intensive games, because GP102 can actually render 6 triangles/clock and Vega can only actually render 4.

 

[tviceman]

I game at 1440p.GTX1070 is too slow for 1440/max out.I think i should get nearly 30% performance bumb with vega 64 max oc.And far more in time(it will end up close to 1080TI in 1-2 years anyway-gtx2070 teritory)

You are absolutely disillusion if you think Vega is going to gain 35% over it's life span vs. the competition. Everyone and their mom talked up DX12 and AMD's advantage, but a year after GTX 1060 was released RX 480 has only gained 5% on the GTX 1060 and is still generally slower (albeit "trading blows"). A max OC'd Vega 64 will not be faster than a max OC'd GTX 1080, but it's going to consume 200 more watts of power. Even if Vega has caches of untapped potential, it will never be exploited in more than 2-3 games because Vega sales will be so dismal that AMD won't want to sink money into a product that lost them 10's, if not 100's of millions of dollars.

Whatever floats your boat though. You've been looking for so many reasons to hate your GTX 1070. Go get your self a Vega 56 or 64. Better yet, get two of them!

 

[96Firebird]

Head1985, I for one think you should side-grade your 1070 for Vega. You've made it very clear you aren't satisfied with your current card, on multiple occasions, so why not waste money getting a card that will probably be barely faster? As long as it makes you happy.

 

[Head1985]

You are absolutely disillusion if you think Vega is going to gain 35% over it's life span vs. the competition. Everyone and their mom talked up DX12 and AMD's advantage, but a year after GTX 1060 was released RX 480 has only gained 5% on the GTX 1060 and is still generally slower (albeit "trading blows"). A max OC'd Vega 64 will not be faster than a max OC'd GTX 1080, but it's going to consume 200 more watts of power. Even if Vega has caches of untapped potential, it will never be exploited in more than 2-3 games because Vega sales will be so dismal that AMD won't want to sink money into a product that lost them 10's, if not 100's of millions of dollars.

Whatever floats your boat though. You've been looking for so many reasons to hate your GTX 1070. Go get your self a Vega 56 or 64. Better yet, get two of them!

i didnt say it will beat 1080TI.I said it will be close to 1080TI.I really dont care what you guys think.I just hate Nvidia for what they done lately(GTX970 lies, GTX1070 cutdown so much, Founder edition tax,Super high prices)I said i will never buy NV again after GTX970 but AMD didnt release any high-end card so i was forced buy GTX1070 whitch i hate because it cost me like 550USD and its most cutdown x70 card ever and its already so slow that it cant hold 60fps/max out in any new game after one year.This was like worst buy ever.Lucky me i can sell it for 400USD because miners and buy vega.
I am sure vega at 1700Mhz will end up 30% faster than GTX1070 2140/9500 in 1440p/4k and far more in future.

 

[Insomniator]

i didnt say it will beat 1080TI.I said it will be close to 1080TI.I really dont care what you guys think.I just hate Nvidia for what they done lately(GTX970 lies, GTX1070 cutdown so much, Founder edition tax,Super high prices)I said i will never buy NV again after GTX970 but AMD didnt release any high-end card so i was forced buy GTX1070 whitch i hate because it cost me like 550USD and its most cutdown x70 card ever and its already so slow that it cant hold 60fps/max out in any new game after one year.This was like worst buy ever.Lucky me i can sell it for 400USD because miners and buy vega.
I am sure vega at 1700Mhz will end up 30% faster than GTX1070 2140/9500 in 1440p/4k and far more in future.

wat

 

[Head1985]

wat

short:i dont want support nvidia after GTX970.

 

[Elixer]

short:i dont want support nvidia after GTX970.

Didn't you already support them by buying the 1070?
That aside, you don't really need to explain why you are doing it, it is your cash, and you get to spend it how you want.

As we come to the final hours of one of the longest marketing campaigns for AMD, overall, I am really disappointed at how Vega was marketed.
It was also idiotic when GN basically threw a temper tantrum, broke more rules by posting what they did, and then get rewarded for their bad behavior by getting Vega cards.
It reminds me of the shady "used car" salesmen tactics. I just hope they aren't going to also do a bait & switch between what the "reviewers" have received, and what the public gets.
I am sure consumers would love to get a plexi-glass(?) Vega logo cube, and a dead Vega chip in their retail box as well.

 

[Hi-Fi Man]

i didnt say it will beat 1080TI.I said it will be close to 1080TI.I really dont care what you guys think.I just hate Nvidia for what they done lately(GTX970 lies, GTX1070 cutdown so much, Founder edition tax,Super high prices)I said i will never buy NV again after GTX970 but AMD didnt release any high-end card so i was forced buy GTX1070 whitch i hate because it cost me like 550USD and its most cutdown x70 card ever and its already so slow that it cant hold 60fps/max out in any new game after one year.This was like worst buy ever.Lucky me i can sell it for 400USD because miners and buy vega.
I am sure vega at 1700Mhz will end up 30% faster than GTX1070 2140/9500 in 1440p/4k and far more in future.

The level of mental gymnastics you've done to come to that conclusion is just impressive.

 

[Head1985]

I really dont know why you guys so care what i am buying.Its my money not yours.You have some problem with it?

 

[tamz_msc]

What @Head1985 is saying makes perfect sense. Back in the day the GTX 670 was only slightly cut down from the GTX 680. This changed with subsequent generations and the gap between the x70 and x80 cards has been increasing, both in terms of performance and the price difference. Just like the R9 290/290X and the Fury/Fury X, where it made more sense to get the non-X version, the same would likely hold true for the Vega 56 and 64. Given the low TDP of the reference card, it should be possible to overclock with AIB models like Sapphire Nitro to reach close to Vega 64 performance. This has some caveats though, it seems that the difference in the power draw between the 56 and 64 boils down mainly to the HBM2 clocks and voltages. HBM2 is extremely finicky to overclock.