Thursday, August 3rd 2017
AMD RX Vega 56 Benchmarks Leaked - An (Unverified) GTX 1070 Killer
TweakTown has put forth an article wherein they claim to have received info from industry insiders regarding the upcoming Vega 56's performance. Remember that Vega 56 is the slightly cut-down version of the flagship Vega 64, counting with 56 next-generation compute units (NGCUs) instead of Vega 64's, well, 64. This means that while the Vega 64 has the full complement of 4,096 Stream processors, 256 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and a 2048-bit wide 8 GB HBM2 memory pool offering 484 GB/s of bandwidth, Vega 56 makes do with 3,548 Stream processors,192 TMUs, 64 ROPs, the same 8 GB of HBM2 memory and a slightly lower memory bandwidth at 410 GB/s.
The Vega 56 has been announced to retail for about $399, or $499 with one of AMD's new (famous or infamous, depends on your mileage) Radeon Packs. The RX Vega 56 card was running on a system configured with an Intel Core i7-7700K @ 4.2GHz, 16 GB of DDR4-3000 MHz RAM, and Windows 10 at 2560 x 1440 resolution.
The results in a number of popular games were as follows:
Battlefield 1 (Ultra settings): 95.4 FPS (GTX 1070: 72.2 FPS; 32% in favor of Vega 56)
Civilization 6 (Ultra settings, 4x MSAA): 85.1 FPS (GTX 1070: 72.2 FPS; 17% in favor of Vega 56)
DOOM (Ultra settings, 8x TSAA): 101.2 FPS (GTX 1070: 84.6 FPS; 20% in favor of Vega 56)
Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare (High preset): 99.9 FPS (GTX 1070: 92.1 FPS; 8% in favor of Vega 56)
If these numbers ring true, this means NVIDIA's GTX 1070, whose average pricing stands at around $460, will have a much reduced value proposition compared to the RX Vega 56. The AMD contender (which did arrive a year after NVIDIA's Pascal-based cards) delivers around 20% better performance (at least in the admittedly sparse games line-up), while costing around 15% less in greenbacks. Coupled with a lower cost of entry for a FreeSync monitor, and the possibility for users to get even more value out of a particular Radeon Pack they're eyeing, this could potentially be a killer deal. However, I'd recommend you wait for independent, confirmed benchmarks and reviews in controlled environments. I dare to suggest you won't need to look much further than your favorite tech site on the internet for that, when the time comes.
Source:
TweakTown
The Vega 56 has been announced to retail for about $399, or $499 with one of AMD's new (famous or infamous, depends on your mileage) Radeon Packs. The RX Vega 56 card was running on a system configured with an Intel Core i7-7700K @ 4.2GHz, 16 GB of DDR4-3000 MHz RAM, and Windows 10 at 2560 x 1440 resolution.
Battlefield 1 (Ultra settings): 95.4 FPS (GTX 1070: 72.2 FPS; 32% in favor of Vega 56)
Civilization 6 (Ultra settings, 4x MSAA): 85.1 FPS (GTX 1070: 72.2 FPS; 17% in favor of Vega 56)
DOOM (Ultra settings, 8x TSAA): 101.2 FPS (GTX 1070: 84.6 FPS; 20% in favor of Vega 56)
Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare (High preset): 99.9 FPS (GTX 1070: 92.1 FPS; 8% in favor of Vega 56)
If these numbers ring true, this means NVIDIA's GTX 1070, whose average pricing stands at around $460, will have a much reduced value proposition compared to the RX Vega 56. The AMD contender (which did arrive a year after NVIDIA's Pascal-based cards) delivers around 20% better performance (at least in the admittedly sparse games line-up), while costing around 15% less in greenbacks. Coupled with a lower cost of entry for a FreeSync monitor, and the possibility for users to get even more value out of a particular Radeon Pack they're eyeing, this could potentially be a killer deal. However, I'd recommend you wait for independent, confirmed benchmarks and reviews in controlled environments. I dare to suggest you won't need to look much further than your favorite tech site on the internet for that, when the time comes.
169 Comments on AMD RX Vega 56 Benchmarks Leaked - An (Unverified) GTX 1070 Killer
I can scarcely wait for proper reviews to come out. The speculation with Vega is as bad as Ryzen if not worse.
and $500 for founders
editor is not wrong there
As for me the unverified results are nice considering AMD hasnt been in such a position in a long time. I think Nvidia will up its game with Volta, which might mean a delayed release until they prove they retake top daug slot without much fanfare.
$400, and it slightly loses to the 1080 while having FAR better long-term technology. This will sell well, and Vega64 should be at least 15% stronger than this!
Although you are very "vocal" in these forums, so I already know you are aware of them, and I can''t wait to see what your fanboy response will be.
And who the heck cares what kept AMD floating? :O It was ~10% slower for about $40 cheaper and a bit more power consumption. And 5-6 months later, the performance gap was reduced to 0-2% and still costing $30-40 less.
- HBC is relevant for pure compute workloads, but not for gaming.
- Asynchronous compute is supported by Nvidia as well.
You're all screwed. It's allegedly the God of mining.
videocardz.com/71591/rumor-amd-radeon-rx-vega-64-to-be-great-for-mining
m.youtube.com/watch?feature=share&v=85ProuqAof0
The 1070 will be sold at a profit, and just wait to see how prices sit in the Fall after mining peters out. Back in with either red or green then depending on price points
The only exception I can think of is possibly a cut-down Volta sold as a Titan card for $1500 - $2000.
And if you think about it, it was only a matter of time before some program found a way to make money off of the massive computational power modern GPU's have.
1) It's still not enough to be the fastest gaming GPU and ;
2) It keeps the profit margins very low
Anyway, if you see my post further up, Vega 64 is a mining monster. So it's going to disappear fast on one of those jumbo jets. Not good news at all for gamers. :mad: