Skip to main content

Gigabyte Radeon RX Vega 64 Gaming OC 8G Review

Gaming Benchmarks

Thus far, everything seems pretty similar to the Gigabyte Radeon RX Vega 56 we reviewed previously, right? We did, however, have to run our benchmarks twice, since the company recently adapted its BIOS to accommodate a modified power table from AMD that should improve support for third-party cards. It increases the average clock rate of Gigabyte's Radeon RX Vega 64 Gaming OC by about 50 MHz, and even reduces power consumption by a bit.

This means that previous benchmark issues discovered in our Sapphire Radeon RX Vega 64 Nitro+ review should soon be solved. Moving forward, we hope to see partner boards behave the way we were expecting from the get-go.

Unfortunately, for now, Gigabyte's new firmware is still in beta, meaning it isn't publicly available. As such, all of our benchmarks, from gaming performance to acoustics, power, and heat, are recorded as the Radeon RX Vega 64 Gaming OC landed on our doorstep: with its default BIOS.

Comparison Products

Results: 2560x1440 (WQHD)

First, we test at 2560x1440, where a card like this is most likely to excel.

Image 1 of 9

Image 2 of 9

Image 3 of 9

Image 4 of 9

Image 5 of 9

Image 6 of 9

Image 7 of 9

Image 8 of 9

Image 9 of 9

Compared to AMD's reference design, third-party boards usually only achieve slightly higher clock rates, resulting in humble performance improvements. Nevertheless, the Radeon RX Vega 64 Gaming OC is still consistently faster (sometimes a bit more and sometimes a bit less).

Results: 3840x2160 (WQHD)

The overall picture doesn't change much at 3840x2160, though there isn't much difference between Gigabyte's card and AMD's reference design. Neither option is ideal for 4K gaming with maxed-out settings. Compromises must be made on the detail sliders to bring frame rates up enough for smooth performance.

Image 1 of 9

Image 2 of 9

Image 3 of 9

Image 4 of 9

Image 5 of 9

Image 6 of 9

Image 7 of 9

Image 8 of 9

Image 9 of 9

Summary

We have to look elsewhere for the true advantages of Gigabyte's card. Although the Radeon RX Vega 64 Gaming OC 8G might not be much faster than what we've already seen, better power numbers or acoustics could still make it a winner.


MORE: Best Graphics Cards


MORE: Desktop GPU Performance Hierarchy Table


MORE: All Graphics Content

  • g-unit1111
    I really wish we could buy these. I'd love to get a Vega 56. This GPU shortage is getting absolutely stupid.
    Reply
  • FormatC
    I personally hate this stupid mining. A waste of ressources, only to feed a big bubble.

    And to look forward:
    No VGA available means no sales of CPU, mainboards, memory etc.
    The kiddies will buy consoles... Totally bad for the PC market and periphery.
    Reply
  • BulkZerker
    No hash rate benchmarks? Disappointed:(
    Reply
  • barryv88
    Again, Toms is very tight lipped about these Vega cards consistently outperforming their competitors. Hardly anything mentioned about those gaming benchmarks and the fact that the V64 eats the 1080 especially at 2560 res. AND you get a great mining card. And a $200 cheaper monitor (instead of a Gsync comparable one) thanx to Freesync. I'm counting quite alot of wins here. If only the miners didn't spoil the party!
    Reply
  • Malik 722
    @formatc.rightly said i too hate this mining craze.
    Reply
  • rc1235
    Good power analysis. I wish there were comparisons against the 1080 though.
    Reply
  • FormatC
    20634804 said:
    Good power analysis. I wish there were comparisons against the 1080 though.
    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-graphics-cards,4725.html
    I made such a thing long time ago. Simply pick a card of your choice and compare it. The 1080 is in a few months old iron ;)

    No hash rate benchmarks? Disappointed:(
    It is a gaming card, not just another card to feed the mining bubble. The current market situation is the result of all this mining shit. Greed eats brain - not with me. Please don't ask me, how I got these both samples. You see any other reviews of this GB cards? :)

    Hardly anything mentioned about those gaming benchmarks
    Of course, I could have added a performance/watt curve as well. It has all some pros and cons. Sometimes it's just better to keep quiet. Everyone can read, what he prefer. :)



    Reply
  • rc1235
    Oh wow, thanks for the link - that is an amazing article for a number of reasons.
    Reply
  • pepar0
    Personally, I think the tech/gaming media should STOP reviewing graphics cards that cannot be purchased. Nor couldn't be afforded if they could be found. This is not out of wanting to punish the GPU makers, but is rather a practical and principals matter. Plus it might cause GPU makes to rethink their positions; gamers will be here if digital currencies evolve to where mining is not needed.
    Reply
  • g-unit1111
    20634712 said:
    Again, Toms is very tight lipped about these Vega cards consistently outperforming their competitors. Hardly anything mentioned about those gaming benchmarks and the fact that the V64 eats the 1080 especially at 2560 res. AND you get a great mining card. And a $200 cheaper monitor (instead of a Gsync comparable one) thanx to Freesync. I'm counting quite alot of wins here. If only the miners didn't spoil the party!

    I'd *LOVE* to buy a Vega 56 or Vega 64 especially to compare with my 1080, and the Vega platform is pretty solid. The GPU makers really need to start taking steps to end this madness. The GPU shortage is getting to be ridiculously stupid on every level.
    Reply