Why you can trust Tom's Hardware Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.
Middle-earth: Shadow of War (DirectX 11)
Shadow of War yields one more example of Radeon RX Vega 56 beating GeForce GTX 1070, yet succumbing to GeForce GTX 1070 Ti, if only barely.
Meanwhile, Radeon RX Vega 64 bests the GeForce GTX 1080.
Relaxing quality to the Medium preset allows us to achieve playable performance at 3840x2160. There, GTX 1070 Ti and Vega 56 essentially tie. One day ago, AMD’s second-fastest card was still selling for $50 more than its launch price, resulting in similar value stories in Middle-earth. Aware of Nvidia's impending introduction, though, AMD found a way to get Vega 56 down to ~$420 (at least temporarily), making GeForce GTX 1070 Ti look overpriced in comparison.
MORE: Best Graphics Cards
MORE: All Graphics Content
Current page: Middle-earth: Shadow of War (DirectX 11)Prev Page Metro: Last Light Redux (DirectX 11) Next Page Rise of the Tomb Raider (DirectX 12)
Stay on the Cutting Edge
Join the experts who read Tom's Hardware for the inside track on enthusiast PC tech news — and have for over 25 years. We'll send breaking news and in-depth reviews of CPUs, GPUs, AI, maker hardware and more straight to your inbox.
Yaaayyy! The NDA prison has freed everyone to release their reviews! Outstanding review, Chris. This card landed exactly where it was expected to, between the 1070 and 1080. In some games it gets real close to the 1080, where in other games, the 1080 is significantly ahead. Same with comparison to the RX 56 - close in some, not so close in others. Ashes and Destiny 2 clearly favor AMD's Vega GPUs. Can we get Project Cars 2 in the mix soon?Reply
It's a shame the overclocking results were too inconsistent to report, but I guess that will have to wait for vendor versions to test. Also, a hat tip for using 1440p where this GPU is targeted. Now the question is what will the real world selling prices be vs. the 1080. There are $520 1080s available out there (https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127945), so if AIB partners get closer to the $500 pricing threshold, that will be way too close to the 1080 in pricing.
Vega Still wins , If you take in consideration $200 Cheaper Freesync 1440p wide/nonwide monitors , AMD is still a winner.Reply
So why did MSI call it the GTX 1070 Ti Titanium? Do they not know what Ti means?Reply
ed: Lol at least one other person doesn't know what Ti means either : If you don't know Ti stands for "titanium" effectively they named the card GTX 1070 Titanium Titanium.
20334482 said:Vega Still wins , If you take in consideration $200 Cheaper Freesync 1440p wide/nonwide monitors , AMD is still a winner.
Well that is true and always goes without saying. You pay more for G-sync than Freesync which needs to be taken into consideration when deciding on GPUs. However, if you already own a 1440p 60Hz monitor, the choice becomes not so easy to make, especially considering how hard it is to find Vegas.
For those interested, Guru3D overclocked their Founder's Edition sample successfully. As expected, it gains 9-10% which puts it square into reference 1080 territory. Excellent for the lame blower cooler. The AIB vendor dual-triple fan cards will exceed that overclocking capability.Reply
Chris, what is it that pummels the minimums for the 1080 Ti and Vega 64 in BF1 at 1440p? And why, when moving up to UHD, does this effect persist for the 1080 Ti but not for Vega 64?Reply
Also, wrt the testing of Division, and comparing to your 1080 Ti review back in March, I notice the results for the 1070 are identical at 1440p (58.7), but completely different at UHD (42.7 in March, 32.7 now); what has changed? This new test states it's using Medium detail at UHD, so was the March testing using Ultra or something? The other cards are affected in the same way.
Not sure if it's significant, but I also see 1080 and 1080 Ti performance at 1440p being a bit better back in March.
Re pricing, Scan here in the UK has the Vega 56 a bit cheaper than a reference 1070 Ti, but not by much. One thing which is kinda nuts though, the AIB versions of the 1070 Ti are using the same branding names as they do for what are normally overclocked models, eg. SC for EVGA, AMP for Zotac, etc., but of course they're all 1607MHz base. Maybe they'll vary in steady state for boost clocks, but it kinda wrecks the purpose of their marketing names. :D
PS. When I follow the Forums link, the UK site looks different, then reverts to its more usual layout when one logs in (weird). Also, the UK site is failing to retain the login credentials from the US transfer as it used to.
20334510 said:Well that is true and always goes without saying. You pay more for G-sync than Freesync which needs to be taken into consideration when deciding on GPUs. ...
It's a bit odd that people are citing the monitor cost advantage of Freesync, while article reviews are not showing games actually running at frame rates which would be relevant to that technology. Or are all these Freesync buyers just using 1080p? Or much lower detail levels? I'd rather stick to 60Hz and higher quality visuals.
The typical Freesync-Buddy is playing in Wireframe-Mode at 720p ;)
All this sync options can help to smoothen the output, if you are too sensitive. This is a fact, but not for everybody with the same prio.
From other benchmarks I've seen, DX12 performance in BF1 is poor. Average FPS is a bit lower than in DX11, and minimum FPS far worse in some cases. If you're looking for BF1 performance info, I'd recommend looking for benchmarks on other sites that test in DX11.20334648 said:Chris, what is it that pummels the minimums for the 1080 Ti and Vega 64 in BF1 at 1440p? And why, when moving up to UHD, does this effect persist for the 1080 Ti but not for Vega 64?
20334667 said:It's a bit odd that people are citing the monitor cost advantage of Freesync, while article reviews are not showing games actually running at frame rates which would be relevant to that technology. Or are all these Freesync buyers just using 1080p? Or much lower detail levels? I'd rather stick to 60Hz and higher quality visuals.
Well I'm not sure I understand your point. The benchmarks show FPS exceeding 60FPS, meaning maximum GPU performance. It's about matching monitor refresh rate (Hz) to FPS for smooth gameplay, not just raw FPS. But regarding the Freesync argument, that's usually what is brought up in price comparisons between AMD and Nvidia. If someone is looking to upgrade from both a 60Hz monitor and a GPU, then it's a valid point.
However, as I stated, if someone already has a 60Hz 2560x1440 or one of those ultrawide monitors, then the argument for Vega gets much weaker. Especially considering their limited availability. As I posted in a link above, you can buy a nice dual fan MSI GTX 1080 for $520 on NewEgg right now. I have not seen a dual fan MSI Vega for sale anywhere (every Vega for sale I've seen is the reference blower design).