AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 8GB Review
Why you can trust Tom's Hardware
Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation (DirectX 12)
Radeon RX Vega 56 essentially ties GeForce GTX 1070 Founders Edition at 2560x1440 in Ashes. It delivers about 82% of Radeon RX Vega 64’s average frame rate in the process, yielding playable performance through the benchmark run.
Still, Vega 56 trails AMD’s previous-gen flagship, Radeon R9 Fury X, demonstrating what the loss of eight CUs and significant memory bandwidth does to Vega 10’s potential.
Vega 56 again ducks in under the R9 Fury X and GeForce GTX 1070 at 3840x2160, though all three cards fare quite similarly.
While variance doesn’t seem problematic for AMD, a number of frame time spikes during our 150-second recording cause Vega 56 to register the highest percentage of 16ms+ frames. It was quite a bit smoother at 2560x1440.
MORE: Best Graphics Cards
MORE: Desktop GPU Performance Hierarchy Table
MORE: All Graphics Content
Current page: Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation (DirectX 12)
Prev Page How We Tested AMD's Vega RX 56 8GB Next Page Battlefield 1 (DirectX 12)Stay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Intel appoints two new board members with semiconductor backgrounds following Gelsinger exit
Polysoft offers $849 8TB SSD upgrade module for Mac Studio — reverse-engineered SSD vastly undercuts Apple's $2,220 price
Nvidia bids goodbye to GeForce Experience — Nvidia App officially replaces it in the latest driver update
-
kjurden What a crock! I didn't realize that Tom's hardware pandered to the iNvidiot's. AMD VEGA GPU's have rightfully taken the performance crown!Reply -
Martell1977 Vega 56 vs GTX 1070, Vega goes 6-2-2 = Winner Vega!Reply
Good job AMD, hopefully next gen you can make more headway in power efficiency. But this is a good card, even beats the factory OC 1070. -
Wisecracker Thanks for the hard work and in-depth review -- any word on Vega Nano?Reply
Some 'Other Guys' (Namer Gexus?) were experimenting on under-volting and clock-boosting with interesting results. It's not like you guys don't have enough to do, already, but an Under-Volt-Off Smack Down between AMD and nVidia might be fun for readers ...
-
pavel.mateja No undervolting tests?Reply
https://translate.google.de/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=de&ie=UTF-8&u=https://www.hardwareluxx.de/index.php/artikel/hardware/grafikkarten/44084-amd-radeon-rx-vega-56-und-vega-64-im-undervolting-test.html&edit-text= -
10tacle 20112576 said:What a crock! I didn't realize that Tom's hardware pandered to the iNvidiot's. AMD VEGA GPU's have rightfully taken the performance crown!
Yeah Tom's Hardware does objective reviewing. If there are faults with something, they will call them out like the inferior VR performance over the 1070. This is not the National Inquirer of tech review sites like WCCTF. There are more things to consider than raw FPS performance and that's what we expect to see in an honest objective review.
Guru3D's conclusion with caveats:
"For PC gaming I can certainly recommend Radeon RX Vega 56. It is a proper and good performance level that it offers, priced right. It's a bit above average wattage compared to the competitions product in the same performance bracket. However much more decent compared to Vega 64."
Tom's conclusion with caveats:
"Even when we compare it to EVGA’s overclocked GeForce GTX 1070 SC Gaming 8GB (there are no Founders Edition cards left to buy), Vega 56 consistently matches or beats it. But until we see some of those forward-looking features exposed for gamers to enjoy, Vega 56’s success will largely depend on its price relative to GeForce GTX 1070."
^^And that's the truth. If prices of the AIB cards coming are closer to the GTX 1080, then it can't be considered a better value. This is not AMD's fault of course, but that's just the reality of the situation. You can't sugar coat it, you can't hide it, and you can't spin it. Real money is real money. We've already seen this with the RX 64 prices getting close to GTX 1080 Ti territory.
With that said, I am glad to see Nvidia get direct competition from AMD again in the high end segment since Fury even though it's a year and four months late to the party. In this case, the reference RX 56 even bests an AIB Strix GTX 1070 variant in most non-VR games. That's promising for what's going to come with their AIB variants. The question now is what's looming on the horizon in an Nvidia response with Volta. We'll find out in the coming months. -
shrapnel_indie We've seen what they can do in a factory blower configuration. Are board manufacturers allowed to take 64 and 56 and do their own designs and cooling solutions, where they can potentially coax more out of it (power usage aside)? Or are they stuck with this configuration as Fury X and Fury Nano were stuck?Reply -
10tacle No, there will be card vendors like ASUS, Gigabyte, and MSI who will have their own cooling. Here's a review of an ASUS RX 64 Strix Gaming:Reply
http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/109078-asus-radeon-rx-vega-64-strix-gaming/ -
pepar0
Will any gamers buy this card ... will any gamers GET to buy this card? Hot, hungry, noisy and expensive due to the crypto currency mining craze was not what this happy R290 owner had in mind.20112412 said:Radeon RX Vega 56 should be hitting store shelves with 3584 Stream processors and 8GB of HBM2. Should you scramble to snag yours or shop for something else?
AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 8GB Review : Read more