Metro: Last Light Redux (DirectX 11)
The use of SSAA at 2560x1440 was already an issue for Radeon RX Vega 64, so the hit we take on Vega 56 gives even more reason to turn that feature off (or dial back from the game’s Very High quality preset). Nevertheless, it’s good to see Vega 56 landing between the two GeForce GTX 1070s in a DirectX 11-based title historically favorable to Nvidia.
One interesting take-away apparent from the frame time over run line graph is that both Vega cards exhibit larger spikes and dips than the other boards in our test field. As a result, they fall to the bottom of our frame time variance chart.
Disabling SSAA for 3840x2160 testing keeps performance close to where it was at 2560x1440, though now we’re flirting with minimum frame rates under 30 FPS.
The same observation about frame time and variance can be made at 4K, where both Vega cards are less consistent than older Radeons or GeForces. Still, our lab notes turn up no complaints of apparent stuttering, and our unevenness index shows Vega 56 and GTX 1070 on roughly equal footing.
MORE: Best Graphics Cards
MORE: Desktop GPU Performance Hierarchy Table
MORE: All Graphics Content
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.
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 ...
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.