MSI Vigor GK71 Sonic keyboard review
MSI GeForce RTX 3080 Suprim X 12GB review
TeamGroup A440 PRO Special 5eries 4TB NVMe review
Core i5 12400 processor review
MSI MAG B660M Mortar WIFI review
Biostar Z690 Valkyrie review
TeamGroup A440 PRO PCIe 4.0 M.2 NVMe review
DDR5 scaling with G.Skill TridentZ5 6000 CL36 review
ASUS GeForce RTX 3070 Noctua OC review
G.Skill Z5i (Mini ITX) chassis review
AMD Vega Frontier Edition Unboxed and Benchmark (updated)
With AMDs Vega Frontier Edition now available it was only a matter of time before a consumer would get his hands on it. User #define @ Disqus purchased one, took unboxing photos and ran a 3DMark Firestrike.
User #define is still working on some SPECViewperf and 3DMark results, both based on the gaming and non gaming profiles that this Vega card offers. His system is based on a stock clocked Core i7 4790K / ASUS Maximus VII Impact motherboard 16 GB (2x8) dual channel Corsair Vengeance Pro Black modules, running at 2133 MHz.
It seems that PC and the beta driver is responsible for the somewhat lackluster score, and the GPU frequency is all over the place he mentions. Firestrike scored 17313 points, however that is the generic P score. if you look at the graph then the actual graphics score is 22916 though, which is say 10% above the GeForce GTX 1080. A GeForce GTX 1080 Ti / Titan Xp (Pascal scores roughly 28K on that GPU score. I'll update this article once he has some more results, and setup the card better.
So over the night #define updated with Firestrike Extreme and Ultra scores. The Ultra test is significant as that pretty much roots our the processor and system memory in the score. The score for him (in the current state) is 5216 points. I charted that up and threw it into the mix with the Guru3D tests (based on a massive Core a7 5960X quad-channel setup). Remember that chart is indicative, nothing else.
I want to make note that the guy uses an early driver, Radeon Vega Frontier Edition 17.6 with base driver version 17.20.1035 and that is not the gaming optimized driver set.
AMD VEGA Die-shot Photo - 06/06/2017 07:19 AM
Well, GPU shot reallt. Check it out, I checked with AMD if this is a real photo and not a fakes one. It is the real thing though. The VEGA shot shows a thing or two, you can count the 8 blocks that go...
AMD Vega To get 20K Units Released at launch and new Zen+ chatter - 05/09/2017 08:48 AM
The ongoing rumors about Radeon RX Vega are just, on-going. In the latest news it is reported that there will be 20K Units for Vega available state some media. There might be news about Zen+ inbound a...
New AMD Vega Photos and New Logo - 02/22/2017 04:37 PM
Over at the AMD event they had several systems setup with an AMD Vega as well, not just that. There is a new logo is shared as well....
AMD Vega 10 GPU Name Accidentally Confirmed as Radeon RX 490 gets 8GB - 01/31/2017 10:41 AM
Well, it's not like it was exactly a secret but thanks Bethesda for confirming it. Bethesda has announced that it will release a new HD Texture Pack for the PC version of Fallout 4. In order to prep...
AMD VEGA10 Graphics Card Photos - 01/09/2017 01:11 PM
Over at CES AMD has been showing a thing or two gaming wise, the DOOM 4K demos for example. These all have been run on a VEGA10 graphics card, a photo now has surfaced....
Denial
Senior Member
Posts: 13616
Joined: 2004-05-16
Senior Member
Posts: 13616
Joined: 2004-05-16
#5447199 Posted on: 06/28/2017 03:53 PM
I don't know what AMD was thinking with this release. They wanted a card like a Titan, but I guess the release is rushed so the gaming performance is terrible with the current "gaming" drivers, so Raja basically says "not for gaming" but they release a gaming mode for it anyway..
They should have either waited for the drivers to mature before releasing the card, or waited to release the gaming driver only until it was ready.
AMD's community takes pride in the fact that AMD is more willing to interact with users. I really think they should take advantage of that and explain the situation, why the gaming performance is low, what they are going to do to fix it, timeline for the fixes, etc. I think they would received a way better response then not even sending review samples out and sending mixed messages about the target market for the card itself.
I don't know what AMD was thinking with this release. They wanted a card like a Titan, but I guess the release is rushed so the gaming performance is terrible with the current "gaming" drivers, so Raja basically says "not for gaming" but they release a gaming mode for it anyway..
They should have either waited for the drivers to mature before releasing the card, or waited to release the gaming driver only until it was ready.
AMD's community takes pride in the fact that AMD is more willing to interact with users. I really think they should take advantage of that and explain the situation, why the gaming performance is low, what they are going to do to fix it, timeline for the fixes, etc. I think they would received a way better response then not even sending review samples out and sending mixed messages about the target market for the card itself.
Agent-A01
Senior Member
Posts: 11498
Joined: 2010-12-27
Senior Member
Posts: 11498
Joined: 2010-12-27
#5447209 Posted on: 06/28/2017 04:06 PM
I don't know what AMD was thinking with this release. They wanted a card like a Titan, but I guess the release is rushed so the gaming performance is terrible with the current "gaming" drivers, so Raja basically says "not for gaming" but they release a gaming mode for it anyway..
They should have either waited for the drivers to mature before releasing the card, or waited to release the gaming driver only until it was ready.
AMD's community takes pride in the fact that AMD is more willing to interact with users. I really think they should take advantage of that and explain the situation, why the gaming performance is low, what they are going to do to fix it, timeline for the fixes, etc. I think they would received a way better response then not even sending review samples out and sending mixed messages about the target market for the card itself.
Why does it really matter?
The price of this is what, $1500?
Anyways, it's way over a 1080ti and we know the Ti is faster and it only costs $650.
Surely nobody will buy less for more(gaming wise)
I don't know what AMD was thinking with this release. They wanted a card like a Titan, but I guess the release is rushed so the gaming performance is terrible with the current "gaming" drivers, so Raja basically says "not for gaming" but they release a gaming mode for it anyway..
They should have either waited for the drivers to mature before releasing the card, or waited to release the gaming driver only until it was ready.
AMD's community takes pride in the fact that AMD is more willing to interact with users. I really think they should take advantage of that and explain the situation, why the gaming performance is low, what they are going to do to fix it, timeline for the fixes, etc. I think they would received a way better response then not even sending review samples out and sending mixed messages about the target market for the card itself.
Why does it really matter?
The price of this is what, $1500?
Anyways, it's way over a 1080ti and we know the Ti is faster and it only costs $650.
Surely nobody will buy less for more(gaming wise)
Romulus_ut3
Senior Member
Posts: 704
Joined: 2013-09-18
Senior Member
Posts: 704
Joined: 2013-09-18
#5447210 Posted on: 06/28/2017 04:11 PM
Where's the Only Intruder guy now who had a lot to tell me on some other news post?
I didn't bother to reply to him in that thread. Well, here's proof of the performance.
All AMD is good for is providing you with a heater free of cost in colder countries.
Good luck in hoping to see a 50% performance gain with driver optimization alone.
Where's the Only Intruder guy now who had a lot to tell me on some other news post?
I didn't bother to reply to him in that thread. Well, here's proof of the performance.
All AMD is good for is providing you with a heater free of cost in colder countries.
Good luck in hoping to see a 50% performance gain with driver optimization alone.
Denial
Senior Member
Posts: 13616
Joined: 2004-05-16
Senior Member
Posts: 13616
Joined: 2004-05-16
#5447211 Posted on: 06/28/2017 04:11 PM
Why does it really matter?
The price of this is what, $1500?
Anyways, it's way over a 1080ti and we know the Ti is faster and it only costs $650.
Surely nobody will buy less for more(gaming wise)
The AC edition is $1000 the WC edition is $1500, they dropped the prices yesterday.
I guess it matters because the same hardware is being utilized in the RX variant (minus 8GB of HBM) as far as we know. So if this card has no legs with the gaming drivers, the RX variant will probably be similar.
Why does it really matter?
The price of this is what, $1500?
Anyways, it's way over a 1080ti and we know the Ti is faster and it only costs $650.
Surely nobody will buy less for more(gaming wise)
The AC edition is $1000 the WC edition is $1500, they dropped the prices yesterday.
I guess it matters because the same hardware is being utilized in the RX variant (minus 8GB of HBM) as far as we know. So if this card has no legs with the gaming drivers, the RX variant will probably be similar.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 1443
Joined: 2008-07-16
Should I laugh or should I cry ?
This is my result on a GTX1080 which was supposed to be slower than Vega:
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/10146244
Graphics Score - 24031
Yes, it is a bit overclocked... but still... dang, I have that card for a year, and 1080Ti's are scoring WAY, WAY higher (Up to ~30000 graphics score)