Intel Core i9 9900KS processor review
AMD Ryzen 9 3950X review
Promo: Windows 10 Pro for $13 With Office 2016 For $33
ASUS PRIME X570 Pro review
ASUS ROG STRIX Scope keyboard review
GALAX GeForce RTX 2070 Super WTF review
ADATA Spectrix S40G 512GB NVMe M.2 SSD review
Red Dead Redemption 2: PC graphics performance benchmark review
XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT THICC III Ultra review
Promo: URcdkey Halloween sale Windows 10 Pro for 11$
Review: Radeon RX 5700 and 5700 XT
It's the 7th ot the 7th, it is time to review the two new 7nm based graphics cards from AMD, yes the Radeon RX 5700 and 5700 XT get tested. Join us in an in-depth review of these new 8GB GDDR6 based graphics cards.
Read the full review right here.
Review: Team Group Vulcan Z DDR4 3200 MHz 2x 8GB - 07/04/2019 01:29 PM
Today we are reviewing Team Group Vulcan Z DDR4 16 GB 3200MHz CL16 memory. It’s another kit from this Taiwanese manufacturer that we received, after the T-Force Night Hawk RGB Legend that we...
Review: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER and 2070 SUPER - 07/02/2019 01:59 PM
NVIDIA today launches the first two cards in their new Super series. We review the GeForce RTX 2060 Super and 2070 Super and check out if they are actually that, super that is, of course with an aim t...
Review: Asus ROG Strix Helios Chassis - 06/27/2019 01:17 PM
Announced a long time ago, the product has finally hit the market; yes, ROG Strix Helios has been an eye-catcher ever since it was announced. Spacious and fantastic looks can be achieved with it. A ch...
Review: Cooler Master MasterBox Q500L - 06/25/2019 12:32 PM
It’s time to check out the new Cooler Master Masterbox Q500L mid-tower PC chassis. It’s another fresh product from this manufacturer, after the MasterBox NR600, but this time it&am...
Review: Colorful iGame GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Advanced OC - 06/20/2019 01:34 PM
We review the Colorful iGame advanced OC model of the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti, a product with more a triple fan cooler as well being factory tweaked towards an 1860 MHz boost frequency. Based on three fan...
RzrTrek
Senior Member
Posts: 2342
Joined: 2012-04-16
Senior Member
Posts: 2342
Joined: 2012-04-16
#5688356 Posted on: 07/07/2019 04:49 PM
The RX 5700 (which I'm looking at) and RX 5700 XT cost way more where I live ($444/$509), but they're both trading blows with the RTX 2060 and RTX 2070.
However I do think this GPU release is a bit underwhelming (much like Vega), but thankfully they seem to have done an excellent job with the Ryzen 3000 series.
The RX 5700 (which I'm looking at) and RX 5700 XT cost way more where I live ($444/$509), but they're both trading blows with the RTX 2060 and RTX 2070.
However I do think this GPU release is a bit underwhelming (much like Vega), but thankfully they seem to have done an excellent job with the Ryzen 3000 series.
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4507
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 4507
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5688362 Posted on: 07/07/2019 04:52 PM
Given the architecture refresh, I'd give it a little more time to mature, and maybe to see the prices drop a little. That's what I'm doing, anyway.
Thankfully, the Linux drivers already seem to be in better shape (which are overall more important to me).
However I do think this GPU release is a bit underwhelming (much like Vega), but thankfully they seem to have done an excellent job with the Ryzen 3000 series so there's that.
Given the architecture refresh, I'd give it a little more time to mature, and maybe to see the prices drop a little. That's what I'm doing, anyway.
Thankfully, the Linux drivers already seem to be in better shape (which are overall more important to me).
Kaarme
Senior Member
Posts: 1669
Joined: 2013-03-10
Senior Member
Posts: 1669
Joined: 2013-03-10
#5688373 Posted on: 07/07/2019 05:03 PM
AMD made quite nice progress especially against their own older products. If you don't think about the prices much, and of course ignore the RT, it feels like Nvidia succeeded well with their Super versions, though. But as it is, a buyer just needs to ponder if they want to pay the extra for the Super, getting the RT as well of course. Based on this review, I couldn't say 5700 (XT) would absolutely be the way to go.
Nevertheless, it does seem like GPU prices may have permanently become a bit more expensive than they used to be. Nvidia could raise the prices due to lacking competition, and AMD would also like to charge a bit more to get money for their R&D, which they certainly need. It remains to be seen if Intel entering the fray can change anything. Typically Intel hasn't been the forerunner of cheap prices, though, haha.
AMD made quite nice progress especially against their own older products. If you don't think about the prices much, and of course ignore the RT, it feels like Nvidia succeeded well with their Super versions, though. But as it is, a buyer just needs to ponder if they want to pay the extra for the Super, getting the RT as well of course. Based on this review, I couldn't say 5700 (XT) would absolutely be the way to go.
Nevertheless, it does seem like GPU prices may have permanently become a bit more expensive than they used to be. Nvidia could raise the prices due to lacking competition, and AMD would also like to charge a bit more to get money for their R&D, which they certainly need. It remains to be seen if Intel entering the fray can change anything. Typically Intel hasn't been the forerunner of cheap prices, though, haha.
kings
Senior Member
Posts: 105
Joined: 2018-09-18
Senior Member
Posts: 105
Joined: 2018-09-18
#5688376 Posted on: 07/07/2019 05:06 PM
Overall a litte slower than the new RTX Super, but also cheaper!
It will depend on the sale we catch on both brands and the importance or not that each one will give to the Ray Tracing factor.
As happened with Vega 56 vs. Vega 64, the 5700 XT seems to have been stretched beyond its sweet spot, the 5700 in performance/watt is a lot better!
Overall, solid cards from AMD and more or less matching Turing efficiency, despite the 7nm vs 12nm situation.
Interestingly, now, unlike what some people did with the RTX Super, no one complains about AMD showing the middle finger to the Radeon VII owners. A $699 card with only 5 months of market and now is virtually irrelevant to a $399 card.
Overall a litte slower than the new RTX Super, but also cheaper!
It will depend on the sale we catch on both brands and the importance or not that each one will give to the Ray Tracing factor.
As happened with Vega 56 vs. Vega 64, the 5700 XT seems to have been stretched beyond its sweet spot, the 5700 in performance/watt is a lot better!
Overall, solid cards from AMD and more or less matching Turing efficiency, despite the 7nm vs 12nm situation.
Interestingly, now, unlike what some people did with the RTX Super, no one complains about AMD showing the middle finger to the Radeon VII owners. A $699 card with only 5 months of market and now is virtually irrelevant to a $399 card.
-Tj-
Senior Member
Posts: 16412
Joined: 2012-05-18
Senior Member
Posts: 16412
Joined: 2012-05-18
#5688377 Posted on: 07/07/2019 05:08 PM
Was about to dis it, but on 2nd hand it rivals 1080ti, and that is something for lower end chip.. Now the full Navi should easily match/beat 2080ti.. Im just wondering what the heat will be, if these small ones already heat a lot. Hopefully not another 290X.. xD
Was about to dis it, but on 2nd hand it rivals 1080ti, and that is something for lower end chip.. Now the full Navi should easily match/beat 2080ti.. Im just wondering what the heat will be, if these small ones already heat a lot. Hopefully not another 290X.. xD
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4507
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 4507
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5688380 Posted on: 07/07/2019 05:09 PM
That's because the VII is a niche product. It has some solid gains in some places. It was mostly created as a placeholder. It's an older architecture. The Super series were made strictly to spite AMD. You can't really compare the two.
It's to be expected that a new GPU will outperform its predecessors. The Super series aren't new.
Interestingly, now, unlike what some people did with the RTX Super, no one complains about AMD showing the middle finger to the Radeon VII owners. A $699 card with only 5 months of market and now is virtually irrelevant to a $399 card.
That's because the VII is a niche product. It has some solid gains in some places. It was mostly created as a placeholder. It's an older architecture. The Super series were made strictly to spite AMD. You can't really compare the two.
It's to be expected that a new GPU will outperform its predecessors. The Super series aren't new.
Mesab67
Senior Member
Posts: 139
Joined: 2016-10-19
Senior Member
Posts: 139
Joined: 2016-10-19
#5688382 Posted on: 07/07/2019 05:12 PM
Interestingly, now, unlike what some people did with the RTX Super, no one complains about AMD showing the middle finger to the Radeon VII owners. A $699 card with only 5 months of market and now is virtually irrelevant to a $399 card.
The very expensive 16GB HBM2 had a bit to do with that. Together with this HBM2 memory, the VII also had further features directing it's use, in addition, away from gaming. As schmidtbag said, it's a uniquely niche product.
Interestingly, now, unlike what some people did with the RTX Super, no one complains about AMD showing the middle finger to the Radeon VII owners. A $699 card with only 5 months of market and now is virtually irrelevant to a $399 card.
The very expensive 16GB HBM2 had a bit to do with that. Together with this HBM2 memory, the VII also had further features directing it's use, in addition, away from gaming. As schmidtbag said, it's a uniquely niche product.
Eastcoasthandle
Senior Member
Posts: 2163
Joined: 2006-05-22
Senior Member
Posts: 2163
Joined: 2006-05-22
#5688387 Posted on: 07/07/2019 05:18 PM
Respect!
This is by far the best (also fairest) review I've seen so far.
As mentioned, performance can and will be all over the place depending on the game title. One moment with certain titles it's just above the GeForce RTX 2070 Super, where in others it runs below a GeForce RTX 2060 perf level. That is a bit weird to observe but has everything to do with the nature of the beast (read different architecture). Some games will benefit greatly from rDNA others less. It's the intricate little stuff like that that define the differences but paints a more complex to understand performance positioning. We feel both the Radeon RX 5700 and XT are super interesting and fascinating products. It's good to see AMD push them out. While we did not run into weird issues, I also need to mention that the cards will probably need a few driver updates to get fully up-to-snuff. The pricing though is the decisive factor, and only you guys can determine whether or not the 349 and 339 USD is worth it. At 349 USD and a perf offset of 10%, the non-XT models will be the better deal. As far as our recommendations go, we can recommend both cards but with the sidenote that you might want to hold off and see what the board partners products will offer with better cooling (more silent) solutions.
Respect!
This is by far the best (also fairest) review I've seen so far.
Stormyandcold
Senior Member
Posts: 5212
Joined: 2003-09-15
Senior Member
Posts: 5212
Joined: 2003-09-15
#5688390 Posted on: 07/07/2019 05:20 PM
Good product and price in UK here is actually ok.
It's obvious that the drivers are good, but, haven't reached their full potential yet. Also, the move to GDDR6 is probably the best thing they've done here.
Good product and price in UK here is actually ok.
It's obvious that the drivers are good, but, haven't reached their full potential yet. Also, the move to GDDR6 is probably the best thing they've done here.
Stormyandcold
Senior Member
Posts: 5212
Joined: 2003-09-15
Senior Member
Posts: 5212
Joined: 2003-09-15
#5688397 Posted on: 07/07/2019 05:29 PM
The problem is people in youtube-land actually think/thought the 16GB of ram will future-proof this product. Only content creators will be able to justify it, meanwhile everyone else will move over to XT and Super cards.
The very expensive 16GB HBM2 had a bit to do with that. Together with this HBM2 memory, the VII also had further features directing it's use, in addition, away from gaming. As schmidtbag said, it's a uniquely niche product.
The problem is people in youtube-land actually think/thought the 16GB of ram will future-proof this product. Only content creators will be able to justify it, meanwhile everyone else will move over to XT and Super cards.
Ufozile
Junior Member
Posts: 3
Joined: 2015-10-29
Junior Member
Posts: 3
Joined: 2015-10-29
#5688405 Posted on: 07/07/2019 05:43 PM
@Hilbert Hagedoorn, will you not use Anno 1800 as a benchmark for new GPUs?
@Hilbert Hagedoorn, will you not use Anno 1800 as a benchmark for new GPUs?
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 9755
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 9755
Joined: 2012-07-20
#5688407 Posted on: 07/07/2019 05:44 PM
Not a big issue with heat I think for 64CU card, if CUs have same arrangement.
64 CUs means 1.6 times higher performance at same clock. And would result in TBP of 335W at those same clocks. But limiting card to 300W would mostly result in 10% performance loss only.
So some 1.4 times higher performance than RX 5700 XT which would be around 2080Ti's performance and would have some 16B transistors.
Issue would be with bigger GPUs. Because there RDNA1 would have to throw away all that clock potential just to stay within 300W limit. This 1st iteration can go up to 2GHz for good chips. Gaming clock is around 1700~1800MHz to keep TDP. But bigger GPUs would be forced to go down to maybe 1450~1500MHz. That would be big waste.
And I think AMD is working hard on optimizing power draw so next iteration can use higher portion of achievable clock.
It is actually funny, because people with 5700 who raise TBP limit (and other limits) to like 240W may get stock 5700 XT performance via OC if their chip can clock that high. (Something like 7950 vs 7970)
But I think that it is pointless to even try to OC those cards till all power limits in BIOS are changed.
@Hilbert Hagedoorn : Do those reference cards have dual BIOS switch? I have seen some unusual rectangular hole on side of PCB close to cover which makes tiny access inside. Maybe there is switch. (Wishful thinking.)
Was about to dis it, but on 2nd hand it rivals 1080ti, and that is something for lower end chip.. Now the full Navi should easily match/beat 2080ti.. Im just wondering what the heat will be, if these small ones already heat a lot. Hopefully not another 290X.. xD
Not a big issue with heat I think for 64CU card, if CUs have same arrangement.
64 CUs means 1.6 times higher performance at same clock. And would result in TBP of 335W at those same clocks. But limiting card to 300W would mostly result in 10% performance loss only.
So some 1.4 times higher performance than RX 5700 XT which would be around 2080Ti's performance and would have some 16B transistors.
Issue would be with bigger GPUs. Because there RDNA1 would have to throw away all that clock potential just to stay within 300W limit. This 1st iteration can go up to 2GHz for good chips. Gaming clock is around 1700~1800MHz to keep TDP. But bigger GPUs would be forced to go down to maybe 1450~1500MHz. That would be big waste.
And I think AMD is working hard on optimizing power draw so next iteration can use higher portion of achievable clock.
It is actually funny, because people with 5700 who raise TBP limit (and other limits) to like 240W may get stock 5700 XT performance via OC if their chip can clock that high. (Something like 7950 vs 7970)
But I think that it is pointless to even try to OC those cards till all power limits in BIOS are changed.
@Hilbert Hagedoorn : Do those reference cards have dual BIOS switch? I have seen some unusual rectangular hole on side of PCB close to cover which makes tiny access inside. Maybe there is switch. (Wishful thinking.)
Aura89
Senior Member
Posts: 7679
Joined: 2008-07-31
Senior Member
Posts: 7679
Joined: 2008-07-31
#5688413 Posted on: 07/07/2019 05:52 PM
Issue would be with bigger GPUs. Because there RDNA1 would have to throw away all that clock potential just to stay within 300W limit. This 1st iteration can go up to 2GHz for good chips. Gaming clock is around 1700~1800MHz to keep TDP. But bigger GPUs would be forced to go down to maybe 1450~1500MHz. That would be big waste.
This seems to be something nvidia does quite often and it seems to work for them.
RTX 2080 has less cores but higher frequencies then the 2080 ti, yet the 2080 ti performs quite a bit better then the 2080, same with the RTX titan. Same thing with the 1080 vs 1080 ti or titan X/XP, etc.
I'd rather have a much larger GPU with more cores and lower frequency and overall more performance options, then not have them at all.
Issue would be with bigger GPUs. Because there RDNA1 would have to throw away all that clock potential just to stay within 300W limit. This 1st iteration can go up to 2GHz for good chips. Gaming clock is around 1700~1800MHz to keep TDP. But bigger GPUs would be forced to go down to maybe 1450~1500MHz. That would be big waste.
This seems to be something nvidia does quite often and it seems to work for them.
RTX 2080 has less cores but higher frequencies then the 2080 ti, yet the 2080 ti performs quite a bit better then the 2080, same with the RTX titan. Same thing with the 1080 vs 1080 ti or titan X/XP, etc.
I'd rather have a much larger GPU with more cores and lower frequency and overall more performance options, then not have them at all.
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 9755
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 9755
Joined: 2012-07-20
#5688425 Posted on: 07/07/2019 06:05 PM
This seems to be something nvidia does quite often and it seems to work for them.
RTX 2080 has less cores but higher frequencies then the 2080 ti, yet the 2080 ti performs quite a bit better then the 2080, same with the RTX titan. Same thing with the 1080 vs 1080 ti or titan X/XP, etc.
I'd rather have a much larger GPU with more cores and lower frequency and overall more performance options, then not have them at all.
True. But since AMD is going to hit power limit, making big 20B transistor GPU for example could maybe deliver 1.65 times higher performance than 5700 XT (10B transistors) due to need to stay within 300W limit.
Issue is price then. Twice as big GPU, much worse yields. As 5700 XT goes for $400, what would be price of card with GPU twice the size? $1000? $1200?
Sadly, even if AMD went chiplet way and managed to make card with 2 chiplets with same 20 Dual-CUs as 5700XT and therefore potentially $900 price point, it would still be power limited and therefore around that 1.65x multiplier of 5700 XT.
Had 5700 XT been 200W TDP card, I would be much more hopeful. Because like 60W out of that are memories, VRMs and blower. Then GPU would be lovely 140W and clock sacrifice on bigger/dual chip would be much smaller.
Maybe AMD will go with HBM2 again to save like 40W on 12GB card. But power is big limiter even for RDNA... for now.
This seems to be something nvidia does quite often and it seems to work for them.
RTX 2080 has less cores but higher frequencies then the 2080 ti, yet the 2080 ti performs quite a bit better then the 2080, same with the RTX titan. Same thing with the 1080 vs 1080 ti or titan X/XP, etc.
I'd rather have a much larger GPU with more cores and lower frequency and overall more performance options, then not have them at all.
True. But since AMD is going to hit power limit, making big 20B transistor GPU for example could maybe deliver 1.65 times higher performance than 5700 XT (10B transistors) due to need to stay within 300W limit.
Issue is price then. Twice as big GPU, much worse yields. As 5700 XT goes for $400, what would be price of card with GPU twice the size? $1000? $1200?
Sadly, even if AMD went chiplet way and managed to make card with 2 chiplets with same 20 Dual-CUs as 5700XT and therefore potentially $900 price point, it would still be power limited and therefore around that 1.65x multiplier of 5700 XT.
Had 5700 XT been 200W TDP card, I would be much more hopeful. Because like 60W out of that are memories, VRMs and blower. Then GPU would be lovely 140W and clock sacrifice on bigger/dual chip would be much smaller.
Maybe AMD will go with HBM2 again to save like 40W on 12GB card. But power is big limiter even for RDNA... for now.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 4507
Joined: 2012-11-10
I guess to elaborate: I want something that can readily maintain 4K@60FPS with all max detail in most modern titles, except with AA off. But again, for a reasonable price. I have the money to buy a 2080Ti but I can't justify that price point. $400 is pretty much as high as I'm willing to spend on a single component for a gaming PC, and if that means I need to wait another year, so be it. Considering I'm still on 1080p, I'm obviously not in a major rush.