[Updated with final Review] Vega FE Benchmarking by PCPER

[zMeul]

1 hour ago, revsilverspine said:

this is exactly what happened with the 1800x. These cards are not designed or targeted towaeds being gaming cards. They are workstation cards, similar to quadro or firepro cards. Vega gaming gpus will launch at a later date.

the gaming benchmarks are interesting, but ultimately useless

you surely understand / know that the GPUs inside the Quadro cards are identical to those in GTX cards? the only diff is that Quadro cards have more VRAM and it's ECC

it baffles me when people say this is a workstation card and the RX will be different - it won't! that's not how it works, it's the same architecture ... the same

[Paragon_X]

What was interesting that this card was not nowhere near the 1600mhz mark as it should, it run around 1440mhz if I am not mistaken and at 83C which is okayish for blower cooler. Gaming performance is underwhelming for sure, if there are any aftermarket cards that can sustain higher clocks it could match the Titan Xp, but for a new architecture to catch up to a last years meh. We will see how drivers will help with the situation.

[xAcid9]

That drop from 1440p to 4K Fallout 4 is crazy. I guess the card is throttling heavily at 4K?

[zMeul]

1 minute ago, xAcid9 said:

That drop from 1440p to 4K Fallout 4 is crazy. I guess the card is throttling heavily at 4K?

or Ryan didn't use the proper settings the 1st time

[xAcid9]

1 minute ago, zMeul said:

or Ryan didn't use the proper settings the 1st time

Yeah i just read they retesting 1440p Fallout 4.

[Red Hardware]

Hi Guys

Something that most of you are not paying attention to is that it's not a gaming card. It's made for work station users. And I think there is something wrong with the drivers , All of that vega is slightly better than a fury x ? I think it doesn't do well in games because of the drivers. We should wait for RX VEGA and see how it goes but it's too early to judge vega base on some gaming benchmarks of a work station card

 

[xAcid9]

1 minute ago, Red Hardware said:

Hi Guys

Something that most of you are not paying attention to is that it's not a gaming card. It's made for work station users. And I think there is something wrong with the drivers , All of that vega is slightly better than a fury x ? I think it doesn't do well in games because of the drivers. We should wait for RX VEGA and see how it goes but it's too early to judge vega base on some gaming benchmarks of a work station card

 

Workstation use FirePro card, no? Vega FirePro is coming as well.

 

This Vega FE is similar to Nvidia Titan imo.

[laminutederire]

Can anyone read those graphs Correctly? I have trouble discerning which is which...

[laminutederire]

53 minutes ago, Paragon_X said:

What was interesting that this card was not nowhere near the 1600mhz mark as it should, it run around 1440mhz if I am not mistaken and at 83C which is okayish for blower cooler. Gaming performance is underwhelming for sure, if there are any aftermarket cards that can sustain higher clocks it could match the Titan Xp, but for a new architecture to catch up to a last years meh. We will see how drivers will help with the situation.

Did they day anything about the fan curve used?

 

[Valentyn]

3 hours ago, Phate.exe said:

So it's barely outperforming a lightly overclocked Fury X, with similar power draw, and WAY higher clockspeeds?

 

Yeah, something's not right.  Wouldn't have taken them nearly this long if all they were doing was making a 14nm Fiji card.

 

There's "this card is underperforming because the drivers are not optimized well" (see:  Polaris) and then there's "this card is barely functioning".  I'm thinking we're a lot closer to the second option.

A statement like this need to be under the headline of every Frontier Edition thread or article. 

 

Nothing about the cards performance  to tech makes sense at all. 

[Paragon_X]

2 minutes ago, laminutederire said:

Did they day anything about the fan curve used?

 

No those were on stock curves but on a run with 100% RPM it barely reached 58C but deffinetely there is a some thermal throttling going on.

[cj09beira]

2 hours ago, zMeul said:

you surely understand / know that the GPUs inside the Quadro cards are identical to those in GTX cards? the only diff is that Quadro cards have more VRAM and it's ECC

it baffles me when people say this is a workstation card and the RX will be different - it won't! that's not how it works, it's the same architecture ... the same

its all about the drivers, they can make huge difference.

btw i would like to see how a wx7100 does in games, we could gain some info on how drivers can really affect perf 

[JediFragger]

All we need now is for AMD to come out with a few actual RX benchmarks to put our minds at ease (which I think will be roughly 15-20% faster). They won't do it though, as that would be the smart thing to do...

 

Zero communication as normal.

[3DOSH]

The card isn't doing tiled rasterization, a feature that was shown in the architecture preview. 

If you wanted more proof that the driver is missing key elements for it to run 100% that is that .

Also it was power and thermal  throttling after 30 seconds due to bad fan curve from AMD. Going from 300w down to 280w then even down to 240w.

Full load temp with default curve is 85c.

Full load with fan at max is 60c??????

More indaction of rushed launch  just to please the share holders.

 

[zMeul]

43 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

its all about the drivers, they can make huge difference.

btw i would like to see how a wx7100 does in games, we could gain some info on how drivers can really affect perf 

no they won't! if AMD had new miracle drivers for Vega they would be already available

based on what do you even believe that RX drivers will pull Vega from the shit?

[yian88]

how to destroy amd reputation and stock and then hope for better products on the market, be zMeul, or be youtuber and  make reviews of professional video cards inside games cause stupidity...no one made benchmarks of quadro inside games and complained about perf? or did they? linus did, i think,but he compared it to titan's not amd gaming gpu's, it doesnt matter you are comparing apples to oranges, vega fe vs 1080 ti, this is not the vega made to compete pascal high end, this is just for professionals and its a big thing, only 999$ how about compare it to the nvdia quadro series at 2-5k$ or titan Xp 2k$? thats their competition, fucking stupids i cant find a single benchmark against a quadro/Xp card

[mr moose]

I expect all the members in this thread to come back to it after the RX is released and bench marked, with the latest "gaming" drivers, and defend their concrete assertions.

 

For some I imagine it will be a bitter pill to swallow given how adamant they are they know whats going on.

 

 

[3DOSH]

28 minutes ago, zMeul said:

no they won't! if AMD had new miracle drivers for Vega they would be already available

based on what do you even believe that RX drivers will pull Vega from the shit?

You said the same thing about Ryzen and you were proving wrong. And I know its not the same thing.

 

ALSO

Quote

Koduri was asked if the consumer RX Vega version of the card will be "as fast as the Frontier version", to which he replied: "Consumer RX will be much better optimized for all the top gaming titles and flavors of RX Vega will actually be faster than Frontier version!"

 

[Valentyn]

FE Vega is not drawing with Tiled rasterisation like its supposed to.

 

 

What Fiji aka Fury rasterizers like. It's the exact same as Vega.

 

 

[mr moose]

34 minutes ago, yian88 said:

how to destroy amd reputation and stock and then hope for better products on the market, be zMeul, or be youtuber and  make reviews of professional video cards inside games cause stupidity...no one made benchmarks of quadro inside games and complained about perf? or did they? linus did, i think,but he compared it to titan's not amd gaming gpu's, it doesnt matter you are comparing apples to oranges, vega fe vs 1080 ti, this is not the vega made to compete pascal high end, this is just for professionals and its a big thing, only 999$ how about compare it to the nvdia quadro series at 2-5k$ or titan Xp 2k$? thats their competition, fucking stupids i cant find a single benchmark against a quadro/Xp card

Pretty strong words and insinuations. Calling people like Ryan stupid for doing his job.

 

People will review whatever their viewers want them to.  If people want reviews of vega FE, then they will review vega FE, just because you don't think it should be associated with games at all doesn't mean people aren't going to buy it for that, just look how many people wasted money on the titans.  We have plenty of reviews for them.

 

What's really going on here? are you upset with the results and wish people would stop talking ab9out them or do you genuinely feel grief that people are thinking about the FE as a gaming solution?

 

 

[MoonSpot]

15 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I expect all the members in this thread to come back to it after the RX is released and bench marked, with the latest "gaming" drivers, and defend their concrete assertions.

I wouldn't hold my breath.

[mr moose]

Just now, MoonSpot said:

I wouldn't hold my breath.

I know you're right, but part of me just wants to see what would happen if everyone came back and tried to address their claims afterwards.

[yian88]

21 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Pretty strong words and insinuations. Calling people like Ryan stupid for doing his job.

 

People will review whatever their viewers want them to.  If people want reviews of vega FE, then they will review vega FE, just because you don't think it should be associated with games at all doesn't mean people aren't going to buy it for that, just look how many people wasted money on the titans.  We have plenty of reviews for them.

 

What's really going on here? are you upset with the results and wish people would stop talking ab9out them or do you genuinely feel grief that people are thinking about the FE as a gaming solution?

 

 

No people just want to get their answer faster already, "how good is the new AMD Vega arch", so they test a workhorse gpu like FE in games, it probably doesnt even have game drivers or optimizations.

This will create the impression AMD Vega sucks, since every tech illeterate out there will see these benchmarks and without informing themselves any further they think it AMD sucks.

It creates bad rep for AMD, because many people are uninformed.

There's no way AMD would have released such an underperforming gaming card for 1000$, no one would buy it when 1080ti/titan are miles ahead and cheaper.

 

Ive watched PCper video, 0 professional apps were tested, a bunch of losers, they should know better.

[Taf the Ghost]

3 hours ago, Valentyn said:

A statement like this need to be under the headline of every Frontier Edition thread or article. 

 

Nothing about the cards performance  to tech makes sense at all. 

Without digging into the drivers themselves, it's hard to say, but I've seen some chatter that it's literally running the Fiji (so Fury X) drivers. Considering the currently testing results, that actually would make the most sense. As it's acting like a higher clocked 64 CU + HBM GPU.  It would also mean that two generations of GCN improvements aren't operating.

 

This would fit with my thought that the Gaming Mode is running at a compatibility level.  They simply didn't want to ship the Gaming driver until it's ready for RX Vega.

 

However, from the Professional task early results, we also know it runs a whole lot faster than the Fury X. So, your guess is as good as mine, but I think we have an idea what's going on now.

[zMeul]

Vega doesn't seem to have tile based raster

example