Jump to content

AMD Radeon VII Benchmark/Launch Mega Thread

Taf the Ghost
9 minutes ago, Billy Pilgrim said:

This launch really feels like AMD is trying to shout "We're Here!" to the high end GPU market. Even though It might not be worth it it is impressive how AMD has really started to try competing with high end GPUs when they haven't for years.

Actually feels more like the Driver Team is knee deep in Navi work and behind schedule with the "rushed" Radeon VII launch.

 

Still, this is the King of Science Departments for the next decade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

My guess is that Navi wasn't ready for CES

IIRC they had some problems with the silicon when it came back, so they had to go back to tapeout.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

AMD should ignore that and scrap that shit because hardly anybody uses it.

And they don't have the resources for 1% of the Userbase.

Yes, that is not a joke, that is how little people use multiple GPU in their PC...

 

And Crossfire Support was not that bad - back in the Radeon X era, where you didn't need a special GPU just put two (for example) X1800XL in a PC and call it a day.

That as well.

Its a Chicken <-> Egg Problem at the Moment.

 

Because nobody uses it, nobody cares about it.

Becuase nobody cares about it, nobody uses it.

 

AMD used a similar technique back in the Day.

Look up "SUper AA" or however that was called back in the day, when you could use both cards for FSAA and improve the picture further (IIRC up to 12x).


And also something called "Split Frame Rendering". 

 

So what you're saying was already done.

It was however phased out because it collides with fullscreen effects of modern Games...

Nobody uses it because they quit making it good and quit making it on affordable GPUs and quit making it on dual gpu high end cards to make up for a lack of power in a single chip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ToneStar said:

Nobody uses it because they quit making it good and quit making it on affordable GPUs and quit making it on dual gpu high end cards to make up for a lack of power in a single chip.

Tell that to Square Enix (Nier:Automata), Koei Tecmo and other game developer that develop the Games in a way that doesn't allow multi GPU.

 

And for DX12 and Vulkan it needs to be supported in the API.

And Vulkan (until recently) didn't support mGPU at all...

 

So no, nobody cares about it is a true statement. It sucks for some people but you need to tell the game developers first that you want multi GPU. And then you have to convince people to do that as well.

And then it might eventually change. But I don't see it happening right now....

 

The chances of that shit was awesome in the DX9 era - but even then it failed. And yes, it was pretty widely supported. The X1950GT had support for that. NVidia 8600GT had SLi support - still it made more sense to sell the card and get the next best thing.

 

So that only leaves the High End for it to make sense...

 

And yeah, I also have a Crossfire Setup lying around.

"Hell is full of good meanings, but Heaven is full of good works"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

if you think there's even a ''debate'' to be had as to wheter or not the RTX 2080 is a VASTLY superior offering in terms of 700$ graphics card, then i'm sorry i can't fix you ;)

 

It depends on use case. Someone that has a limited budget and does compute work + gaming would DEFINITELY buy the radeon vii over the rtx 2080 (provided proper driver support is implemented).

CPU: i7 4790k @ 4.7 GHz

GPU: XFX GTS RX580 4GB

Cooling: Corsair h100i

Mobo: Asus z97-A 

RAM: 4x8 GB 1600 MHz Corsair Vengence

PSU: Corsair HX850

Case: NZXT S340 Elite Tempered glass edition

Display: LG 29UM68-P

Keyboard: Roccat Ryos MK FX RGB

Mouse: Logitech g900 Chaos Spectrum

Headphones: Sennheiser HD6XX

OS: Windows 10 Home

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

They'll say anything...you won't win against the die hard ones...
They'll say stuff like: '' yeah but you can undervolt it and underclock it and THEN it will be better and blah blah blah..'' you'll never win.

Probably because the people you're fighting against aren't trying to win any argumrent. No one is saying Radeon VII is better. EVERYONE agrees that at $700 the current state of the Radeon VII is worse than a $700 rtx 2080 (until drivers are fixed; then some people will leverage the FP64 compute capability). Even after driver fixes if the prices are similar the rtx 2080 will still be better for everyone not utilizing FP64.

 

My point is there is not a one size fits all package. Even when excluding fanboys there are still reasons to buy the Radeon VII (presumably when drivers are fixed), albeit the market for that use case is very small. Maybe those reasons are not meant for you, but they will be for some people.

CPU: i7 4790k @ 4.7 GHz

GPU: XFX GTS RX580 4GB

Cooling: Corsair h100i

Mobo: Asus z97-A 

RAM: 4x8 GB 1600 MHz Corsair Vengence

PSU: Corsair HX850

Case: NZXT S340 Elite Tempered glass edition

Display: LG 29UM68-P

Keyboard: Roccat Ryos MK FX RGB

Mouse: Logitech g900 Chaos Spectrum

Headphones: Sennheiser HD6XX

OS: Windows 10 Home

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, valdyrgramr said:

Well, I and even reviewers agree that it's a great card for specific workstation tasks and games good enough.  We even state that the RTX 2080 is the better sole gaming card.  Hopefully, Navi has a better sole game card.  But, to be fair, it is possible that the atm shit drivers are impacting the performance of the card.  I'd rather wait to see AMD release a better driver for it then have further testing done before making a final claim against the Radeon VII.  Jay couldn't even bench his due to how shit the drivers were.  XD

My worry is that professional applications may have comparable support to games right now (that's to say next to none). So many games couldn't even boot in many reviews that I'm worried many programs may not be operable either. That's why I emphasized driver updates.

 

With proper support I'm willing to bet performance will go up, but if the card can't run stably then it certainly can't run a compute load. Maybe I'm wrong; if so I'm happy to listen.

CPU: i7 4790k @ 4.7 GHz

GPU: XFX GTS RX580 4GB

Cooling: Corsair h100i

Mobo: Asus z97-A 

RAM: 4x8 GB 1600 MHz Corsair Vengence

PSU: Corsair HX850

Case: NZXT S340 Elite Tempered glass edition

Display: LG 29UM68-P

Keyboard: Roccat Ryos MK FX RGB

Mouse: Logitech g900 Chaos Spectrum

Headphones: Sennheiser HD6XX

OS: Windows 10 Home

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

No, its not that they are unable, its that people wouldn't buy the higher end AMD Card anyway as most "Gamers" only buy nVidia for no reason.

 

YOu see that here in this Forum all the time, where people rather buy a shitty 3GiB 1060 instead of an 8GiB RX470 or 570.

Don't forget about all the people buying the gtx 1050tis instead of rx 570s for gaming $140. There's a lot of that as well. Ridiculous...

CPU: i7 4790k @ 4.7 GHz

GPU: XFX GTS RX580 4GB

Cooling: Corsair h100i

Mobo: Asus z97-A 

RAM: 4x8 GB 1600 MHz Corsair Vengence

PSU: Corsair HX850

Case: NZXT S340 Elite Tempered glass edition

Display: LG 29UM68-P

Keyboard: Roccat Ryos MK FX RGB

Mouse: Logitech g900 Chaos Spectrum

Headphones: Sennheiser HD6XX

OS: Windows 10 Home

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Lathlaer said:

They could've accomplished that much with this card if they halfed the RAM and dropped the price by 150-200 USD. But no, instead of using the opening NVIDIA gave them by making their GPU's more expensive due to RTX, they decided to match the price in order to fulfil some kind of weird fetish with 16GB HBM2 memory

As many others have already stated, Vega was bandwidth starved. They needed 1TB/s Bandwidth and the only way to do that was with 4 HBM stacks. AMD knew the payback of re-engineering the GPU with less memory would yield less profit than just selling the reject MI50s with a diffrent cooler. That's why there wasn't a creative memory solution and why Radeon VII supply is so small.

CPU: i7 4790k @ 4.7 GHz

GPU: XFX GTS RX580 4GB

Cooling: Corsair h100i

Mobo: Asus z97-A 

RAM: 4x8 GB 1600 MHz Corsair Vengence

PSU: Corsair HX850

Case: NZXT S340 Elite Tempered glass edition

Display: LG 29UM68-P

Keyboard: Roccat Ryos MK FX RGB

Mouse: Logitech g900 Chaos Spectrum

Headphones: Sennheiser HD6XX

OS: Windows 10 Home

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like the card performed right about where I expected it to, going back and forth with a 2080. I'm left wondering though since some reviewers are getting different numbers in the same games. I guess it's down to a driver issue like most of the other problems with this card, but it's weird how it can change performance numbers just because of a different system.

 

Also Tech YES City has another weird issue with the card not booting sometimes if it's in the PCIe slot all the way at startup. I shit you not, that's apparently a thing that can happen...

I wish AMD had waited a bit more to launch this card, but I think they were trying to get rid of this inventory of cards the had built up before they launch Navi. Maybe AMD wasn't expecting this card to sell that well at all.

Intel Xeon 1650 V0 (4.4GHz @1.4V), ASRock X79 Extreme6, 32GB of HyperX 1866, Sapphire Nitro+ 5700XT, Silverstone Redline (black) RL05BB-W, Crucial MX500 500GB SSD, TeamGroup GX2 512GB SSD, WD AV-25 1TB 2.5" HDD with generic Chinese 120GB SSD as cache, x2 Seagate 2TB SSHD(RAID 0) with generic Chinese 240GB SSD as cache, SeaSonic Focus Plus Gold 850, x2 Acer H236HL, Acer V277U be quiet! Dark Rock Pro 4, Logitech K120, Tecknet "Gaming" mouse, Creative Inspire T2900, HyperX Cloud Flight Wireless headset, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

No, its not that they are unable, its that people wouldn't buy the higher end AMD Card anyway as most "Gamers" only buy nVidia for no reason.

 

YOu see that here in this Forum all the time, where people rather buy a shitty 3GiB 1060 instead of an 8GiB RX470 or 570.

You mean yes? your reason is similar to Buildzoid and i agreed. 

| Intel i7-3770@4.2Ghz | Asus Z77-V | Zotac 980 Ti Amp! Omega | DDR3 1800mhz 4GB x4 | 300GB Intel DC S3500 SSD | 512GB Plextor M5 Pro | 2x 1TB WD Blue HDD |
 | Enermax NAXN82+ 650W 80Plus Bronze | Fiio E07K | Grado SR80i | Cooler Master XB HAF EVO | Logitech G27 | Logitech G600 | CM Storm Quickfire TK | DualShock 4 |

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, xAcid9 said:

You mean yes? your reason is similar to Buildzoid and i agreed. 

The big OC'ers would buy them if they were just that little bit better in benchmark scores (not games, they benchmark better than game already anyway) and could actually OC. If they would be unable to top the chart with one it's not getting purchased.

 

The AMD cards are actually highly appealing to them, no strict power limits or extremely easy to remove and the now standard over the top VRMs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ATFink said:

Don't forget about all the people buying the gtx 1050tis instead of rx 570s for gaming $140. There's a lot of that as well. Ridiculous...

don't forget the 1050ti was out for a year before the 570 and retail prices for the 570 have been inflated more than the 1050ti in 2017.   It is logical that the 1050ti would have sold more under those conditions.

Grammar and spelling is not indicative of intelligence/knowledge.  Not having the same opinion does not always mean lack of understanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

don't forget the 1050ti was out for a year before the 570 and retail prices for the 570 have been inflated more than the 1050ti in 2017.   It is logical that the 1050ti would have sold more under those conditions.

the 470 was still a better buy before and it didnt sell as well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

the 470 was still a better buy before and it didnt sell as well

Wasn't that also at an inflated price due to mining/low stocks?

Grammar and spelling is not indicative of intelligence/knowledge.  Not having the same opinion does not always mean lack of understanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Wasn't that also at an inflated price due to mining/low stocks?

not always only at the end, before that it was obvious which was selling like hot cup cakes 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

not always only at the end, before that it was obvious which was selling like hot cup cakes 

Given the 470 was released 2 months before the 1050ti and the shortages started the following year I can't imagine there'd being much more than 4-5 months where the 470 was the better option.  It's not like now the mining boom has died almost completely that you'd be a fucking moron to get a 1050ti when the 570 is the same price.

Grammar and spelling is not indicative of intelligence/knowledge.  Not having the same opinion does not always mean lack of understanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

not always only at the end, before that it was obvious which was selling like hot cup cakes 

The RX400 series drivers weren't really in great shape for about 6 months, but the early prices were higher than MSRP for a while. Might have been an early part of the mining boom before it kicked into a bubble that drove it. ETH mining had already started to get going by then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Given the 470 was released 2 months before the 1050ti and the shortages started the following year I can't imagine there'd being much more than 4-5 months where the 470 was the better option.  It's not like now the mining boom has died almost completely that you'd be a fucking moron to get a 1050ti when the 570 is the same price.

AMD also has cut prices pretty far, recently. GDDR5 getting cheaper and their costs on 14nm going down certainly helps in that regard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mr moose said:

It's not like now the mining boom has died almost completely that you'd be a fucking moron to get a 1050ti when the 570 is the same price.

Brand loyalty was stronger before Ryzen. I'll admit I made some stupid decisions several years back, going with Nvidia over AMD just because I'd heard bad stuff about AMD. Public perception means a lot more when you don't understand the details yourself.

Make sure to quote or tag me (@JoostinOnline) or I won't see your response!

PSU Tier List  |  The Real Reason Delidding Improves Temperatures"2K" does not mean 2560×1440 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JoostinOnline said:

Brand loyalty was stronger before Ryzen. I'll admit I made some stupid decisions several years back, going with Nvidia over AMD just because I'd heard bad stuff about AMD. Public perception means a lot more when you don't understand the details yourself.

I get that, I'm simply pointing out that any perception of an over adoption of the 1050 over the 570 has other effectors that make the decision legitimate. Not every purchase was brand loyalty driven when the 1050 did provide a cheaper option for a while there.   

Grammar and spelling is not indicative of intelligence/knowledge.  Not having the same opinion does not always mean lack of understanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, ATFink said:

 Radeon VII is worse than a $700 rtx 2080 (until drivers are fixed; then some people will leverage the FP64 compute capability). Even after driver fixes if the prices are similar the rtx 2080 will still be better for everyone not utilizing FP64.

 

except the gimped the 16Tflops of FP64 from the actual compute card the VII is based on down to only 1.6Tflops on this card making it basically useless for double precision floating point compute.

| CPU: Core i7-8700K @ 4.89ghz - 1.21v  Motherboard: Asus ROG STRIX Z370-E GAMING  CPU Cooler: Corsair H100i V2 |
| GPU: MSI RTX 3080Ti Ventus 3X OC  RAM: 32GB T-Force Delta RGB 3066mhz |
| Displays: Acer Predator XB270HU 1440p Gsync 144hz IPS Gaming monitor | Oculus Quest 2 VR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

except the gimped the 16Tflops of FP64 from the actual compute card the VII is based on down to only 1.6Tflops on this card making it basically useless for double precision floating point compute.

3.5TFLOPS actually. 1/4

| Intel i7-3770@4.2Ghz | Asus Z77-V | Zotac 980 Ti Amp! Omega | DDR3 1800mhz 4GB x4 | 300GB Intel DC S3500 SSD | 512GB Plextor M5 Pro | 2x 1TB WD Blue HDD |
 | Enermax NAXN82+ 650W 80Plus Bronze | Fiio E07K | Grado SR80i | Cooler Master XB HAF EVO | Logitech G27 | Logitech G600 | CM Storm Quickfire TK | DualShock 4 |

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

except the gimped the 16Tflops of FP64 from the actual compute card the VII is based on down to only 1.6Tflops on this card making it basically useless for double precision floating point compute.

The MI50 it's based off is 6.7TFLOPs FP64 so 1/2 rate of FP32. The Radeon VII is 3.46 TFLOPs FP64 so 1/4 rate FP32. Put another way the Radeon VII is half the FP64 performance for the MI50.

 

None of the figures you mentioned are actually correct.

 

An RTX 2080 for comparison is 0.3 TFLOPS FP64, or put another way... utterly useless and not worth considering as a valid option for FP64. Don't worry though a Titan RTX can surely fix that.... 0.5 TFLOPs FP64.... nope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, leadeater said:

The MI50 it's based off is 6.7TFLOPs FP64 so 1/2 rate of FP32. The Radeon VII is 3.46 TFLOPs FP64 so 1/4 rate FP32. Put another way the Radeon VII is half the FP64 performance for the MI50.

 

None of the figures you mentioned are actually correct.

 

An RTX 2080 for comparison is 0.3 TFLOPS FP64, or put another way... utterly useless and not worth considering as a valid option for FP64.

Science Department King Radeon VII.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×