Radeon VII or RX 5700 XT

[Jon Jon]

I am personally looking to upgrade, and I am thinking this is a worthwhile conversation.

 

Is it worth it to still consider Radeon VII strictly for the performance gains over the RX 5700 XT (Assuming independent reviews mirror what AMD has shown), or is it worth it to invest in RTX 2070 level performance and get all of the new RDNA features and benefits.

 

I think we are at a cross roads, as I think Navi will just get better with time, where as Vega's potential has been pretty much realized.

 

What are your thoughts on this?

[Zando_]

Just wait for independent benches and pricing numbers. If you have to get a new GPU right now, get a 2080 if you're a gamer, Radeon VII if you hate Nvidia, like AMD, or just like how OCing and tweaking works on the VII and are willing to deal with noise and higher temps (or swap the cooler). There'll always be something new around the corner, if you can wait for benches, pricing, or actual release, then do that. Otherwise just buy the best option now. 

[Terabyte_272]

This will be quite the topic but I recommend waiting for 3rd party reviews before making a decision on the RX 5700 xt. just because we dont know if all of the numbers they are touting is true.

[Princess Luna]

The Radeon 7 is a repurposed workstation card while the 5700 XT is made with gaming on focus... we will find out when it releases and we can watch independent reviews.

[Terabyte_272]

If the 5700 XT is great I would recommend waiting a little bit later until there are 3rd party coolers (for better overclocking and just life time)

[Gohardgrandpa]

Funny how they showed strange brigade which favors amd gpu's. I'm taking the results they showed with a grain of salt, if the card was really impressive they would of shown a different game that favors nvidia gpu's and they would of had a higher framerate. Sorry but i'm not buying what they are trying to sell here

[Zando_]

Just now, Terabyte_272 said:

If the 5700 XT is great I would recommend waiting a little bit later until there are 3rd party coolers (for better overclocking and just life time)

^^^ Yes. I had the Vega FE, now run Radeon VII. Both have meh coolers if you value your temps and ears (if you wear closed headphones you should be better off tho), on the FE it's a blower (very nice one, similar to the one they're putting on the XT, but it's still a blower) and on the RVII they legit cut out the heatsink itself to fit the fans in, it's a lot smaller than it should be. Aftermarket coolers are much better, if Sapphire drops a Nitro+ and it's anything like the Vega 64 one, it should be an amazing card. 

[Jon Jon]

I guess I didn't phrase myself well.

 

Ignoring the obvious, it's always something I think about and it's something that we all do when we shift between generations.

 

Would it be worth it to invest into Vega for that performance, or into the new architecture for more optimizations and longevity.

 

It makes me think of people going out and buying GTX 980 Tis when the Pascal cards were out, just because the 1080 was hard to find and it was still faster than the 1070.

 

I guess that's where I want to steer this conversation.

 

Are the new RDNA optimizations worth it while being slower today, or would a Radeon VII be just better strictly because it is overall faster in today's games?

 

Heck, the same conversation can be had with Pascal versus Turing. Is it even still worth it to go Pascal, or just go with the Ray Tracing or non Ray Tracing Turing, even if the Pascal card may today yield better performance numbers depending on the model?

[Terabyte_272]

1 minute ago, Zando Bob said:

^^^ Yes. I had the Vega FE, now run Radeon VII. Both have meh coolers if you value your temps and ears (if you wear closed headphones you should be better off tho), on the FE it's a blower (very nice one, similar to the one they're putting on the XT, but it's still a blower) and on the RVII they legit cut out the heatsink itself to fit the fans in, it's a lot smaller than it should be. Aftermarket coolers are much better, if Sapphire drops a Nitro+ and it's anything like the Vega 64 one, it should be an amazing card. 

: ) Thx

[Jon Jon]

4 minutes ago, Terabyte_272 said:

If the 5700 XT is great I would recommend waiting a little bit later until there are 3rd party coolers (for better overclocking and just life time)

If that card is what they claim it to be, I will probably just get an ROG STRIX variant.

 

For me, I think the ROG STRIX tax is worth it, just because you can run them practically silent and OC pretty well.

[Terabyte_272]

Just now, Jon Jon said:

I guess I didn't phrase myself well.

 

Ignoring the obvious, it's always something I think about and it's something that we all do when we shift between generations.

 

Would it be worth it to invest into Vega for that performance, or into the new architecture for more optimizations and longevity.

 

It makes me think of people going out and buying GTX 980 Tis when the Pascal cards were out, just because the 1080 was hard to find and it was still faster than the 1070.

 

I guess that's where I want to steer this conversation.

 

Are the new RDNA optimizations worth it while being slower today, or would a Radeon VII be just better strictly because it is overall faster in today's games?

 

Heck, the same conversation can be had with Pascal versus Turing. Is it even still worth it to go Pascal, or just go with the Ray Tracing or non Ray Tracing Turing, even if the Pascal card may today yield better performance numbers depending on the model?

RDNA is supposed to be faster? Also as other people have mentioned the Radeon VII Is not a gaming card like the RX 5700 XT But again WAIT FOR IT.

[Jon Jon]

1 minute ago, Terabyte_272 said:

RDNA is supposed to be faster? Also as other people have mentioned the Radeon VII Is not a gaming card like the RX 5700 XT But again WAIT FOR IT.

the RX 5700 XT is being positioned as a slower card, so yes, it is.

Vega's best today, is still faster than Navi's best today.

 

Obviously, I am waiting for reviews. I am just trying to spark a conversation about whether brute force older architecture is worth investing in versus new technology.

 

It's always something I consider when upgrading my system.

[Zando_]

3 minutes ago, Jon Jon said:

If that card is what they claim it to be, I will probably just get an ROG STRIX variant.

 

For me, I think the ROG STRIX tax is worth it, just because you can run them practically silent and OC pretty well.

Yee. For the Vega 64, the Sapphire Nitro+ is the best all round, STRIX and the Red Devil are reaaally close as well. All 3 are excellent variants, hopefully that carries over to the new GPUs. 

[Terabyte_272]

I think the 5700 XT will be a great card if the numbers are right because of that price tag man I might get one when I upgrade my cpu to an X5675 (I love my R9 Fury X but those numbers are great!)

[xg32]

radeon vii might have better resell value, the 5700 XT this year will be worse than the consoles out next year.

[Masada02]

1 minute ago, Jon Jon said:

I guess I didn't phrase myself well.

 

Ignoring the obvious, it's always something I think about and it's something that we all do when we shift between generations.

 

Would it be worth it to invest into Vega for that performance, or into the new architecture for more optimizations and longevity.

 

It makes me think of people going out and buying GTX 980 Tis when the Pascal cards were out, just because the 1080 was hard to find and it was still faster than the 1070.

 

I guess that's where I want to steer this conversation.

 

Are the new RDNA optimizations worth it while being slower today, or would a Radeon VII be just better strictly because it is overall faster in today's games?

 

Heck, the same conversation can be had with Pascal versus Turing. Is it even still worth it to go Pascal, or just go with the Ray Tracing or non Ray Tracing Turing, even if the Pascal card may today yield better performance numbers depending on the model?

It's a good question. Generally when I hear "optimizations" I think they mean they cut out unnecessary features. I'd bet that the RDNA architecture has a lot less of the compute/workstation features that makes Vega so versatile. Though with RDNA you get the strong IPC uplifts I guess. AMD did say at one of their last shows that they would still be using the Vega architecture in workstation cards going forward, and that RDNA would be focused on the gaming market. I take that as the support for Vega won't stop for a while.

 

Hopefully they will enable some of the Vega features that we haven't seen yet (like rapid packed math) whenever the RDNA cards start to show up since they support them as well.

 

I'm curious how well the 5700 chips will OC too. Tweaking on the VII is fun already and it looks like the regular 5700 will be a strong overclocker. Could be fun just on it's own.

[Zando_]

6 minutes ago, Terabyte_272 said:

I think the 5700 XT will be a great card if the numbers are right because of that price tag man I might get one when I upgrade my cpu to an X5675 (I love my R9 Fury X but those numbers are great!)

Ooooooooooooooo an X58 boye! I'm on X99 now (i7 5820K), but I used to run an X5675, they're excellent CPUs. Have an X5670 in my X58 bench as well rn, does 4.54 CB20 stable, 4.74 CB15 (1.45v on the core, I have it on water so that voltage is easily doable, I pushed around 1.44v or so on air without hitting much above the 90s in Prime95 though). The X56xx Xeons are excellent overclockers for the most part, and they can take a beating if you wanna push their limits. My X5675 actually kept up with a 1080 Ti reasonably well too, though games like Assassin's Creed Odyssey wouldn't push more than 30-40 fps in busier sections, but frametimes stayed solid so it was perfectly playable. 

[Terabyte_272]

13 minutes ago, xg32 said:

radeon vii might have better resell value, the 5700 XT this year will be worse than the consoles out next year.

Your joking right? The next console generation wont effect it, at the moment we have no way of knowing what chip they have. and if they are using a chip from now they'll be out of date when they come out. also the next gen will probably be quite expensive in comparison to last gen. The next consoles might hit 600-700 dollars if they hope to push what they say.

[Terabyte_272]

12 minutes ago, Zando Bob said:

Ooooooooooooooo an X58 boye! I'm on X99 now (i7 5820K), but I used to run an X5675, they're excellent CPUs. Have an X5670 in my X58 bench as well rn, does 4.54 CB20 stable, 4.74 CB15 (1.45v on the core, I have it on water so that voltage is easily doable, I pushed around 1.44v or so on air without hitting much above the 90s in Prime95 though). The X56xx Xeons are excellent overclockers for the most part, and they can take a beating if you wanna push their limits. My X5675 actually kept up with a 1080 Ti reasonably well too, though games like Assassin's Creed Odyssey wouldn't push more than 30-40 fps in busier sections, but frametimes stayed solid so it was perfectly playable. 

Yep ive been on the X58 Thread a coupe of times

[xg32]

6 minutes ago, Terabyte_272 said:

Your joking right? The next console generation wont effect it, at the moment we have no way of knowing what chip they have. and if they are using a chip from now they'll be out of date when they come out. also the next gen will probably be quite expensive in comparison to last gen. The next consoles might hit 600-700 dollars if they hope to push what they say.

the pricing's pretty much already know, it's 500usd, generally the faster card has a better resell value, i don't consider the 5700 XT to be a good card performance or value wise unless it beats the 2070, keep in mind 2070 is terrible value for a mid range card to begin with, and with super coming out, it doesn't look good. I'm all for ryzen but amd gpus are meh, a simple 50dollar price cut from nvidia on RTX cards would be navi terrible buys.

[Terabyte_272]

well at the moment from what we know the card should compete very well against the 2070 plus in even in Canadian roubles the 2070 is more expensive then the price of a RX 5700 XT. there is no price confirmation on the Scarlet and again unless Microsoft wants to sell at a loss they will need to sell higher. Super may be an interesting contender but once again super may have super high prices

[Jon Jon]

4 hours ago, Masada02 said:

It's a good question. Generally when I hear "optimizations" I think they mean they cut out unnecessary features. I'd bet that the RDNA architecture has a lot less of the compute/workstation features that makes Vega so versatile. Though with RDNA you get the strong IPC uplifts I guess. AMD did say at one of their last shows that they would still be using the Vega architecture in workstation cards going forward, and that RDNA would be focused on the gaming market. I take that as the support for Vega won't stop for a while.

 

Hopefully they will enable some of the Vega features that we haven't seen yet (like rapid packed math) whenever the RDNA cards start to show up since they support them as well.

 

I'm curious how well the 5700 chips will OC too. Tweaking on the VII is fun already and it looks like the regular 5700 will be a strong overclocker. Could be fun just on it's own.

That's just it, as really the primary driver for me looking to upgrade my RX 580 is for much better VR performance.

 

I am also contemplating upgrading to the Rift S from my CV1, but the graphics card needs to come first.

 

Compute workloads aren't that big of a deal to me as really my primary use for the PC is streaming and gaming.

5 hours ago, Zando Bob said:

Yee. For the Vega 64, the Sapphire Nitro+ is the best all round, STRIX and the Red Devil are reaaally close as well. All 3 are excellent variants, hopefully that carries over to the new GPUs. 

I hope so too! I will admit, that I am a bit of an ASUS fanboy. I really love their hardware and I have zero problems with them. I am very happy with my ROG STRIX X370-F motherboard and I am also really happy with my ASUS ROG Rapture Router. I used to own an R9 380 ROG STRIX as well that is now in a friend's PC and he has no issues with it as well for all of the F2P games he plays.

[Zando_]

16 hours ago, Jon Jon said:

I hope so too! I will admit, that I am a bit of an ASUS fanboy. I really love their hardware and I have zero problems with them. I am very happy with my ROG STRIX X370-F motherboard and I am also really happy with my ASUS ROG Rapture Router. I used to own an R9 380 ROG STRIX as well that is now in a friend's PC and he has no issues with it as well for all of the F2P games he plays.

Z390 boards below $500 have been oof by all accounts, but all the ASUS stuff I've had in the past was solid too. Ran an ASUS Rampage III Formula, ASUS Crosshair VII, STRIX RX570, and I think some other stuff I forgot. Oh yeah, a STRIX B450-F as well. All well made, performed well, and ASUS's BIOS on everything from X58 on up has been excellent IMO. More polished and feature rich version of ASRock's, which I also like.

[VMBRA_]

Speaking of RX 5700 nad 5700 XT. have any leaks of any AIB Partner model shown up on the Internet? I am extremely curious on the design of those...