Amd vega 16: AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 Graphics Card

Buried towards the tail-end of today’s MacBook Air press release from Apple was a second announcement: that they’d be releasing a minor MacBook Pro refresh next month. Though curious in and of itself – the MacBook Pros were just updated in July – more interesting is what they’d be refreshed with: new AMD GPUs. Announced by AMD at the same time, we now have confirmation that AMD’s missing mobile GPU is finally shipping. It will be arriving first as the Radeon Pro Vega 20 and Radeon Pro Vega 16, upgradable graphics options for the 15-inch MacBook Pro set to become available next month.

As a bit of background, AMD first announced the Vega Mobile GPU – which we believe is codenamed Vega 12 – at the start of the year at AMD’s CES Tech Day. The company stated the GPU would be coming later this year, and even showed it off. While details were scarce at the time, it was announced that it would be a smaller, lower-power GPU specifically for mobile devices. And of particular note, it would have a z-height of only 1.7mm, the same as AMD’s mobile Polaris 11 GPU, making it suitable for installation in relatively thin laptops.

However between CES and today, AMD has been completely silent about the GPU. Even when I reached out to them I couldn’t get a solid answer, and to be perfectly honest, I had given up on seeing the GPU. Sometimes products hit too many problems, or can’t find interested customers; it happens. With everyone (sans Apple) already having their holiday 2018 products on store shelves, it seemed like AMD had all but missed their launch window, and with it, any real chance of adoption.

Instead, as we now know, it will be making it to commercial products after all as an upgrade option for the 15-inch MacBook Pro. And while the lack of a shipping date for the new models is not especially confidence-inspiring given everything else that has been going on, none the less I have to admit that I was premature in giving up on AMD.

The flip side to this however is that because the first Vega Mobile SKUs are going into Apple products, AMD has limited what they’re saying about the products, as is traditional for Apple suppliers. So while the company is proud to announce the part – they even have a short video showing it off – specific details are a bit thinner. As a result, the following is a mix of details from AMD and some guesses on my part.

AMD Radeon GPU Comparison
	Vega 12	Vega 10	«Vega M»	Polaris 10	Polaris 11
CUs	20 (1280 SPs)	64 (4096 SPs)	24 (1536 SPs)	36 (2304 SPs)	16 (1024 SPs)
ROPs	(Probably?)	64	64	32	16
Base Clock	?	1247MHz	1063MHz	1120MHz	1175MHz
Boost Clock	1300MHz	1546MHz	1190MHz	1266MHz	1275MHz
Memory Clock	1. 5Gbps HBM2	1.89Gbps HBM2	1.6Gbps HBM2	8Gbps GDDR5	7Gbps GDDR5
Memory Bus Width	1024-bit	2048-bit	1024-bit	256-bit	128-bit
VRAM	4GB	8GB	4GB	8GB	2GB/4GB
Die Size	?	484mm2	?	232mm2	123mm2
Manufacturing Process	GloFo 14nm	GloFo 14nm	GloFo 14nm	GloFo 14nm	GloFo 14nm
Architecture	Vega (GCN 5)	Vega (GCN 5)	GCN 4*	GCN 4	GCN 4
Launch Date	11/2018	08/2017	06/2016	06/2016	08/2016

Perhaps the most important bit of news here is that the new GPU is definitely an actual Vega GPU. This is no mix-and-match semi-custom GPU like the “Vega M” GPU in Kaby Lake G – which turned out to be Polaris’s graphics core with Vega’s memory controller – but rather it’s a bona fide Vega GPU with all of the features that entails, including Rapid Packed Math. So, if only at long-last, we finally have a second discrete GCN 5 GPU from AMD.

AMD’s announcement and the resulting SKUs also strongly point to this part having a total of 20 CUs (or 1280 SPs). As a mobile part we were already expecting it to be less than half of a Vega 10 (64 CUs), but this is actually smaller than we were expecting. In practice this puts Vega Mobile much closer to Polaris 11 than it does Polaris 10 or Vega 10; in fact even “Vega M” has more CUs. Which again, we’re looking at mobile parts here, so it becomes a matter of what’s viable in terms of chip size and power consumption. But it also means that we shouldn’t expect to see Polaris 10-like performance out of the part, while the performance improvements over Polaris 11 remain to be seen. Apple for their part is touting a “60%” improvement, but they don’t actually specify what they’re comparing the new GPUs to.

AMD Radeon Mobile SKUs
	Vega Pro 20	Vega Pro 16	Pro 560X
CUs	20 (1280 SPs)	16 (1024 SPs)	16 (1024 SPs)
Boost Clock	1300MHz	1185MHz	?
Memory Clock	1. 5Gbps HBM2	1.5Gbps HBM2	5.1Gbps GDDR5
Memory Bus Width	1024-bit	1024-bit	128-bit
VRAM	4GB	4GB	4GB
Architecture	Vega (GCN 5)	Vega (GCN 5)	GCN 4
Launch Date	11/2018	11/2018	07/2018

Meanwhile AMD was also able to send over clockspeed information for both SKUs. The Pro Vega 20 has an “engine clockspeed” – which I’m interpreting to mean the boost clock given that we’re talking about mobile parts – of 1300MHz. Meanwhile the lower-end Pro Vega 16 tops out at 1185Mhz. The Pro Vega 16 also only features 16 CUs out of 20, so on-paper we’re looking at around 70% of the Pro Vega 20’s theoretical throughput.

Past that, we don’t have any further confirmed information on the GPU itself. Specifically, we don’t know the number of ROPs or the clockspeeds. 32 ROPs is likely since that would be half of a Vega 10, but then “Vega M” included 64 ROPs anyhow. We also don’t have a good estimate on die size at this time, as we don’t have better pictures of the GPU. What we do know however is that the chip is being fabbed on a 14nm FinFET process, which means it’s almost certainly being done by long-time partner GlobalFoundries.

Moving on, feeding the new GPU is a single HBM2 memory stack, which means we’re looking at a 1024-bit wide memory bus. Because these are mobile parts, AMD has clocked them fairly conservatively, with a memory clock of 1. 5Gbps. Even then, a single HBM2 stack offers 192GB/sec of memory bandwidth, a more than 70% improvement over the best Polaris 11 product and even more over the various mobile SKUs which Apple uses. So there is far more bandwidth available here to feed the GPU. Meanwhile it’s worth noting that Apple’s SKUs are all using 4GB stacks here, but if AMD wanted to, they should be able to offer 8GB (8-Hi) configurations as well.

Once Apple’s machines do ship, it will be interesting to see what performance is like. The Radeon Pros Apple current uses are no slouches, but they are limited by their relatively small size, not to mention the TDP limits of the notebook itself. Improving performance on the MacBook Pro means not only offering a larger GPU, but also better performance-per-watt than the current GPUs. In the desktop space AMD has struggled mightily here as they’ve aggressively pursued absolute performance, however we’ve never seen what Vega is like in a more conservative configuration. So it will be interesting to see what AMD and Apple can do.

Finally, looking at the broader landscape, I’m curious to see whether Vega Mobile will be adopted anywhere else. AMD is quite late in this generation, and as I’ve mentioned previously they’ve missed the rest of the 2018 laptop updates. However as we still don’t have a good replacement for NVIDIA’s GP106 GPU – the workhorse of many high-end laptops – AMD may not be as late as they seem if they can sign up more laptop manufacturers in the first part of next year.

Source:
AMD

Tweet

PRINT THIS ARTICLE

Apple M1 8-core vs AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16

Comparative analysis of Apple M1 8-core and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Memory, Technologies, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support.
Benchmark videocards performance analysis: Geekbench — OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps), PassMark — G2D Mark, PassMark — G3D Mark.

Apple M1 8-core

Buy on Amazon

vs

AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16

Buy on Amazon

Differences

Reasons to consider the Apple M1 8-core

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 11 month(s) later
• 4.3x more core clock speed: 1278 MHz vs 300 MHz
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 5 nm vs 14 nm
• Around 18% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 10433 vs 8870
• Around 18% better performance in GFXBench 4. 0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 10433 vs 8870
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames): 3723 vs 3586
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps): 3723 vs 3586

Launch date	10 Nov 2020 vs 14 November 2018
Core clock speed	1278 MHz vs 300 MHz
Manufacturing process technology	5 nm vs 14 nm
GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	10433 vs 8870
GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	10433 vs 8870
GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames)	3723 vs 3586
GFXBench 4. 0 — Manhattan (Fps)	3723 vs 3586
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames)	3364 vs 3359
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps)	3364 vs 3359

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16

• Around 23% better performance in Geekbench — OpenCL: 22421 vs 18171

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: Apple M1 8-core
GPU 2: AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16

Geekbench — OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2
GFXBench 4. 0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2
GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2
GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2
GFXBench 4. 0 — Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2

Name	Apple M1 8-core	AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16
Geekbench — OpenCL	18171	22421
GFXBench 4. 0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	10433	8870
GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	10433	8870
GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames)	3723	3586
GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps)	3723	3586
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames)	3364	3359
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps)	3364	3359
PassMark — G2D Mark		672
PassMark — G3D Mark		4683

Compare specifications (specs)

	Apple M1 8-core	AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16
Launch date	10 Nov 2020	14 November 2018
Place in performance rating	382	254
Type	Desktop, Laptop	Workstation
Architecture		GCN 5. 0
Code name		Vega 12
Core clock speed	1278 MHz	300 MHz
Manufacturing process technology	5 nm	14 nm
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance	650 GFLOPS
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance	5200 GFLOPS
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance	2600 GFLOPS
Pipelines	128
Boost clock speed		1190 MHz
Thermal Design Power (TDP)		75 Watt
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB
Memory clock speed		2400 MHz
4K h364 Decode
4K h364 Encode
h365/HEVC Decode
h365/HEVC Encode
Display Connectors		No outputs
Interface		PCIe 3. 0 x16
DirectX		12.0 (12_1)
OpenGL		4.6

Radeon Pro Vega 16 [in 6 benchmarks]

Radeon Pro Vega 16

• PCIe 3.0 x16 interface
• Core frequency
• Video memory size 4 GB
• Memory type HBM2
• Memory frequency 2400 MHz
• Maximum resolution

Description

AMD started Radeon Pro Vega 16 sales 15 November 2018. This is Vega architecture notebook card based on 14 nm manufacturing process and primarily aimed at designers. It has 4 GB of HBM2 memory at 2.4 GHz, and coupled with a 1024-bit interface, this creates a bandwidth of 307.2 GB / s.

In terms of compatibility, this is a PCIe 3.0 x16 card. Power consumption — 75 W.

It provides poor performance in tests and games at the level of

15.83%

from the leader, which is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti.

Radeon Pro
Vega 16

or

GeForce RTX
3090 Ti

General information

Information about the type (desktop or laptop) and architecture of Radeon Pro Vega 16, as well as sales start time and cost at that time.

10060

Price-quality ratio

• 0
• 50
• 100

Features

Radeon Pro Vega 16’s general performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core clock, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. They indirectly speak of Radeon Pro Vega 16’s performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider its benchmark and gaming test results. of 900 (Tesla S2050) Textory speed 76.16 of 939.8 (h200 SXM5)

compatibility and size 9,0002
Information on Radeon Pro Vega 16 compatibility with other computer components. Useful for example when choosing the configuration of a future computer or to upgrade an existing one. For laptop video cards, this is the estimated size of the laptop, the bus and the connection connector, if the video card is connected through the connector, and not soldered on the motherboard.

9

9013AP
Parameters of the memory installed on Radeon Pro Vega 16 — type, size, bus, frequency and bandwidth. For video cards built into the processor that do not have their own memory, a shared part of the RAM is used.

API support

APIs supported by Radeon Pro Vega 16, including their versions.

DirectX	12 (12_1)
Sheder Model	6.3	9009
										9005 9AG0021 This is our overall performance rating. We regularly improve our algorithms, but if you find any inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in the comments section, we usually fix problems quickly. Pro Vega 16 15.83 Passmark 3DMark 11 Performance GPU 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU 3DMark Fire Strike Score 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics GeekBench 5 OpenCL Passmark This is a very common benchmark included in the Passmark PerformanceTest package. He gives the card a thorough evaluation, running four separate tests for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11, and 12 (the latter being done at 4K resolution whenever possible), and a few more tests using DirectCompute. Benchmark coverage: 26% Pro Vega 16 4682 3DMark 11 Performance GPU 3DMark 11 is Futuremark’s legacy DirectX 11 benchmark. He used four tests based on two scenes: one is several submarines exploring a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All tests make extensive use of volumetric lighting and tessellation and, despite being run at 1280×720, are relatively heavy. Support for 3DMark 11 ended in January 2020 and is now being replaced by Time Spy. Benchmark coverage: 17% Pro Vega 16 10569 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU Cloud Gate is a legacy DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark used to test home PCs and low-end laptops. It displays several scenes of some strange teleportation device launching spaceships into the unknown at a fixed resolution of 1280×720. As with the Ice Storm benchmark, it was deprecated in January 2020 and 3DMark Night Raid is now recommended instead. Benchmark coverage: 14% Pro Vega 16 56273 3DMark Fire Strike Score Benchmark coverage: 14% Pro Vega 16 6902 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests showing a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature that appears to be made of lava. Using resolution 1920×1080, Fire Strike shows quite realistic graphics and is quite demanding on hardware. Benchmark coverage: 14% Pro Vega 16 7745 GeekBench 5 OpenCL Geekbench 5 is a widely used benchmark for video cards that combines 11 different test scenarios. All of these scenarios are based on the direct use of the processing power of the GPU, without the use of 3D rendering. This option uses the Khronos Group’s OpenCL API. Benchmark coverage: 9% Pro Vega 16 22421 Game tests FPS in popular games on Radeon Pro Vega 16, as well as compliance with system requirements. Remember that the official requirements of the developers do not always match the data of real tests. Average FPS Here are the average fps for a large selection of popular games at various resolutions: 38 Full HD 54 4K Popular games 9000 FULLLLLLLLLL Full HD Medium Preset Full HD High Preset Full HD Ultra Preset 1440p High Preset 1440p Ultra Preset 4K High Preset 4K Ultra Preset Cyberpunk 2077 16-18 Assassin’s Creed Odyssey 16-18 Assassin’s Creed Valhalla 16-18 Battlefield 5 16-18 Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16-18 Cyberpunk 2077 16-18 Far Cry 5 16-18 Far Cry New Dawn 16-18 Forza Horizon 4 16-18 Hitman 3 16-18 Horizon Zero Dawn 16-18 Red Dead Redemption 2 16-18 Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16-18 Watch Dogs: Legion 16-18 Assassin’s Creed Odyssey 16-18 Assassin’s Creed Valhalla 16-18 Battlefield 5 16-18 Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16-18 Cyberpunk 2077 16-18 Far Cry 5 16-18 Far Cry New Dawn 16-18 Forza Horizon 4 16-18 Hitman 3 16-18 Horizon Zero Dawn 16-18 Metro Exodus 16-18 Red Dead Redemption 2 16-18 Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16-18 The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16-18 Watch Dogs: Legion 16-18 Assassin’s Creed Odyssey 16-18 Assassin’s Creed Valhalla 16-18 Battlefield 5 16-18 Cyberpunk 2077 16-18 Far Cry 5 16-18 Far Cry New Dawn 16-18 Forza Horizon 4 16-18 The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27 Watch Dogs: Legion 16-18 Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16-18 Hitman 3 16-18 Horizon Zero Dawn 16-18 Metro Exodus 16-18 Red Dead Redemption 2 16-18 Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16-18 The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16-18 Assassin’s Creed Odyssey 16-18 Assassin’s Creed Valhalla 16-18 Battlefield 5 16-18 Cyberpunk 2077 16-18 Far Cry 5 16-18 Far Cry New Dawn 16-18 Forza Horizon 4 16-18 Watch Dogs: Legion 16-18 Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16-18 Hitman 3 16-18 Horizon Zero Dawn 16-18 Metro Exodus 16-18 Red Dead Redemption 2 16-18 Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16-18 The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16-18 Assassin’s Creed Odyssey 16-18 Assassin’s Creed Valhalla 16-18 Battlefield 5 16-18 Cyberpunk 2077 16-18 Far Cry 5 16-18 Far Cry New Dawn 16-18 Forza Horizon 4 16-18 Watch Dogs: Legion 16-18 Relative performance Radeon Pro Vega 16 overall performance compared to its closest competitors in mobile workstation graphics cards. NVIDIA Quadro T2000 (mobile) 116.93 NVIDIA Quadro P2000 Max-Q 115.22 AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 109.29 AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 100 NVIDIA Quadro P1000 94.88 NVIDIA Quadro M2200 92.17 AMD Radeon Pro 560X 78.58 Competitor from NVIDIA We believe that the closest equivalent to Radeon Pro Vega 16 from NVIDIA is Quadro P1000, which is slower by 5% on average and lower by 16 positions in our rating. Quadro P1000 Compare Here are some of NVIDIA’s closest competitors to the Radeon Pro Vega 16: NVIDIA Quadro M3000M 120.66 NVIDIA Quadro T2000 (mobile) 116. 93 NVIDIA Quadro P2000 Max-Q 115.22 AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 100 NVIDIA Quadro P1000 94.88 NVIDIA Quadro M2200 92.17 NVIDIA Quadro P620 77.45 Other video cards Here we recommend several video cards that are more or less similar in performance to the reviewed one. Quadro P1000 Compare Quadro M2200 Compare Radeon Pro Vega 20 Compare Quadro P2000 Max-Q Compare Radeon Pro 560X Compare Quadro P620 Compare Recommended Processors According to our statistics, these processors are most often used with the Radeon Pro Vega 16. Ryzen 5 3500U 15.6% Core i9 9880H 9.4% Ryzen 5 2600 6.3% Athlon 3000G 3.1% Ryzen Threadripper 3970X 3.1% Ryzen 5 2400GE 3.1% EPYC 7502P 3.1% Core i9 9900K 3.1% Xeon W 3275M 3.1% Core i5 11400 3. 1% User rating Here you can see the rating of the video card by users, as well as put your own rating. Tips and comments Here you can ask a question about Radeon Pro Vega 16, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch. Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus. performance overview and gaming performance tests The Radeon Pro Vega 16 graphics card was released by AMD, release date: 14 November 2018. The graphics card is designed for workstation computers and is based on the GCN 5.0 architecture, codenamed Vega 12. Core Clock — 300 MHz. The core frequency in Boost mode is 1190 MHz. Technological process — 14 nm. Power consumption (TDP) — 75 Watt. Memory frequency — 2400 MHz. Benchmarks GFXBench 4.0 Car Chase Offscreen Top 1 GPU This GPU 34770 Frames 8870 Frames GFXBench 4. 0 Car Chase Offscreen Top 1 GPU This GPU 34770.000 Fps 8870.000 Fps GFXBench 4.0 Manhattan Top 1 GPU This GPU 27823 Frames 3586 Frames GFXBench 4.0 Manhattan Top 1 GPU This GPU 27823. 000 Fps 3586.000 Fps GFXBench 4.0 T-Rex Top 1 GPU This GPU 69225 Frames 3359 Frames GFXBench 4.0 T-Rex Top 1 GPU This GPU 69225.000 Fps 3359. 000 Fps Geekbench OpenCL Top 1 GPU This GPU 237214 PassMark G2D Mark Top 1 GPU This GPU PassMark G3D Mark Top 1 GPU This GPU Name Meaning GFXBench 4. 0 — Car Chase Offscreen 8870 Frames GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen 8870.000 Fps GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan 3586 Frames GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan 3586.000 Fps GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex 3359 Frames GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex 3359.000 Fps Geekbench — OpenCL 22421 PassMark — G2D Mark 672 PassMark — G3D Mark 4683 Vega 12 Production date November 14, 2018 Place in the ranking 254 Type Workstation Boost core clock 1190 MHz Core frequency 300MHz Process 14nm Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt Video connectors No outputs Interface PCIe 3. 0 x16 DirectX 12.0 (12_1) OpenGL 4.6 Memory frequency 2400 MHz Navigation Choose your graphics card Compare graphics cards Compare AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 with other graphics cards AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 versus ATI Radeon X800 GT AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 versus ATI Radeon HD 2900XT AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 versus NVIDIA GeForce GTS 150M AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 versus AMD Radeon R9 M395 Mac Edition AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop) AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 versus AMD Radeon RX 570X specs and benchmarks in 3 games and 10 benchmarks AMD started shipping the Radeon Pro Vega 16 on November 14, 2018. This is a graphics card for mobile workstations, based on the GCN 5.0 architecture, with a 14 nm process technology. It has 4 GB of HBM2 memory with a frequency of 1200 MHz, a 1024-bit bus, which provides a throughput of 24 Gb / s. Connected via PCIe 3.0 x16 interface. Power is not specified, the declared maximum power consumption is 75 watts. Specifications GPU GPU option Vega 12 XLA Architecture GCN 5.0 Manufacturer GlobalFoundries Process 14 nm Graphic card Release date November 14, 2018 Generation Radeon Pro Mac (Vega Series) Data bus interface PCIe 3. 0 x16 Frequencies Base frequency 815 MHz Boost frequency 1190 MHz Memory frequency 1200 MHz Memory Memory capacity 4 GB Memory type HBM2 Memory bus 1024 bit Memory speed 24 Gb/s Memory bandwidth 307.2 GB/s Render configuration Shader blocks 1024 Compute modules 16 Texture blocks 64 Screen blocks 32 L1 cache 16 KB L2 cache 1024 KB Rated output Pixel fill rate 38. 08 GP/s Texture Fill Rate 76.16 GT/s Performance FP16 4.874 Tflops Performance FP32 2.437 Tflops Performance FP64 152.3 GFlops Graphics DirectX 12 (12_1) OpenGL 4.6 OpenCL 2.1 Vulcan 1.2 Shader Model 6.3 Video Card Design Heat Sink Requirements 75 W Outlets None Game FPS The Witcher 3 (2015) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770, but worse than AMD Radeon RX 560. 1920×1080 / Ultra / 27 X-Plane 11.11 (2018) Better than AMD Radeon RX 5700, but worse than AMD Radeon RX 470. 1280×720 / Low / 65 1920×1080 / Medium / 50.8 1920×1080 / Tall / 43.5 Dota 2 Reborn (2015) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M. 1280×720 / Low / 103 1366×768 / Medium / 99 1920×1080 / Tall / 75 1920×1080 / Ultra / 72 3840×2160 / Ultra / 38. 4 Benchmark tests 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU: 56273 Better than AMD Radeon RX 5300M but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile. 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score: 29958 Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB. 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics: 7745 Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q. 3DMark Fire Strike Score: 6902 Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 but worse than NVIDIA Quadro M4000M. 3DMark Time Spy Graphics: 2198 Better than AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL, but worse than AMD Radeon R9 280X. 3DMark Time Spy Score: 2443 Better than AMD Radeon R9 280X, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile.