AMD RX 5700-XT vs Vega-56
- CPU
- GPU
- SSD
- HDD
- RAM
- USB
VS
YouTube*NEW*
About
Watch Gameplay
| CSGO Dust 2 1080p Max |
236 EFps | +3% | 229 EFps | |||
| GTAV Franklin & Lamar 1080p Max |
78 EFps | 110 EFps | Much Better GTAV EFps. +41% |
|||
| Overwatch Temple of Anubis 1080p Max |
98 EFps | 138 EFps | Much Better Overwatch EFps. +41% |
|||
| PUBG M249 Training 1080p Max |
94 EFps | 127 EFps | Much Better PUBG EFps. +35% |
|||
| Fortnite UserBenchmark Island 1080p Max |
117 EFps | 157 EFps | Much Better Fortnite EFps. +34% |
Real World Speed
Performance profile from 188,627 user samples
Benchmark your GPU here
100,910 User Benchmarks
Best Bench: 92% Sapphire(1DA2 E376)
Worst Bench: 70% Asus(1043 0555) ≥ 4GB
Poor: 70%
Great: 92%
SPEED RANK: 63rd / 688
87,717 User Benchmarks
Best Bench: 116% Sapphire(1DA2 E409)
Worst Bench: 60% XFX(1682 5701)
Poor: 60%
Great: 116%
SPEED RANK: 48th / 688
| Effective 3D Speed Effective 3D Gaming GPU Speed |
82. 2 % |
94.7 % | Faster effective speed. +15% |
| Lighting Avg. Locally-deformable PRT (Bat) |
96.4 fps | 109 fps | Better lighting effects. +13% |
|||
| Reflection Avg. High dynamic range lighting (Teapot) |
103 fps | 126 fps | Better reflection handling. +22% |
|||
| MRender Avg. Render target array GShader (Sphere) |
87.9 fps | 109 fps | Faster multi rendering. +24% |
|||
| Gravity Avg. NBody particle system (Galaxy) |
112 fps | 132 fps | Faster NBody calculation. +18% |
| Lighting Locally-deformable PRT (Bat) |
108 fps | 139 fps | Better peak lighting effects. +29% |
|||
| Reflection High dynamic range lighting (Teapot) |
111 fps | 147 fps | Much better peak reflection handling. +32% |
|||
| MRender Render target array GShader (Sphere) |
92.4 fps | 122 fps | Much faster peak multi rendering. +32% |
|||
| Gravity NBody particle system (Galaxy) |
128 fps | 158 fps | Faster peak NBody calculation. +23% |
Market Share
Based on 55,660,680 GPUs tested.
See market share leaders
| Market Share Market Share (trailing 30 days) |
0.08 % | 0.52 % | Hugely higher market share. +550% |
|||
| Value Value For Money |
44.8 % | 68 % | Much better value. +52% |
|||
| User Rating UBM User Rating |
69 % | 74 % | Slightly more popular. +7% |
|||
| Price Price (score) |
$436 | $330 | Cheaper. +24% |
| Age Newest |
62 Months | 39 Months | Much more recent. +37% |
|||
| Parallax Parallax occlusion mapping (Stones) |
177 fps | 230 fps | Better peak texture detail. +30% |
|||
| Splatting Force Splatted Flocking (Swarm) |
77 fps | 98.5 fps | Faster peak complex splatting. +28% |
|||
| Parallax Avg. Parallax occlusion mapping (Stones) |
153 fps | 179 fps | Better texture detail. +17% |
|||
| Splatting Avg.  Force Splatted Flocking (Swarm)
|
74.1 fps | 91.7 fps | Faster complex splatting. +24% |
ADVERTISEMENT
The Radeon RX Vega 56 is the weakest member of AMD’s Vega GPU family. The Vega architecture is built on 14 nm silicon and contains next-generation compute units (nCUs). Each NCU houses 64 steam processors, of which the Vega 56 has 3584 vs. 4096 in the Vega 64. The new architecture employs 8GB of second generation high-bandwidth memory (HBM2). In terms of compatibility all of the games we tested were fine apart from GTAV where enabling reflection MSAA resulted in very poor, almost matt, reflection fidelity (the same bug appeared on several Navi and Vega cards).
Although the Vega 56 has 12.5% less processing units, users have found that by flashing an RX 64 BIOS into an RX 56 card allows a 10% increase in OC headroom which effectively brings a BIOS flashed RX 56 onto par with a stock RX 64 and just 12.5% slower than a fully overclocked RX 64. All of this OC headroom is great on paper but in the real world the reference Vega 56 is far too noisy. Hair dryer levels of noise at stock clocks are unacceptable for most users. Provided you are partially deaf or happy to use noise canceling headphones the Vega 56 “can” deliver levels of performance that approach an RTX 2060 but prices need to drop below $200 before the Vega 56 is competitive. [Nov ’19 GPUPro]
MORE DETAILS
Out of the box the reference 5700 XT has high burst speeds but under load it overheats and therefore drops frames to the extent that it is more or less unusable for demanding games like PUBG. In order to settle the card it was under volted by 120 mV and the maximum clock was lowered to 1,980 MHz (the stock BIOS and 19.
9.1 driver defaulted the card to 2,030 MHz). The fan curve also had to be turned up to around 50% power at 75 degrees (which is a lot noisier than stock). After making these changes the card delivered far more consistent performance albeit with a reduced top speed and unacceptable (hair dryer) levels of noise. There were also incompatibilities with GTAV: enabling reflection MSAA resulted in very poor, almost matt, reflection fidelity (the same bug appeared on several Navi and Vega cards). The reference 5700 XT is great for beating cherry picked benchmarks, but it is not so great for playing games. Thousands of people, duped by sponsored marketing material, purchased the reference card expecting flagship performance, instead they got a shopping trolley with a V6 engine. It appears that the same marketing tactics were employed for the reference Vega 56 and 64 series of graphics cards which we will purchase for our gaming lab and generate effective Fps gaming metrics as soon as possible (results here).
AMD appear to have very short term marketing strategists at the helm, they seem more concerned with this years bonuses than the longevity of the brand. [Jul ’19 GPUPro]
MORE DETAILS
Systems with these GPUs
Top Builds that include these GPUs
- Asus ROG STRIX B450-F GAMING (86)
- MSI B450 Tomahawk (85)
- MSI MPG X570 GAMING PLUS (MS-7C37) (48)
- MSI B450 GAMING PRO CARBON AC (MS-7B85) (44)
- Asus PRIME X470-PRO (37)
- Gigabyte X470 AORUS ULTRA GAMING (37)
- MSI B450 TOMAHAWK MAX (MS-7C02) (36)
- Asus TUF GAMING X570-PLUS (WI-FI) (924)
- MSI B450 TOMAHAWK MAX (MS-7C02) (863)
- Asus ROG STRIX B450-F GAMING (721)
- Gigabyte X570 AORUS ELITE (451)
- MSI MPG X570 GAMING EDGE WIFI (MS-7C37) (411)
- MSI MPG X570 GAMING PLUS (MS-7C37) (376)
- Asus PRIME X570-P (329)
Custom PC Builder (Start a new build)
Build your perfect PC: compare component prices, popularity, speed and value for money.
CHOOSE A COMPONENT:
CPU GPU SSD HDD RAM MBD
Graphics Card Rankings (Price vs Performance)
October 2022 GPU Rankings.
We calculate effective 3D speed which estimates gaming performance for the top 12 games. Effective speed is adjusted by current prices to yield value for money. Our figures are checked against thousands of individual user ratings. The customizable table below combines these factors to bring you the definitive list of top GPUs. [GPUPro]
ADVERTISEMENT
Group Test Results
- Best user rated — User sentiment trumps benchmarks for this comparison.
- Best value for money — Value for money is based on real world performance.
- Fastest real world speed — Real World Speed measures performance for typical consumers.
How Fast Is Your GPU? (Bench your build)
Size up your PC in less than a minute.
Welcome to our freeware PC speed test tool. UserBenchmark will test your PC and compare the results to other users with the same components. You can quickly size up your PC, identify hardware problems and explore the best upgrades.
UserBenchmark of the month
Gaming
Desktop
ProGaming
CPUGPUSSDHDDRAMUSB
How it works
- — Download and run UserBenchmark.
- — CPU tests include: integer, floating and string.
- — GPU tests include: six 3D game simulations.
- — Drive tests include: read, write, sustained write and mixed IO.
- — RAM tests include: single/multi core bandwidth and latency.
- — SkillBench (space shooter) tests user input accuracy.
- — Reports are generated and presented on userbenchmark.com.
- — Identify the strongest components in your PC.
- — See speed test results from other users.
- — Compare your components to the current market leaders.
- — Explore your best upgrade options with a virtual PC build.
- — Compare your in-game FPS to other users with your hardware.
Frequently Asked Questions
Best User Rated
-
Nvidia RTX 3060-Ti
-
Nvidia RTX 3070
-
Nvidia RTX 3050
-
Nvidia GTX 1660S (Super)
-
Nvidia RTX 3080
-
Nvidia GTX 1650S (Super)
-
Nvidia GTX 1060-6GB
-
Nvidia RTX 2070S (Super)
-
Nvidia RTX 2060
-
AMD RX 6600-XT
-
AMD RX 5600-XT
-
Nvidia RTX 2060S (Super)
About • User Guide • FAQs • Email • Privacy • Developer • YouTube
Feedback
AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT vs AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT and AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory.
Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark — G2D Mark, PassMark — G3D Mark, 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).
AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT
Buy on Amazon
vs
AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile
Buy on Amazon
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 2 month(s) later
- Around 9% higher core clock speed: 1243 MHz vs 1138 MHz
- Around 15% higher boost clock speed: 1499 MHz vs 1301 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 7 nm vs 14 nm
| Launch date | 4 Aug 2020 vs 1 June 2018 |
| Core clock speed | 1243 MHz vs 1138 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1499 MHz vs 1301 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm vs 14 nm |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile
- Around 8% lower typical power consumption: 120 Watt vs 130 Watt
- Around 7% higher memory clock speed: 1600 MHz vs 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective)
- 2.
4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames): 8917 vs 3712 - 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps): 8917 vs 3712
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 120 Watt vs 130 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz vs 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective) |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames) | 8917 vs 3712 |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps) | 8917 vs 3712 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT
GPU 2: AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||
GFXBench 4. 0 — Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT | AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark — G2D Mark | 830 | |
| PassMark — G3D Mark | 12622 | |
| Geekbench — OpenCL | 53335 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 16433 | |
GFXBench 4. 0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
16433 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames) | 3712 | 8917 |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps) | 3712 | 8917 |
| GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT | AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile | |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture | RDNA 1. 0 |
GCN 5.0 |
| Code name | Navi 10 | Vega 10 |
| Launch date | 4 Aug 2020 | 1 June 2018 |
| Place in performance rating | 104 | 93 |
| Type | Laptop | Desktop |
| Boost clock speed | 1499 MHz | 1301 MHz |
| Compute units | 40 | |
| Core clock speed | 1243 MHz | 1138 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 14 nm |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 479. 7 GFLOPS (1:16) |
|
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 15.35 TFLOPS (2:1) | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 7.675 TFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 2560 | |
| Pixel fill rate | 95.94 GPixel/s | |
| Texture fill rate | 239.8 GTexel/s | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 130 Watt | 120 Watt |
| Transistor count | 10300 million | 12,500 million |
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort |
| Interface | PCIe 4. 0 x16 |
PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Recommended system power (PSU) | 350 Watt | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
| Width | IGP | |
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | |
| Vulkan | ||
| Maximum RAM amount | 16 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 384 GB/s | |
| Memory bus width | 256 bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective) | 1600 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR6 |
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT with others
AMD
Radeon Pro 5700 XT
vs
AMD
Radeon Pro Duo
AMD
Radeon Pro 5700 XT
vs
NVIDIA
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q
AMD
Radeon Pro 5700 XT
vs
AMD
Radeon RX Vega 56
AMD
Radeon Pro 5700 XT
vs
AMD
Radeon RX 580X
AMD
Radeon Pro 5700 XT
vs
NVIDIA
GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER
AMD
Radeon Pro 5700 XT
vs
NVIDIA
Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q
Compare Sapphire Radeon Pulse RX Vega 56 vs Radeon Nitro+ Rx 5700 Xt
-
Compare -
Graphics Cards - Sapphire Radeon Pulse RX Vega 56 ? Sapphire Radeon Nitro+ Rx 5700 Xt
Save comparison
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
* Pangoly may earn a commission when you use one of the links to make a purchase.
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
Brand
|
Brand
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Model
|
Model
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Release Date
|
Release Date
|
||||||||||||||||
|
* First availability for purchase, it may not correspond to the actual market launch date. 
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
User reviews
|
User reviews
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
TDP
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
Price history
|
Price history
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Supported PC parts
|
Supported PC parts
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
| % more: 1605 MHz vs 1138 MHz
Reasons to choose AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile
| ||||||||||||
| Power consumption (TDP) | 120 Watt vs 225 Watt | ||||||||||||||||
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames) | 8917 vs 3720 | ||||||||||||||||
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps) | 8917 vs 3720 | ||||||||||||||||
(Disclosure)
4 times more performance in GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames) benchmark: 8917 vs 3720 Benchmark comparison
GPU 1: AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT
GPU 2: AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|||
GFXBench 4. 0 — Manhattan (Fps) |
|
| Name | AMD Radeon RX 5700XT | AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark — G3D Mark | 16906 | |
| PassMark — G2D Mark | 953 | |
| Geekbench — OpenCL | 71091 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 252.601 | |
CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
3949.565 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s) | 24.769 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s) | 254.777 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1322.129 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 14699 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames) | 3720 | 8917 |
GFXBench 4. 0 — T-Rex (Frames) |
3369 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 14699 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps) | 3720 | 8917 |
| GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps) | 3369 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike — Graphics Score | 9651 |
Performance comparison
| AMD Radeon RX 5700XT | AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile | |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture | RDNA | GCN 5. 0 |
| Codename | Navi 10 | Vega 10 |
| Issue date | July 7, 2019 | June 1, 2018 |
| Price at first issue date | $400 | |
| Place in the ranking | 56 | 93 |
| Type | Desktop | Desktop |
| Boost core clock | 1905 MHz | 1301MHz |
| Number of Compute | 40 | |
| Core frequency | 1605 MHz | 1138MHz |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 19. 51 TFLOPs |
|
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 9.75 TFLOPs | |
| Pixel fill rate | 121.9GP/s | |
| Render output units | 64 | |
| Stream Processors | 2560 | |
| Texturing speed | 304.8 GT/s | |
| Texture Units | 160 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 225 Watt | 120 Watt |
| Number of transistors | 10. 3B |
12,500 million |
| Process | 14nm | |
| DisplayPort support | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Video connectors | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort | |
| Recommended power supply | 600 Watt | |
| Additional power connectors | 1 x 8 pin and 1 x 6 pin | |
| Interface | PCIe 3. 0 x16 |
|
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (12_1) |
| Vulcan | ||
| OpenGL | 4.6 | |
| Maximum memory size | 8GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 448 GB/s | |
| Memory bus width | 256bit | |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | |
| Memory frequency | 1600 MHz | |
| 4K h364 Decode | ||
| 4K h364 Encode | ||
DisplayPort 1. 3 HBR / 1.4 HDR Ready |
||
| FreeSync | ||
| h365/HEVC Decode | ||
| h365/HEVC Encode | ||
| HDMI 4K Support | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Virtual Super Resolution (VSR) | ||
| VR Ready |
Radeon Vega 3 Embedded vs Radeon Pro 5700 XT
Radeon Vega 3 Embedded vs Radeon Pro 5700 XT — Th200
Contents
- Introduction
- Features
- Tests
- Key differences
- Conclusion
- Comments
Video card
Video card
Introduction
We compared two graphics cards: AMD Radeon Vega 3 Embedded versus AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT.
On this page, you will learn about the key differences between them, as well as which one is the best in terms of features and performance.
AMD Radeon Vega 3 Embedded is a Great Horned Owl (Vega) generation integrated graphics card based on GCN 5.0 architecture released Feb 13th, 2018.
AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT is a Radeon Pro Mac generation (Navi Series) integrated graphics card based on RDNA 1.0 architecture released Aug 4th, 2020.
Specifications
Graphics Card
Name
AMD Vega3 Embeded
AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT
Release date
FEB 13TH, 2018
AUG 4TH, 2020
Tire
IGP
PCIe 4.0 X16 9000 9000 9000 9000
GRAPHICS PROCESSOR
192
2560
Texture Units
12
160
Raster Units
4
64
Compute Units
3
40
Graphics Features
DirectX
12 (12_1)
12 (12_1)
Opengl
4.
6
4.6
OpenCL
2.1
2.1
Vulkan
1.2
Board Design
Heating
15W
130W
Power connectors
None
None
Width Slot
IGP
IGP
Tests
9000 RP
00 RP is a test created by Th200. It measures the raw power of the components and gives a score, with a higher value indicating better performance.
AMD Radeon Vega 3 Embedded
AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT
+2695%
Blender bmw27
Blender is the most popular 3D content creation software. It has its own test, which is widely used to determine the rendering speed of processors and video cards. We chose the bmw27 scene. The result of the test is the time taken to render the given scene.
AMD Radeon Vega 3 Embedded
AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT
Key Differences
Why is AMD Radeon Vega 3 Embedded better than AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT?
Uses 89% less power — 15W vs 130W
Why is AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT better than AMD Radeon Vega 3 Embedded?
Newer — 2 years later release
Has 2695% better performance
More modern manufacturing process — 7 nm vs 14 nm
Has 16 GB more memory
Has 2297% faster pixel fill rate — 95.
94 GPixel/s vs 4.004 GPixel/s
Has 1897% faster texture fill rate — 239.8 GTexel/s vs 12.01 GTexel/s
Has 37 more compute units
Conclusion Which Pro is better6 Radeon Pro is better6 5700XT or Radeon Vega 3 Embedded?
The Radeon Pro 5700 XT delivers 2695% better performance, consumes up to 767% more energy and holds 16 GB more memory. Based on our research, Radeon Pro 5700 XT 3990X is more powerful than Radeon Vega 3 Embedded.
What AMD graphics cards is equivalent to Radeon Pro 5700 XT?
The Radeon Pro Vega 56 is AMD’s closest competitor to the Radeon Pro 5700 XT. It is 2% more powerful, uses 62% more energy, and holds 8 GB more memory.
What NVIDIA graphics cards is equivalent to Radeon Pro 5700 XT?
The Quadro RTX 4000 is NVIDIA’s closest competitor to the Radeon Pro 5700 XT. It is 1% more powerful, uses 24% more energy, and holds 8 GB more memory.
How does Radeon Vega 3 Embedded perform compared to Radeon Pro 5700 XT and other graphics cards?
Relative performance
General performance
Mobile performance
Professional performance
Radeon RX 5700/RX 5700 XT Overview and Pricing
AMD’s highly anticipated Navi graphics cards are finally out, fusing the brand’s new RDNA architecture with the advanced 7nm process that gave birth to the Radeon 7.
The resulting Radeon 5700 and Radeon 5700 XT feature higher frame rates than last year’s similarly priced RTX competitors, while consuming less power and generating less heat than their Vega predecessors.
It looks like an empty net for the red team, but Nvidia has added two new players to the game: the RTX 2060 Super and 2070 Super. These cards proved to be more expensive than their Radeon counterparts thanks to AMD’s price cut two days before release.
New releases from Nvidia aside, the Radeon 5700 cards are impressive. The 7nm process and RDNA architecture means that AMD’s new GPUs produce significantly more graphics power than the 14nm Vega 64 — 1.25 times the performance per clock, according to AMD, despite having fewer compute units and less memory bandwidth. Comparisons are useless here, except to highlight the impressive work of AMD engineers.
| Flow. percent | Expanded frequency | TFLOPs | Memory | Memory PS | TDP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vega 56 | 4096 | 1474 MHz | 10. 6 |
8 GB HBM2 | 410 Gb/s | 210 W |
| Vega 64 | 4096 | 1546 MHz | 12.7 | 8 GB HBM2 | 484 Gb/s | 295 W |
| RX 5700 | 2304 | 1725 MHz | 7.5 | 8 GB GDDR6 | 448 Gb/s | 185 W |
| RX 5700 XT | 2560 | 1905 MHz | 9.0 | 8 GB GDDR6 | 448 Gb/s | 225 W |
| Radeon 7 | 3840 | 1800 MHz | 14.2 | 16 GB HBM2 | 1024 Gb/s | 295 W |
The new Navi cards also impress with their cooling system, with an aluminum alloy shroud, a single cooling fan, and a seven-phase VRM for overclocking. In terms of power connectors, both cards require one eight-pin and one six-pin input.
I/O is pretty standard, with three DisplayPort 1.4 connectors and one HDMI 2.0 port; you won’t get a DVI-D input like the RTX 2060 Super or the VirtualLink USB-C port found on both RTX Super cards.
It’s also worth considering the new features AMD is introducing with the RX 5700 series. They don’t have the hardware-accelerated ray tracing that’s a hallmark of Nvidia’s RTX series, but AMD is introducing a widely adopted alternative to another RTX feature: DLSS scaling. Instead of adding support for this AI-powered scaling on a per-game basis, which is Nvidia’s approach, AMD instead uses a sharpening effect called Radeon Image Sharpening (RIS). The idea is that you can run games below the monitor’s native resolution to increase the frame rate, and then enable this sharpening feature to get a cleaner upscaled image. RIS is sensitive to contrast, which AMD claims will help avoid the ghosting that comes with primitive sharpening techniques. You can also use RIS at the monitor’s native resolution to counteract the softening effect of anti-aliasing techniques such as TAA.
Although RIS works on a much wider range of games than DLSS, there are some limitations: all DX9, DX12 and Vulkan games will work, but DX10 and DX11 games will not; HDR is also excluded. This method also provides more fine-grained control than DLSS, as you can choose to run at any render resolution to trade off performance gains and image fidelity.
AMD is also looking to hit the eSports market with Radeon Anti-Lag. Its goal is to minimize the delay between when an input is made (e.g. firing a gun, computed by the CPU) and the effects of that input being displayed on screen (computed by the GPU) in GPU-constrained situations. This is achieved by stopping the processor when it calculates the next frame, ensuring that the most recent frame rendered by the GPU also contains the most recent input that the processor computed. At best, you save a latency equivalent of 16ms at 60Hz or 4ms at 240Hz. Anti-Lag feature works in DirectX 9 gamesand DirectX 11, which includes most esports games, where this feature will be most useful.
The Radeon 5700 series cards also support new hardware standards, adding DisplayPort 1.4 support to the RTX series using Display Stream Compression. This offers an alternative to color decimation for 8K HDR 60Hz or 4K HDR 144Hz displays. The new AMD models are also the first PCIe 4.0 graphics cards on the market. Graphics cards are not limited to the latest generation PCIe 3.0 in the vast majority of workloads, but some content creation tasks and synthetic benchmarks can benefit from having twice the bandwidth through PCIe.
One of the most noticeable differences between Nvidia and AMD products this time around is the price. AMD has taken a more aggressive stance by announcing price cuts before the cards go on sale to increase competition with Super Nvidia’s release.
To give it even more, AMD is also offering a three-month Microsoft Xbox Game Pass for PC service that includes access to over 100 of the latest games. Previous AMD packages included two or three free games, for an unlimited time, this time there is a chance to play a much larger range of games for three months.