Vega 56 vs 5700 xt: Please click the green button to continue.

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT vs AMD Radeon RX Vega 56: What is the difference?

57points

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

44points

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

vs

54 facts in comparison

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

Why is AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT better than AMD Radeon RX Vega 56?

  • 449MHz faster GPU clock speed?
    1605MHzvs1156MHz
  • 27.76 GPixel/s higher pixel rate?
    121.9 GPixel/svs94.14 GPixel/s
  • 950MHz faster memory clock speed?
    1750MHzvs800MHz
  • 12400MHz higher effective memory clock speed?
    14000MHzvs1600MHz
  • 38GB/s more memory bandwidth?
    448GB/svs410GB/s
  • 434MHz faster GPU turbo speed?
    1905MHzvs1471MHz
  • 7nm smaller semiconductor size?
    7nmvs14nm
  • 1 newer version of PCI Express (PCIe)?
    4vs3

Why is AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 better than AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT?

  • 0. 75 TFLOPS higher floating-point performance?
    10.5 TFLOPSvs9.75 TFLOPS
  • 15W lower TDP?
    210Wvs225W
  • 24.7 GTexels/s higher texture rate?
    329.5 GTexels/svs304.8 GTexels/s
  • 1792bit wider memory bus width?
    2048bitvs256bit
  • 1024 more shading units?
    3584vs2560
  • 2200million more transistors?
    12500 millionvs10300 million
  • 64 more texture mapping units (TMUs)?
    224vs160

Which are the most popular comparisons?

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

vs

AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

vs

AMD Radeon RX 580

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

vs

Nvidia GeForce RTX 3060

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

vs

Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

vs

AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

vs

AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

vs

AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

vs

AMD Radeon RX Vega 8

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

vs

Nvidia GeForce RTX 3060 Ti

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

vs

Gigabyte Radeon RX 6600 XT Eagle

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

vs

AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

vs

Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

vs

MSI Radeon RX 6600 XT Gaming

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

vs

AMD Radeon Pro Duo

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

vs

Nvidia Geforce GTX 1660 Super

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

vs

MSI Radeon RX 6700 XT Mech 2X

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

vs

Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060 Super

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

vs

Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

vs

Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080

Price comparison

User reviews

Overall Rating

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

1 User reviews

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

9. 0/10

1 User reviews

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

1 User reviews

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

10.0/10

1 User reviews

Features

Value for money

8.0/10

1 votes

10.0/10

1 votes

Gaming

9.0/10

1 votes

10.0/10

1 votes

Performance

10.0/10

1 votes

10.0/10

1 votes

Fan noise

5.0/10

1 votes

4.0/10

1 votes

Reliability

7.0/10

1 votes

8.0/10

1 votes

Performance

1.GPU clock speed

1605MHz

1156MHz

The graphics processing unit (GPU) has a higher clock speed.

2.GPU turbo

1905MHz

1471MHz

When the GPU is running below its limitations, it can boost to a higher clock speed in order to give increased performance.

3. pixel rate

121.9 GPixel/s

94.14 GPixel/s

The number of pixels that can be rendered to the screen every second.

4.floating-point performance

9.75 TFLOPS

10.5 TFLOPS

Floating-point performance is a measurement of the raw processing power of the GPU.

5.texture rate

304.8 GTexels/s

329.5 GTexels/s

The number of textured pixels that can be rendered to the screen every second.

6.GPU memory speed

1750MHz

800MHz

The memory clock speed is one aspect that determines the memory bandwidth.

7.shading units

Shading units (or stream processors) are small processors within the graphics card that are responsible for processing different aspects of the image.

8.texture mapping units (TMUs)

TMUs take textures and map them to the geometry of a 3D scene. More TMUs will typically mean that texture information is processed faster.

9.render output units (ROPs)

The ROPs are responsible for some of the final steps of the rendering process, writing the final pixel data to memory and carrying out other tasks such as anti-aliasing to improve the look of graphics.

Memory

1.effective memory speed

14000MHz

1600MHz

The effective memory clock speed is calculated from the size and data rate of the memory. Higher clock speeds can give increased performance in games and other apps.

2.maximum memory bandwidth

448GB/s

410GB/s

This is the maximum rate that data can be read from or stored into memory.

3.VRAM

VRAM (video RAM) is the dedicated memory of a graphics card. More VRAM generally allows you to run games at higher settings, especially for things like texture resolution.

4.memory bus width

256bit

2048bit

A wider bus width means that it can carry more data per cycle. It is an important factor of memory performance, and therefore the general performance of the graphics card.

5.version of GDDR memory

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Radeon RX Vega 56)

Newer versions of GDDR memory offer improvements such as higher transfer rates that give increased performance.

6.Supports ECC memory

✖AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

✖AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

Error-correcting code memory can detect and correct data corruption. It is used when is it essential to avoid corruption, such as scientific computing or when running a server.

Features

1.DirectX version

DirectX is used in games, with newer versions supporting better graphics.

2. OpenGL version

OpenGL is used in games, with newer versions supporting better graphics.

3.OpenCL version

Some apps use OpenCL to apply the power of the graphics processing unit (GPU) for non-graphical computing. Newer versions introduce more functionality and better performance.

4.Supports multi-display technology

✔AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

✔AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

The graphics card supports multi-display technology. This allows you to configure multiple monitors in order to create a more immersive gaming experience, such as having a wider field of view.

5.load GPU temperature

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Radeon RX Vega 56)

A lower load temperature means that the card produces less heat and its cooling system performs better.

6.supports ray tracing

✖AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

✖AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

Ray tracing is an advanced light rendering technique that provides more realistic lighting, shadows, and reflections in games.

7.Supports 3D

✔AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

✖AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

Allows you to view in 3D (if you have a 3D display and glasses).

8.supports DLSS

✖AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

✖AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling) is an upscaling technology powered by AI. It allows the graphics card to render games at a lower resolution and upscale them to a higher resolution with near-native visual quality and increased performance. DLSS is only available on select games.

9.PassMark (G3D) result

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Radeon RX Vega 56)

This benchmark measures the graphics performance of a video card. Source: PassMark.

Ports

1.has an HDMI output

✔AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

✔AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

Devices with a HDMI or mini HDMI port can transfer high definition video and audio to a display.

2.HDMI ports

More HDMI ports mean that you can simultaneously connect numerous devices, such as video game consoles and set-top boxes.

3.HDMI version

HDMI 2.0

HDMI 2.0

Newer versions of HDMI support higher bandwidth, which allows for higher resolutions and frame rates.

4.DisplayPort outputs

Allows you to connect to a display using DisplayPort.

5.DVI outputs

Allows you to connect to a display using DVI.

6.mini DisplayPort outputs

Allows you to connect to a display using mini-DisplayPort.

Price comparison

Cancel

Which are the best graphics cards?

Radeon RX 5700 XT vs Radeon RX Vega 56



  1. Home
  2. VGA Benchmarks
  3. Radeon RX 5700 XT vs Radeon RX Vega 56
  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    279%

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    100%

Relative performance

Reasons to consider Radeon RX 5700 XT
179% higher gaming performance.
This is a much newer product, it might have better long term support.
Supports Direct3D 12 Async Compute
Supports FreeSync
Supports ReLive (allows game streaming/recording with minimum performance penalty)
Reasons to consider Radeon RX Vega 56
Supports Direct3D 12 Async Compute
Supports FreeSync
Supports ReLive (allows game streaming/recording with minimum performance penalty)
Supports TrueAudio
Based on an outdated architecture (AMD GCN), there may be no performance optimizations for current games and applications

HWBench recommends Radeon RX 5700 XT

The Radeon RX 5700 XT is the better performing card based on the game benchmark suite used (67 combinations of games and resolutions).

Core Configuration
Radeon RX 5700 XT Radeon RX Vega 56
GPU Name Navi 10 (Navi 10 XT) vs Vega 10 (Vega 10 XL)
Fab Process 7 nm vs 14 nm
Die Size 254 mm² vs 484 mm²
Transistors unknown vs 12,500 million
Shaders 2560 vs 3584
Compute Units 40 vs 56
Core clock 1605 MHz vs 1156 MHz
ROPs 64 vs 64
TMUs 256 vs 224

Memory Configuration
Radeon RX 5700 XT Radeon RX Vega 56
Memory Type GDDR6 vs HBM2
Bus Width 256 bit vs 2048 bit
Memory Speed 1750 MHz

14000 MHz effective
vs 800 MHz

1600 MHz effective
Memory Size 8192 Mb vs 8192 Mb
Additional details
Radeon RX 5700 XT Radeon RX Vega 56
TDP 225 watts vs 210 watts
Release Date 7 Jul 2019 vs 8 Aug 2017
  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    112. 30 GP/s

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    94.14 GP/s

GigaPixels — higher is better

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    449.30 GT/s

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    329.50 GT/s

GigaTexels — higher is better

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    448.00 GB/s

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    409.60 GB/s

GB/s — higher is better

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    8980.00 GFLOPs

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    10544.00 GFLOPs

GFLOPs — higher is better

Ultra Quality, DirectX12, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    78

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    57

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX12, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    146

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    108

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX11, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    82

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    63

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra quality TTA DirectX11 Windows10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    132

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    98

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra High Quality, TAA, DirectX12, Windows 10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    162

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    94

FPS (higher is better)

Windows 10 x64, Ultra quality, DirectX12

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    61

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    46

FPS (higher is better)

Very High Quality TAA, DirectX12, Windows 10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    153

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    117

FPS (higher is better)

Highest quality DirectX11 Windows10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    133

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    109

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra quality DirectX12 Windows10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    104

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    96

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra High Quality, DirectX12, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    101

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    1

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX11, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    117

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    103

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX12, Windows 10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    109

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    84

FPS (higher is better)

DX11, Max Details, 16:1 AF, 2xMSAA

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    158

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    122

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX12, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    176

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    139

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Detail,16:1 AF, DirectX12, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    75

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    58

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX11, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    44

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    35

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, HR Textures, DirectX11, Windows 10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    112

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    88

FPS (higher is better)

UltraTX Max Quality, Vulkan, Windows 10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    68

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    58

FPS (higher is better)

Max Quality, DirectX12, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    146

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    129

FPS (higher is better)

Highest Details, Pure hair, HBAO+, DirectX12, Windows 10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    117

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    81

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX12, Async Compute ,Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    148

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    116

FPS (higher is better)

DX11,Max Details, 16:1 HQ-AF, +AA

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    127

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    90

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX12, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    68

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    56

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX12, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    59

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    45

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX12, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    109

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    82

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX11, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    59

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    46

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra quality TTA DirectX11 Windows10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    100

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    76

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra High Quality, TAA, DirectX12, Windows 10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    121

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    75

FPS (higher is better)

Windows 10 x64, Ultra quality, DirectX12

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    38

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    30

FPS (higher is better)

Very High Quality TAA, DirectX12, Windows 10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    108

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    82

FPS (higher is better)

Highest quality DirectX11 Windows10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    106

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    76

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra quality DirectX12 Windows10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    90

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    65

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX11, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    102

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    76

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX12, Windows 10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    76

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    58

FPS (higher is better)

DX11, Max Details, 16:1 AF, 2xMSAA

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    129

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    81

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX12, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    120

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    88

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Detail,16:1 AF, DirectX12, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    59

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    45

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX11, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    36

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    26

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, HR Textures, DirectX11, Windows 10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    80

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    61

FPS (higher is better)

UltraTX Max Quality, Vulkan, Windows 10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    54

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    45

FPS (higher is better)

Max Quality, DirectX12, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    93

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    86

FPS (higher is better)

Highest Details, Pure hair, HBAO+, DirectX12, Windows 10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    78

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    54

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX12, Async Compute ,Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    108

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    85

FPS (higher is better)

DX11,Max Details, 16:1 HQ-AF, +AA

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    85

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    67

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX12, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    49

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    40

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX12, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    33

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    27

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX12, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    61

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    47

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX11, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    33

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    26

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra quality TTA DirectX11 Windows10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    58

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    46

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra High Quality, TAA, DirectX12, Windows 10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    68

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    48

FPS (higher is better)

Windows 10 x64, Ultra quality, DirectX12

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    18

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    15

FPS (higher is better)

Very High Quality TAA, DirectX12, Windows 10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    59

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    43

FPS (higher is better)

Highest quality DirectX11 Windows10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    60

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    43

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra quality DirectX12 Windows10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    45

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    34

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX11, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    55

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    41

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX12, Windows 10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    38

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    32

FPS (higher is better)

DX11, Max Details, 16:1 AF, 2xMSAA

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    62

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    43

FPS (higher is better)

Windows 10 x64, Ultra quality, DirectX12

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    67

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    48

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Detail,16:1 AF, DirectX12, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    36

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    29

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX11, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    20

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    15

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, HR Textures, DirectX11, Windows 10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    47

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    36

FPS (higher is better)

UltraTX Max Quality, Vulkan, Windows 10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    34

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    29

FPS (higher is better)

Max Quality, DirectX12, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    48

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    43

FPS (higher is better)

Highest Details, Pure hair, HBAO+, DirectX12, Windows 10 x64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    40

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    28

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX12, Async Compute ,Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    66

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    51

FPS (higher is better)

DX11,Max Details, 16:1 HQ-AF, +AA

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    44

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    39

FPS (higher is better)

Ultra Quality, DirectX12, Windows 10×64

  • Radeon RX 5700 XT

    30

  • Radeon RX Vega 56

    23

FPS (higher is better)

VS
Radeon RX 5700 XT GeForce RTX 2070 Super
VS
Radeon RX 5700 XT Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary
VS
Radeon RX Vega 56 Radeon RX 6600
VS
Radeon RX Vega 56 Radeon RX 6600 XT
VS
GeForce RTX 3060 Ti GeForce RTX 2080 Super
VS
GeForce RTX 2080 Super TITAN V

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.

Radeon Pro 5700 vs Radeon Pro Vega 56 Graphics cards Comparison

When comparing Radeon Pro 5700 and Radeon Pro Vega 56, we look primarily at benchmarks and game tests. But it is not only about the numbers. Often you can find third-party models with higher clock speeds, better cooling, or a customizable RGB lighting. Not all of them will have all the features you need. Another thing to consider is the port selection. Most graphics cards have at least one DisplayPort and HDMI interface, but some monitors require DVI. Before you buy, check the TDP of the graphics card — this characteristic will help you estimate the consumption of the graphics card. You may even have to upgrade your PSU to meet its requirements. An important factor when choosing between Radeon Pro 5700 and Radeon Pro Vega 56 is the price. Does the additional cost justify the performance hit? Our comparison should help you make the right decision.

Radeon Pro 5700

Radeon Pro Vega 56

Main Specs

  Radeon Pro 5700 Radeon Pro Vega 56
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 210 Watt
Interface PCIe 4. 0 x16 PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors None None
Memory type GDDR6 HBM2
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 8 GB
Display Connectors No outputs 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
 
  • Radeon Pro Vega 56 has 61% more power consumption, than Radeon Pro 5700.
  • Radeon Pro 5700 is connected by PCIe 4.0 x16, and Radeon Pro Vega 56 uses PCIe 3.0 x16 interface.
  • Radeon Pro 5700 and Radeon Pro Vega 56 have maximum RAM of 8 GB.
  • Both cards are used in Desktops.
  • Radeon Pro 5700 is build with RDNA 1.0 architecture, and Radeon Pro Vega 56 — with Vega.
  • Radeon Pro 5700 is manufactured by 7 nm process technology, and Radeon Pro Vega 56 — by 14 nm process technology.
  • Memory clock speed of Radeon Pro Vega 56 is 774 MHz higher, than Radeon Pro 5700.

Game benchmarks

Assassin’s Creed OdysseyBattlefield 5Call of Duty: WarzoneCounter-Strike: Global OffensiveCyberpunk 2077Dota 2Far Cry 5FortniteForza Horizon 4Grand Theft Auto VMetro ExodusMinecraftPLAYERUNKNOWN’S BATTLEGROUNDSRed Dead Redemption 2The Witcher 3: Wild HuntWorld of Tanks
high / 1080p 55−60 60−65
ultra / 1080p 40−45 40−45
QHD / 1440p 30−35 30−35
4K / 2160p 18−20 20−22
low / 720p 85−90 85−90
medium / 1080p 65−70 70−75
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro Vega 56 in Assassin’s Creed Odyssey is 3% more, than Radeon Pro 5700.
high / 1080p 90−95 95−100
ultra / 1080p 80−85 85−90
QHD / 1440p 65−70 65−70
4K / 2160p 35−40 35−40
low / 720p 140−150 140−150
medium / 1080p 100−110 100−110
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro Vega 56 in Battlefield 5 is 2% more, than Radeon Pro 5700.
low / 768p 45−50 45−50
Radeon Pro 5700 and Radeon Pro Vega 56 have the same average FPS in Call of Duty: Warzone.
low / 768p 250−260 250−260
medium / 768p 230−240 230−240
QHD / 1440p 150−160 150−160
4K / 2160p 100−110 100−110
high / 768p 220−230 220−230
Radeon Pro 5700 and Radeon Pro Vega 56 have the same average FPS in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive.
low / 768p 70−75 70−75
medium / 1080p 50−55 50−55
Radeon Pro 5700 and Radeon Pro Vega 56 have the same average FPS in Cyberpunk 2077.
low / 768p 120−130 120−130
medium / 768p 110−120 110−120
ultra / 1080p 110−120 110−120
Radeon Pro 5700 and Radeon Pro Vega 56 have the same average FPS in Dota 2.
high / 1080p 75−80 75−80
ultra / 1080p 70−75 70−75
QHD / 1440p 50−55 50−55
4K / 2160p 27−30 27−30
low / 720p 110−120 110−120
medium / 1080p 80−85 80−85
Radeon Pro 5700 and Radeon Pro Vega 56 have the same average FPS in Far Cry 5.
high / 1080p 110−120 110−120
ultra / 1080p 85−90 90−95
QHD / 1440p 55−60 60−65
4K / 2160p 21−24 21−24
low / 720p 240−250 240−250
medium / 1080p 160−170 160−170
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro Vega 56 in Fortnite is 1% more, than Radeon Pro 5700.
high / 1080p 100−110 100−110
ultra / 1080p 80−85 80−85
QHD / 1440p 60−65 60−65
4K / 2160p 40−45 40−45
low / 720p 150−160 150−160
medium / 1080p 100−110 110−120
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro Vega 56 in Forza Horizon 4 is 1% more, than Radeon Pro 5700.
low / 768p 170−180 170−180
medium / 768p 150−160 160−170
high / 1080p 110−120 110−120
ultra / 1080p 60−65 60−65
QHD / 1440p 50−55 50−55
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro Vega 56 in Grand Theft Auto V is 1% more, than Radeon Pro 5700.
high / 1080p 45−50 45−50
ultra / 1080p 35−40 40−45
QHD / 1440p 27−30 30−35
4K / 2160p 18−20 18−20
low / 720p 100−110 110−120
medium / 1080p 60−65 65−70
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro Vega 56 in Metro Exodus is 8% more, than Radeon Pro 5700.
low / 768p 120−130 120−130
Radeon Pro 5700 and Radeon Pro Vega 56 have the same average FPS in Minecraft.
high / 1080p 95−100 100−110
ultra / 1080p 70−75 75−80
4K / 2160p 18−20 18−20
low / 720p 130−140 140−150
medium / 1080p 110−120 110−120
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro Vega 56 in PLAYERUNKNOWN’S BATTLEGROUNDS is 5% more, than Radeon Pro 5700.
high / 1080p 45−50 45−50
ultra / 1080p 27−30 30−33
QHD / 1440p 21−24 24−27
4K / 2160p 14−16 16−18
low / 720p 100−110 110−120
medium / 1080p 65−70 70−75
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro Vega 56 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 8% more, than Radeon Pro 5700.
low / 768p 220−230 220−230
medium / 768p 150−160 150−160
high / 1080p 85−90 90−95
ultra / 1080p 50−55 50−55
4K / 2160p 30−35 30−35
The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro Vega 56 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 0% more, than Radeon Pro 5700.
low / 768p 150−160 150−160
ultra / 1080p 75−80 75−80
Radeon Pro 5700 and Radeon Pro Vega 56 have the same average FPS in World of Tanks.

Full Specs

  Radeon Pro 5700 Radeon Pro Vega 56
Architecture RDNA 1.0 Vega
Code name Navi 10 Vega
Type Workstation Workstation
Release date 4 August 2020 14 December 2017
Pipelines 2304 3584
Core clock speed 1247 MHz
Boost Clock 1350 MHz 1250 MHz
Transistor count 10,300 million 12,500 million
Manufacturing process technology 7 nm 14 nm
Texture fill rate 194. 4 280.0
Floating-point performance 9,677 gflops
Length 267 mm
Memory bus width 256 Bit 2048 Bit
Memory clock speed 12 GB/s 786 MHz
Memory bandwidth 384.0 GB/s 402.4 GB/s
Shared memory
DirectX 12 (12_1) 12 (12_1)
Shader Model 6.5 6.4
OpenGL 4.6 4.6
OpenCL 2.0 2.0
Vulkan 1.2 1.1.125
 

Similar compares

  • Radeon Pro 5700 vs GeForce GTX 1660
  • Radeon Pro 5700 vs GeForce GTX 1660
  • Radeon Pro Vega 56 vs GeForce GTX 1660
  • Radeon Pro Vega 56 vs GeForce GTX 1660
  • Radeon Pro 5700 vs GeForce RTX 2070 Max Q
  • Radeon Pro 5700 vs GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
  • Radeon Pro Vega 56 vs GeForce RTX 2070 Max Q
  • Radeon Pro Vega 56 vs GeForce GTX 1660 Ti

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT vs AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56


Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies.
Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark — G3D Mark, PassMark — G2D Mark, Geekbench — OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike — Graphics Score.

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

Buy on Amazon


vs

AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56

Buy on Amazon

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

  • Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 10 month(s) later
  • Around 41% higher core clock speed: 1605 MHz vs 1138 MHz
  • Around 52% higher boost clock speed: 1905 MHz vs 1250 MHz
  • Around 1% higher texture fill rate: 304. 8 GT/s vs 302.4 GTexel / s
  • Around 36% better performance in PassMark — G3D Mark: 16905 vs 12398
  • Around 22% better performance in PassMark — G2D Mark: 954 vs 782
  • Around 17% better performance in Geekbench — OpenCL: 71091 vs 60993
  • Around 65% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s): 252.601 vs 153.117
  • 2.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 3949.565 vs 1722.138
  • 2.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s): 24.769 vs 11.901
  • 2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s): 254.777 vs 126.528
  • Around 13% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 1322.129 vs 1172.788
  • Around 15% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 14699 vs 12822
  • Around 15% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 14699 vs 12822



















Launch date 7 July 2019 vs 14 August 2017
Core clock speed 1605 MHz vs 1138 MHz
Boost clock speed 1905 MHz vs 1250 MHz
Texture fill rate 304. 8 GT/s vs 302.4 GTexel / s
PassMark — G3D Mark 16905 vs 12398
PassMark — G2D Mark 954 vs 782
Geekbench — OpenCL 71091 vs 60993
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s) 252.601 vs 153.117
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) 3949.565 vs 1722.138
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s) 24.769 vs 11.901
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s) 254. 777 vs 126.528
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) 1322.129 vs 1172.788
GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) 14699 vs 12822
GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames) 3720 vs 3709
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames) 3369 vs 3353
GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) 14699 vs 12822
GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps) 3720 vs 3709
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps) 3369 vs 3353

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56

  • Around 7% lower typical power consumption: 210 Watt vs 225 Watt


Thermal Design Power (TDP) 210 Watt vs 225 Watt

Compare benchmarks


GPU 1: AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT
GPU 2: AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56















PassMark — G3D Mark

GPU 1
GPU 2


PassMark — G2D Mark

GPU 1
GPU 2


Geekbench — OpenCL

GPU 1
GPU 2


CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s)

GPU 1
GPU 2

252.601

153.117

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)

GPU 1
GPU 2

3949.565

1722.138

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s)

GPU 1
GPU 2

24. 769

11.901

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s)

GPU 1
GPU 2

254.777

126.528

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)

GPU 1
GPU 2

1322.129

1172. 788

GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)

GPU 1
GPU 2


GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames)

GPU 1
GPU 2


GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames)

GPU 1
GPU 2


GFXBench 4. 0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)

GPU 1
GPU 2


GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps)

GPU 1
GPU 2


GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps)

GPU 1
GPU 2

















Name AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56
PassMark — G3D Mark 16905 12398
PassMark — G2D Mark 954 782
Geekbench — OpenCL 71091 60993
CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s) 252.601 153.117
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) 3949.565 1722.138
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s) 24.769 11.901
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s) 254.777 126.528
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) 1322.129 1172.788
GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) 14699 12822
GFXBench 4. 0 — Manhattan (Frames) 3720 3709
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames) 3369 3353
GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) 14699 12822
GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps) 3720 3709
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps) 3369 3353
3DMark Fire Strike — Graphics Score 9586

Compare specifications (specs)



























AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56
Architecture RDNA GCN 5. 0
Code name Navi 10 Vega 10
Launch date 7 July 2019 14 August 2017
Launch price (MSRP) $400 $399
Place in performance rating 57 135
Type Desktop Workstation
Boost clock speed 1905 MHz 1250 MHz
Compute units 40
Core clock speed 1605 MHz 1138 MHz
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance 19. 51 TFLOPs
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance 9.75 TFLOPs
Pixel fill rate 121.9 GP/s
Render output units 64
Stream Processors 2560
Texture fill rate 304.8 GT/s 302.4 GTexel / s
Texture Units 160
Thermal Design Power (TDP) 225 Watt 210 Watt
Transistor count 10. 3 B 12,500 million
Floating-point performance

9,677 gflops
Manufacturing process technology

14 nm
Pipelines

3584
DisplayPort support
HDMI
Display Connectors

1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
Recommended system power (PSU) 600 Watt
Supplementary power connectors 1 x 8-pin and 1×6 pin None
Interface

PCIe 3. 0 x16
Length

267 mm
DirectX 12 12.0 (12_1)
Vulkan
OpenGL

4.6
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 8 GB
Memory bandwidth 448 GB/s 402.4 GB / s
Memory bus width 256 bit 2048 Bit
Memory type GDDR6 HBM2
Memory clock speed

1572 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

RX Vega 56 vs RX 5700 XT ⚙️

0x1015652490. 633MH/s175W89442.804MH/W

Argon2d-dyn33.945KH/s124W0.274KH/W

Argon2d-ninja0KH/s191W0KH/W

Argon2d409657.791KH/sWKH/W

Astralhash21.53MH/s183W0.118MH/W

Autolykos290.374MH/s108W0.837MH/W

BCD15.389MH/s181W0.085MH/W

BMW512776.76MH/s85W9.138MH/W

BeamHashII30.357H/s109W0.279H/W

BeamHashIII24.4H/s121W0.202H/W

Blake (2b)1. 484GH/s86W0.017GH/W

Blake (2b-BTCC)GH/sWGH/W

Blake (2s)4.515GH/s164W0.028GH/W

Blake (2s-Kadena)GH/sWGH/W

C1118.444MH/s123W0.15MH/W

CNReverseWaltz1465.64H/s147W9.97H/W

Chukwa80.217KH/s179W0.448KH/W

Chukwa230.116KH/s189W0.159KH/W

Circcash1460.498KH/s169W8.642KH/W

CryptoNightAlloy562.77H/s141W3.991H/W

CryptoNightArto1122. 93H/s142W7.908H/W

CryptoNightConceal2275.1H/s147W15.477H/W

CryptoNightFast50537.857H/s191W264.596H/W

CryptoNightFastV2H/sWH/W

CryptoNightGPU1938H/s90W21.533H/W

CryptoNightHaven1293.56H/s82W15.775H/W

CryptoNightHeavy51113.5H/s188W271.88H/W

CryptoNightHeavyX568.47H/sWH/W

CryptoNightLiteV751.11KH/s188W0.272KH/W

CryptoNightR1062.73H/s180W5. 904H/W

CryptoNightSaberH/sWH/W

CryptoNightStelliteV41182.1H/s142W8.325H/W

CryptoNightStelliteV52110.3H/s200W10.552H/W

CryptoNightTalleo0.01MH/s27W0MH/W

CryptoNightTurtle9.582KH/s193W0.05KH/W

CryptoNightUPX2KH/sWKH/W

CryptoNightV71.182KH/s143W0.008KH/W

CryptoNightV81084H/s168W6.452H/W

CryptoNightWOW1097.9H/s88W12.476H/W

CryptoNightZLS1443. 385H/s99W14.58H/W

Cuckaroo29S4.2H/s194W0.022H/W

Cuckaroo29b3.797H/s108W0.035H/W

CuckooBFCH/sWH/W

CuckooCycle4.48H/s180W0.025H/W

Curvehash3947981765469.3H/s66W59817905537.414H/W

Darkcoin1.913GH/s180W0.011GH/W

Dedal14.49MH/s195W0.074MH/W

Eaglesong0.753GH/s190W0.004GH/W

Equihash(125,4)32.46H/s168W0.193H/W

Equihash(144,5)56. 51H/s200W0.283H/W

Equihash(150,5)H/sWH/W

Equihash(192,7)35H/s179W0.196H/W

Equihash(210,9)178.24H/s160W1.114H/W

Equihash(96,5)H/sWH/W

Etchash54.282MH/s91W0.597MH/W

Ethash54.282MH/s91W0.597MH/W

FiroPoW23.48MH/s121W0.194MH/W

Globalhash19.149MH/s173W0.111MH/W

HMQ17258.901MH/s169W0.053MH/W

Handshake0. 197GH/s100W0.002GH/W

HeavyHash211.874MH/s109W1.944MH/W

Hex11.654MH/s198W0.059MH/W

HoneyComb29.678MH/s170W0.175MH/W

Jeonghash7.61MH/s184W0.041MH/W

KAWPOW26.19MH/s141W0.186MH/W

KangarooTwelve1.437GH/s180W0.008GH/W

Lyra2REv253.191MH/s152W0.35MH/W

Lyra2REv371.694MH/s179W0.401MH/W

Lyra2vc0ban61.271MH/s179W0.342MH/W

MTP2. 261MH/s111W0.02MH/W

Octopus22.34MH/s210W0.106MH/W

PHI161222.659MH/s194W0.117MH/W

PHI2MH/sWMH/W

Padihash11.986MH/s196W0.061MH/W

Pawelhash8.995MH/s180W0.05MH/W

Phi56.866H/s192W0.036H/W

ProgPow16.427MH/s180W0.091MH/W

ProgPowSERO16.96MH/s195W0.087MH/W

ProgPowZ17.498MH/s179W0.098MH/W

RandomKEVA1013. 96H/s164W6.183H/W

RandomSFX1012.975H/s164W6.177H/W

RandomXH/sWH/W

SHA-256csm1644.847MH/s179W9.189MH/W

Skein2546.626MH/s194W2.818MH/W

Skunkhash43.05MH/s172W0.25MH/W

SonoA2.252MH/s174W0.013MH/W

Tellor0.193GH/sWGH/W

TimeTravel1037.07MH/s194W0.191MH/W

Tribus79.821MH/s189W0.422MH/W

Ubqhash49. 708MH/s190W0.262MH/W

Verthash0.698MH/s163W0.004MH/W

VerusHash0.47MH/s140W0.003MH/W

X11k2.821MH/s192W0.015MH/W

X16R15.048MH/s194W0.078MH/W

X16RT14.873MH/s189W0.079MH/W

X16RTVEIL15.045MH/s185W0.081MH/W

X16Rv212.778MH/s190W0.067MH/W

X16S15.021MH/s188W0.08MH/W

X1714.727MH/s181W0.081MH/W

X17R13. 12MH/s192W0.068MH/W

X1810.69MH/s186W0.057MH/W

X21S9.026MH/s193W0.047MH/W

X22i3.291MH/s124W0.027MH/W

X25X1.587MH/s113W0.014MH/W

Xevan4.86MH/s189W0.026MH/W

Zhash56.38H/s159W0.355H/W

cuckARoo29H/sWH/W

cuckARood294.49H/s128W0.035H/W

cuckARoom291.26H/s108W0.012H/W

cuckAToo310.4H/s84W0. 005H/W

cuckAToo320.19H/s110W0.002H/W

vProgPow8.041MH/s190W0.042MH/W

Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile vs Radeon RX 5700 XT

Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile vs Radeon RX 5700 XT — Th200

Table of Contents

  1. Introduction
  2. Specifications
  3. Benchmarks
  4. Games
  5. Key Differences
  6. Conclusion
  7. Comments

Graphics card

Graphics card

Introduction

We compared two GPUs: the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile versus the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT. On this page you will learn about the key differences between graphics cards and find out which has the best specs and performance.

The AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile is a graphics card of the Mobility Radeon (Vega) generation based on the GCN 5.0 architecture, launched on Jun 1st, 2018. It comes with 8 Gb of HBM2 memory clocked at 800 MHz and consumes up to 120 Watts.

The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT is a graphics card of the Navi (RX 5000) generation based on the RDNA 1.0 architecture, launched on Jul 7th, 2019. It comes with 8 Gb of GDDR6 memory clocked at 1750 MHz, requires 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin power connectors and consumes up to 225 Watts.

Specifications

Graphics Card

Name

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

Release Date

Jun 1st, 2018

Jul 7th, 2019

Bus Interface

PCIe 3.0 x16

PCIe 4.0 x16

Graphics Processor

Die Size

495 mm²

251 mm²

Memory

Bandwidth

409.6 GB/s

448.0 GB/s

Theoretical Performance

Pixel Rate

83.26 GPixel/s

121.9 GPixel/s

Texture Rate

291. 4 GTexel/s

304.8 GTexel/s

FP16 (half) performance

18.65 TFLOPS (2:1)

19.51 TFLOPS (2:1)

FP32 (float) performance

9.326 TFLOPS

9.754 TFLOPS

FP64 (double) performance

582.8 GFLOPS (1:16)

609.6 GFLOPS (1:16)

Clock Speeds

Base Clock

1138 MHz

1605 MHz

Boost Clock

1301 MHz

1905 MHz

Memory Clock

800 MHz

1750 MHz

Render Config

Shading Units

3584

2560

Texture Units

224

160

Raster Units

64

64

Compute Units

56

40

Graphics Features

DirectX

12 (12_1)

12 (12_1)

OpenGL

4.6

4.6

OpenCL

2.1

2.1

Vulkan

1.2

1.2

Board Design

TDP

120W

225W

Power Connectors

None

1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

Slot Width

MXM Module

Dual-slot

Benchmarks

Th200 RP

Th200 RP is a test created by Th200. It measures raw power of the components and gives score, with higher number indicating better performance.

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT
+20%

3DMark Graphics

3DMark is a computer benchmarking tool created and developed by UL, to measure the performance of computer hardware. Running 3DMark produces a 3DMark score, with higher numbers indicating better performance.

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

Blender bmw27

Blender is the most popular 3D content creation software. It has its own Benchmark, which is widely used to determining the rendering performance of processors and graphics cards. Benchmark measures the time needed to render bmw27 scene.

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

Games

1920×1080, Ultra

Game Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile Radeon RX 5700 XT
Battlefield V

+14%

Cyberpunk 2077
DOOM Eternal
Far Cry 5
Hitman 3
Metro Exodus
Red Dead Redemption 2
Shadow of the Tomb Raider
The Witcher 3
Average 0. 00 fps 111.40 fps

2560×1440, Ultra

Game Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile Radeon RX 5700 XT
Assassin’s Creed Valhalla
Battlefield V

+5%

Cyberpunk 2077
DOOM Eternal
Far Cry 5
Hitman 3
Metro Exodus
Red Dead Redemption 2
Shadow of the Tomb Raider
The Witcher 3
Average 0. 00 fps 84.45 fps

3840×2160, Ultra

Game Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile Radeon RX 5700 XT
Assassin’s Creed Valhalla
Battlefield V
Cyberpunk 2077
DOOM Eternal
Far Cry 5
Hitman 3
Metro Exodus
Red Dead Redemption 2
Shadow of the Tomb Raider
Average 0. 00 fps 47.62 fps

Key Differences

Why is AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile better than AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT?

Consumes up to 47% less energy — 120 Watts versus 225 Watts

More advanced more type — HBM2 versus GDDR6

Has 1792 bit wider memory bus

Has 64 more texture units

Has 1024 more shading units

Has 16 more compute units

Why is AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT better than AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile?

Newer — released 1 year later

Has 20% better performance

More modern manufacturing process — 7 nm versus 14 nm

Has 10% higher bandwidth — 448.0 GB/s versus 409.6 GB/s

Has 47% higher pixel rate — 121.9 GPixel/s versus 83.26 GPixel/s

Has 5% higher texture rate — 304.8 GTexel/s versus 291.4 GTexel/s

Conclusion

Which is better Radeon RX 5700 XT or Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile?

The Radeon RX 5700 XT delivers 20% better performance, consumes up to 88% more energy and holds same amount of memory. Based on our research Radeon RX 5700 XT is more powerful than Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile.

Is Radeon RX 5700 XT good today?

Radeon RX 5700 XT has 8 Gb memory and shows an average of 84.45 FPS in 10 games at 1440p, making it an excellent choice for games in 2022.
This graphics card will give you a good experience in every game on reasonable graphics settings.

What AMD graphics cards is equivalent to Radeon RX 5700 XT?

The Radeon RX 6600 is AMD’s closest competitor to the Radeon RX 5700 XT. It is 1% more powerful, uses 34% less energy, and holds same amount of memory.

What NVIDIA graphics cards is equivalent to Radeon RX 5700 XT?

The GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER is NVIDIA’s closest competitor to the Radeon RX 5700 XT. It is 7% more powerful, uses 12% more energy, holds same amount of memory, and has higher average FPS in games at 1080p, 1440p, 2160p.

How does Radeon RX Vega 56 Mobile perform compared to Radeon RX 5700 XT and other graphics cards?

Relative performance

Global performance

Desktop performance

Mobile performance

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 vs MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT

: What is the difference?

44 BALLLA

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

57 Ballla

MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT

54 Facts compared to

AMD Radeon RX VEGA 56 9000 9000 9000 RADEON RX 5700 XT XTEALA 56 better than MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT?

  • 0. 75 TFLOPS above FLOPS?
    10.5 TFLOPS vs 9.75 TFLOPS
  • 15W below TDP?
    210W vs 225W
  • 24.7 GTexels/s higher number of textured pixels?
    329.5 GTexels/s vs 304.8 GTexels/s
  • 1792bit wider memory bus?
    2048bit vs 256bit
  • 1024 more stream processors?
    3584 vs 2560
  • 2200million more transistors?
    12500 million vs 10300 million
  • 64 more texture units (TMUs)?
    224 vs 160

  • GPU frequency 449MHz higher?
    1605MHz vs 1156MHz
  • 27.76 GPixel/s higher pixel rate?
    121.9 GPixel/s vs 94.14 GPixel/s
  • 950MHz faster memory speed?
    1750MHz vs 800MHz
  • 12400MHz higher effective clock speed?
    14000MHz vs 1600MHz
  • 38GB/s more memory bandwidth?
    448GB/s vs 410GB/s
  • 434MHz faster GPU turbo speed?
    1905MHz vs 1471MHz
  • Are 7nm semiconductors smaller?
    7nm vs 14nm
  • 1 newer PCI Express (PCIe) version?
    4 vs 3

Which comparisons are the most popular?

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

vs

AMD Radeon RX 580

MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT

vs

Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

vs

Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070

MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT

VS

AMD Radeon RX 580

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT

VS

0003

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

vs

AMD Radeon RX Vega 8

MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT

vs

Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070 Ti

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

vs

Gigabyte Radeon RX 6600 XT EAGLE

MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT

VS

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

VS

NVIDIA GTX 1080

MSI RADEON RADEON RADEON RADEON RADEON RADEON RADEON RADEON RADEON RADEON RADEON RADEON0003

Nvidia GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

vs

AMD Radeon Pro Duo

MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT

vs

Gigabyte Radeon RX 5700 XT

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

VS

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT

VS

NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX 1660 SUPER

AMD Radeon RX VEGA 56

VS

MSI RADEON RADEON RADEON RD0003

MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT

0. 0 /10

0 Reviews of Users

Functions

Quality

10.0 /10

9000 1 VOTES

9000

10.0 /10

1 Votes

Reviews not yet

performance

10.0 /10

1 VOTES

reviews yet not

Fan noise

4.0261 /10

1 Votes

Reviews not yet

Reliability

8.0 /10

1 VOTES

Reviews yet not

9001 1.GPU clock frequency

1156MHz

1605MHz

The graphics processing unit (GPU) has a higher clock frequency.

2.Turbo GPU

1471MHz

1905MHz

When the GPU is running below its limits, it can jump to a higher clock speed to increase performance.

3.pixel rate

94.14 GPixel/s

121.9 GPixel/s

The number of pixels that can be displayed on the screen every second.

4. flops

10.5 TFLOPS

9.75 TFLOPS

FLOPS is a measure of GPU processing power.

5.texture size

329.5 GTexels/s

304.8 GTexels/s

Number of textured pixels that can be displayed on the screen every second.

6.GPU memory speed

800MHz

1750MHz

Memory speed is one aspect that determines memory bandwidth.

7.shading patterns

Shading units (or stream processors) are small processors in a video card that are responsible for processing various aspects of an image.

8.textured units (TMUs)

TMUs accept textured units and bind them to the geometric layout of the 3D scene. More TMUs generally means texture information is processed faster.

9 ROPs

ROPs are responsible for some of the final steps of the rendering process, such as writing the final pixel data to memory and for performing other tasks such as anti-aliasing to improve the appearance of graphics.

Memory

1.memory effective speed

1600MHz

14000MHz

The effective memory clock frequency is calculated from the memory size and data transfer rate. A higher clock speed can give better performance in games and other applications.

2.max memory bandwidth

410GB/s

448GB/s

This is the maximum rate at which data can be read from or stored in memory.

3.VRAM

VRAM (video RAM) is the dedicated memory of the graphics card. More VRAM usually allows you to run games at higher settings, especially for things like texture resolution.

4.memory bus width

2048bit

256bit

Wider memory bus means it can carry more data per cycle. This is an important factor in memory performance, and therefore the overall performance of the graphics card.

5. GDDR memory versions

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Radeon RX Vega 56)

Later versions of GDDR memory offer improvements such as higher data transfer rates, which improve performance.

6. Supports memory debug code

✖AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

✖MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT

Memory debug code can detect and fix data corruption. It is used when necessary to avoid distortion, such as in scientific computing or when starting a server.

Functions

1.DirectX version

DirectX is used in games with a new version that supports better graphics.

2nd version of OpenGL

The newer version of OpenGL, the better graphics quality in games.

OpenCL version 3.

Some applications use OpenCL to use the power of the graphics processing unit (GPU) for non-graphical computing. Newer versions are more functional and better quality.

4. Supports multi-monitor technology

✔AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

✔MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT

The video card has the ability to connect multiple screens. This allows you to set up multiple monitors at the same time to create a more immersive gaming experience, such as a wider field of view.

5. GPU temperature at boot

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Radeon RX Vega 56)

Lower boot temperature means the card generates less heat and the cooling system works better.

6.supports ray tracing

✖AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

✖MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT

Ray tracing is an advanced light rendering technique that provides more realistic lighting, shadows and reflections in games.

7. Supports 3D

✖AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

✔MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT

Allows you to view in 3D (if you have a 3D screen and glasses).

8.supports DLSS

✖AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

✖MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT

DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling) is an AI based scaling technology. This allows the graphics card to render games at lower resolutions and upscale them to higher resolutions with near-native visual quality and improved performance. DLSS is only available in some games.

9. PassMark result (G3D)

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Radeon RX Vega 56)

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT)

This test measures the graphics performance of a graphics card. Source: Pass Mark.

Ports

1.has HDMI output

✔AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

✔MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT

Devices with HDMI or mini HDMI ports can stream HD video and audio to the connected display.

2.HDMI connectors

More HDMI connectors allow you to connect multiple devices at the same time, such as game consoles and TVs.

HDMI 3.Version

HDMI 2.0

HDMI 2.0

New HDMI versions support higher bandwidth for higher resolutions and frame rates.

4. DisplayPort outputs

Allows connection to a display using DisplayPort.

5.DVI outputs

Allows connection to a display using DVI.

Mini DisplayPort 6.outs

Allows connection to a display using Mini DisplayPort.

Price match

Cancel

Which graphics cards are better?

What is better than AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 or MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT

MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

GPUs 9000 STICTIC FREEMENT CHAPTIC FREEMEN clock frequency.

1605MHz

max 2457

Average: 938 MHz

1156MHz

max 2457

Average: 938 MHz

GPU memory frequency

This is an important aspect calculating memory bandwidth

1750MHz

max 16000

Average: 1326. 6 MHz

800MHz

max 16000

Average: 1326.6 MHz

FLOPS

A measure of the processing power of a processor is called FLOPS.

9.38TFLOPS

max 1142.32

Average: 92.5 TFLOPS

10.7TFLOPS

max 1142.32

Average: 92.5 TFLOPS

Turbo GPU

If the GPU speed drops below its limit, it can go to a high clock speed to improve performance.
Show all

1905 MHz

max 2903

Average: 1375.8 MHz

1471MHz

max 2903

Average: 1375. 8 MHz

Texture size

A certain number of textured pixels are displayed on the screen every second.
Show all

304.8 GTexels/s

max 756.8

Average: 145.4 GTexels/s

329.5 GTexels/s

max 756.8

Average: 145.4 GTexels/s

Architecture name

NAVI / RDNA

GCN 5.0

Graphic processor name

Navi 10

VEGA 10

This is the speed with which the device retains or reads information.

448GB/s

max 2656

Average: 198.3 GB/s

409.6GB/s

max 2656

Average: 198. 3 GB/s

Effective memory speed

The effective memory clock speed is calculated from the size and information transfer rate of the memory. The performance of the device in applications depends on the clock frequency. The higher it is, the better.
Show all

14000MHz

max 19500

Average: 6984.5 MHz

1600MHz

max 19500

Average: 6984.5MHz

RAM

8GB

max 128

Average: 4.6 GB

8GB

max 128

Average: 4.6 GB

GDDR Memory Versions

Latest GDDR memory versions provide high data transfer rates for improved overall performance
Show all

6

Average: 4. 5

Average: 4.5

Memory bus width

A wide memory bus means that it can transfer more information in one cycle. This property affects the performance of the memory as well as the overall performance of the device’s graphics card.
Show all

256bit

max 8192

Average: 290.1bit

2048bit

max 8192

Average: 290.1bit

Heat dissipation (TDP)

Heat dissipation requirement (TDP) is the maximum amount of energy that can be dissipated by the cooling system. The lower the TDP, the less power will be consumed.
Show all

225W

Average: 140.4W

210W

Average: 140. 4W

Process technology

The small size of the semiconductor means it is a new generation chip.

7 nm

Average: 47.5 nm

14 nm

Average: 47.5 nm

Number of transistors

The higher their number, the more processor power it indicates

10300 million

max 80000

Average: 5043 million

12500 million

max 80000

Average: 5043 million

PCIe version

Considerable speed of the expansion card used to connect the computer to peripherals is provided. The updated versions have impressive throughput and provide high performance.
Show all

four

Mean: 2.8

3

Mean: 2.8

Width

270mm

max 421.7

Average: 242.6mm

280mm

max 421.7

Average: 242.6mm

Height

110mm

max 180

Average: 119.1mm

127mm

max 180

Average: 119.1mm

DirectX

Used in demanding games providing enhanced graphics

12

max 12. 2

Average: 11.1

12

max 12.2

Average: 11.1

OpenCL version

Used by some applications to enable GPU power for non-graphical calculations. The newer the version, the more functional it will be
Show all

2

max 4.6

Average: 1.7

2.1

max 4.6

Average: 1.7

opengl version

Later versions provide better game graphics

4.6

max 4.6

Average: 4

4.6

max 4. 6

Average: 4

Shader model version

6.5

max 6.6

Average: 5.5

6.4

max 6.6

Average: 5.5

Vulkan version

1.2

1.2

Has HDMI output

HDMI output allows you to connect devices with HDMI or mini HDMI ports. They can transmit video and audio to the display.

Yes

Yes

HDMI version

The latest version provides a wide signal transmission channel due to the increased number of audio channels, frames per second, etc.
Show all

2

max 2.1

Average: 2

2

max 2. 1

Average: 2

DisplayPort

Allows connection to a display using DisplayPort

3

Average: 2

3

Average: 2

Number of HDMI connectors

The more there are, the more devices can be connected at the same time (for example, game/TV type consoles)
Show all

one

Average: 1.1

one

Average: 1.1

HDMI

Yes

Yes

Passmark score

16495

max 29325

Average: 7628. 6

13341

max 29325

Average: 7628.6

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU test score

138294

max 1

Average: 80042.3

122852

max 1

Average: 80042.3

3DMark Fire Strike Score

21686

max 38276

Average: 12463

16756

max 38276

Average: 12463

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics test score

24914

max 49575

Average: 11859. 1

20344

max 49575

Average: 11859.1

3DMark 11 Performance GPU score

34866

max 57937

Average: 18799.9

28504

max 57937

Average: 18799.9

3DMark Vantage Performance Score

65107

max 97887

Average: 37830.6

53494

max 97887

Average: 37830.6

3DMark Ice Storm GPU score

446992

max 533357

Average: 372425. 7

404564

max 533357

Average: 372425.7

SPECviewperf 12 test score — specvp12 sw-03

98

max 202

Average: 64

max 202

Average: 64

SPECviewperf 12 test score — specvp12 showcase-01

136

max 232

Average: 121.3

max 232

Average: 121.3

SPECviewperf 12 score — Showcase

135

max 175

Average: 108.4

max 175

Average: 108. 4

SPECviewperf 12 test score — specvp12 mediacal-01

45

max 107

Average: 39

max 107

Average: 39

SPECviewperf 12 test score — specvp12 maya-04

99

max 180

Average: 132.8

max 180

Average: 132.8

SPECviewperf 12 test score — specvp12 energy-01

12

max 21

Average: 10.7

max 21

Average: 10.7

SPECviewperf 12 test score — specvp12 creo-01

73

max 153

Average: 52. 5

max 153

Average: 52.5

SPECviewperf 12 test score — specvp12 catia-04

163

max 189

Average: 91.5

max 189

Average: 91.5

SPECviewperf 12 evaluation — Catia

156

max 189

Average: 88.6

138

max 189

Average: 88.6

SPECviewperf 12 test score — specvp12 3dsmax-05

183

max 316

Average: 189.5

max 316

Average: 189. 5

SPECviewperf 12 test score — 3ds Max

167

max 269

Average: 169.8

141

max 269

Average: 169.8

Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary vs Radeon RX Vega 56

Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary vs Radeon RX Vega 56 — Th200

Contents

  1. Introduction
  2. Features
  3. Tests
  4. Games
  5. Key differences
  6. Conclusion
  7. Comments

Video card

Video card

Introduction

We compared two graphics cards: AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary vs AMD Radeon RX Vega 56. On this page, you will learn about the key differences between them, as well as which one is better in terms of features and performance.

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary Navi Generation (RX 5000) RDNA 1.0 Graphics Card Released Jul 7th, 2019. It comes with 8GB of GDDR6 memory running at 1750MHz, has 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin power connector and draws up to 165W.

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 is a Vega generation (RX Vega) graphics card based on GCN 5.0 architecture released Aug 14th, 2017. It comes with 8GB HBM2 memory running at 800MHz, has a 2x 8-pin power connector and consumes up to 165 watts.

Specification

Graphics Card

Name

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary
+21%

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

Th200 RP

Th200 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 RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary
+12%

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

3DMark Graphics

3DMark is a test tool designed and developed by UL to measure the performance of computer hardware. Upon completion, the program gives a score, where a higher value indicates better performance.

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56

Games

1920×1080, Ultra

Game Radeon RX 5700XT 50th Anniversary Radeon RX Vega 56
Battlefield V
Cyberpunk 2077
DOOM Eternal
Far Cry 5
Hitman 3
Metro Exodus
Red Dead Redemption 2
Shadow of the Tomb Raider
The Witcher 3
Average 0. 00 fps 84.92 fps

2560×1440, Ultra

Game Radeon RX 5700XT 50th Anniversary Radeon RX Vega 56
Assassin’s Creed Valhalla
Battlefield V
Cyberpunk 2077
DOOM Eternal
Far Cry 5
Hitman 3
Metro Exodus
Red Dead Redemption 2
Shadow of the Tomb Raider
The Witcher 3
Average 0. 00 fps 63.28fps

3840×2160, Ultra

Game Radeon RX 5700XT 50th Anniversary Radeon RX Vega 56
Assassin’s Creed Valhalla
Battlefield V
Cyberpunk 2077
DOOM Eternal
Far Cry 5
Hitman 3
Metro Exodus
Red Dead Redemption 2
Shadow of the Tomb Raider
Average 0. 00 fps 36.14 fps

Key Differences

Why is AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary better than AMD Radeon RX Vega 56?

Newer — 1 year later release

Has 12% better performance

More modern manufacturing process — 7 nm vs 14 nm

Has 10% higher bandwidth — 448.0 GB/s vs 409.6 GB/s

Has 35% higher pixel fill rate — 126.7 GPixel/s vs 94.14 GPixel/s

Why is AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 better than AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary?

Consumes 7% less power — 210W vs 225W

More advanced memory type — HBM2 vs GDDR6

Has slightly larger memory bus

Has 5% faster texture fill rate — 329.5 GTexel/s vs 316.8 GTexel/s

Has 1024 more shading units

Has 16 more compute units

Conclusion

Which is better Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anni 56?

The Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary delivers 12% better performance, consumes up to 8% more energy and holds the same amount of memory. Based on our research, Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary 3990X is more powerful than Radeon RX Vega 56.

What AMD graphics cards is equivalent to Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary?

The Radeon RX 6600 XT is AMD’s closest competitor to the Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary. It is 3% more powerful, uses 20% less energy, and holds the same amount of memory.

What NVIDIA graphics cards is equivalent to Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary?

The GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER is NVIDIA’s closest competitor to the Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary. It is 3% more powerful, uses 12% more energy, and holds the same amount of memory.

How does Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary perform compared to Radeon RX Vega 56 and other graphics cards?

Relative performance

Total performance

Bench performance

Radeon RX 5700 XT vs Radeon Vega 6 Mobile

Radeon RX 5700 XT vs Radeon Vega 6 Mobile — Th200

Contents

  1. Introduction
  2. Features
  3. Tests
  4. Games
  5. Key differences
  6. Conclusion
  7. Comments

Video card

Video card

Introduction

We compared two graphics cards: AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT vs. AMD Radeon Vega 6 Mobile Raven. 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 RX 5700 XT is a Navi generation (RX 5000) RDNA 1.0 architecture graphics card released on Jul 7th, 2019. It comes with 8GB of GDDR6 memory running at 1750MHz, has 1x 6-pin + 1x 8- pin power connector and consumes up to 165 watts.

AMD Radeon Vega 6 Mobile Raven is a Raven Ridge (Vega Mobile) generation integrated graphics card based on GCN 5.0 architecture released Jan 8th, 2018.

Specifications

Graphics Card

40

6

Graphics Features

DirectX

12 (12_1)

12 (12_1)

OpenGL

4.6

4.6

OpenCL

2.1

2.1

Vulkan

1.2

1.2

Board Design

Heating

225W

15W

Power connectors

1x 6-PIN

Width of the slot

Dual-Slot

9000

004 IGP

Benchmarks

3DMark Graphics

3DMark is a benchmarking tool designed and developed by UL to measure the performance of computer hardware. Upon completion, the program gives a score, where a higher value indicates better performance.

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT
+928%

AMD Radeon Vega 6 Mobile Raven

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 RX 5700 XT

AMD Radeon Vega 6 Mobile Raven

Th200 RP

Th200 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 RX 5700 XT
+1486%

AMD Radeon Vega 6 Mobile Raven

Gaming

1920×1080, Ultra

Game Radeon RX 5700XT Radeon Vega 6 Mobile
Battlefield V

+14%

Cyberpunk 2077
DOOM Eternal
Far Cry 5
Hitman 3
Metro Exodus
Red Dead Redemption 2
Shadow of the Tomb Raider
The Witcher 3
Average 111. 40 fps 0.00 fps

2560×1440, Ultra

Game Radeon RX 5700XT Radeon Vega 6 Mobile
Assassin’s Creed Valhalla
Battlefield V

+5%

Cyberpunk 2077
DOOM Eternal
Far Cry 5
Hitman 3
Metro Exodus
Red Dead Redemption 2
Shadow of the Tomb Raider
The Witcher 3
Average 84. 45 fps 0.00 fps

3840×2160, Ultra

Game Radeon RX 5700XT Radeon Vega 6 Mobile
Assassin’s Creed Valhalla
Battlefield V
Cyberpunk 2077
DOOM Eternal
Far Cry 5
Hitman 3
Metro Exodus
Red Dead Redemption 2
Shadow of the Tomb Raider
Average 47. 62 fps 0.00 fps

Key Differences

Why is AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT better than AMD Radeon Vega 6 Mobile Raven?

Newer — 1 year later release

Has 1486% better performance

More modern manufacturing process — 7 nm vs 14 nm

Has 8 GB more memory

Has 1284% faster pixel fill rate — 121.9 GPixel/s vs 8.808 GPixel/s

Has 1054% higher texture fill rate — 304.8 GTexel/s vs 26.42 GTexel/s

Has more texture units +136

Has more raster units +56

Has 2176 more shading units

Has 34 more compute units

Why is AMD Radeon Vega 6 Mobile Raven better than AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT?

Uses 94% less power — 15W vs 225W

Conclusion

Which is better Radeon RX 5700 XT or Radeon Vega 6 Mobile?

The Radeon RX 5700 XT delivers 1486% better performance, consumes up to 1400% more energy and holds 8 GB more memory. According to our research, the Radeon RX 5700 XT 3990X is more powerful than Radeon Vega 6 Mobile.

Is Radeon RX 5700 XT good today?

Radeon RX 5700 XT has 8 GB memory and shows an average of 84.45 FPS in 10 games at 1440p, making it an excellent choice for games in 2022.
This graphics card will give you a good experience in every game on reasonable graphics settings.

What AMD graphics cards is equivalent to Radeon RX 5700 XT?

The Radeon RX 6600 is AMD’s closest competitor to the Radeon RX 5700 XT. It is 1% more powerful, uses 34% less energy, and holds the same amount of memory.

What NVIDIA graphics cards is equivalent to Radeon RX 5700 XT?

The GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER is NVIDIA’s closest competitor to the Radeon RX 5700 XT. It is 7% more powerful, uses 12% more energy, holds the same amount of memory, and has higher average FPS in games at 1080p, 1440p, 2160p.

How does Radeon RX 5700 XT perform compared to Radeon Vega 6 Mobile and other graphics cards?

Relative capacity

Total capacity

Desktop performance

Mobile performance

AMD Radeon RX 5700: Gamez =

Plus

  • Effective and quickly
  • better VEGA 64 and RTX 2060

Lessions

  • No support for
  • trace is the second of the new AMD Navi 10 graphics cards featuring the new/improved RDNA architecture and playing second fiddle to the leading role of the RX 5700 XT. We’ve seen this story many times over the years — the RX 570 was a modest step up from the RX 580, the same for the Vega 56 from the Vega 64, or if you prefer the Nvidia side, it’s a bit like the GTX 1660 on compared to GTX 1660 Ti or GTX 970 vs. GTX 980. The RTX 2060’s direct competitor is a last-minute price cut thanks to the launch of Nvidia’s RTX 2060 Super and RTX 2070 Super.

    I’ve covered the new AMD Navi/RDNA architecture in detail before, and the accompanying review of the Radeon RX 5700 XT pretty much overlaps this one. I recommend starting with these articles if you need more information, but if you’re wondering how the $349 AMD part stacks up against the $349 Nvidia part, you’ve come to the right place. The new AMD Navi GPUs improve performance and efficiency over the old GCN architecture and are the first mainstream 7nm graphics cards to hit the market (if you don’t want to count Radeon VII). Here is a quick overview of the technical specifications and comparison of the new RX 5700 models with several previous generation AMD GPUs:

    The RX 5700 uses the same Navi 10 GPU as the other 5700 models, but AMD disables four CUs and 256 cores, and reduces the boost clock by 180MHz. This is fairly typical of second-tier products for any GPU, and the reason for the change lies in the profitability of the chips. I will cover this topic in more detail in the next article, but here is a brief overview.

    Modern microchips are made from large (300 mm) silicon wafers cut from a large silicon crystal cylinder. Wafers used to make CPUs and GPUs contain impurities that can cause errors or differences in performance characteristics. My understanding is that ICs from the center of the wafer tend to be «better» than ICs near the edge, so they may need less voltage to achieve the same clock speed, or they can run at higher clock speeds at the same voltage. . Microcircuits with impurities or bugs do not work completely, so modern processors have redundancy, and some parts of the chip can be turned off to produce a working chip, but not as fast as a fully powered chip.

    After each wafer is cut into individual chips, each is tested to determine how good it is in a process called binning. Thus, the best chips are usually sold as the fastest and most expensive components — Core i9-9900K, Ryzen 7 3800X or RX 5700 XT. Meanwhile, functional but perhaps not so good chips are being assembled and sold as lower end parts. Depending on how intensive and precise the fusion process is and how mature the manufacturing process is, the gap between the «best» and «worst» functional wafer chips can be relatively small. For newer fabrication nodes like TSMC’s 7nm, the gap is likely to be larger. In other words, RX 5700 cards most likely won’t have the same clock speeds as 5700 XT no matter how hard you try to overclock.

    I wanted to explain that so often there is information on the internet saying, «Oh don’t worry, you can overclock your [lower end product] to the same frequencies as the [higher end product].» In my experience, this is rarely true. What’s more, early issues with AMD RX 5700, WattMan and MSI Afterburner pre-drivers mean that overclocking isn’t very useful right now. This should be fixed soon, but overall I expect the 5700 to be about 100-200 MHz slower than the 5700 XT. This combined with fewer GPU cores means it will theoretically be 19percent slower, and the lower TDP means it can sometimes be higher. But at least it has the same memory bandwidth.

    AMD provided RX 5700 XT and RX 5700 reference models for testing. Unlike the 5700 XT, the vanilla RX 5700 has a more traditional fan design (no dents). It is similar to the RX Vega cards, but with an aluminum shroud and no dots, and the Radeon logo is slightly offset. The good news is that unlike the reference Vega cards, the RX 5700 has a much lower TBP (Typical Board Power) of just 175W, which in turn means the fan doesn’t have to spin nearly as fast. This in turn means less fan noise, and when stored in a closed case, the fan noise of the RX 5700 is almost inaudible.

    If you’re not a blower fan (*cough*), AMD motherboard partners will of course have axial fans and open designs available, including factory overclocked models. They can cost a little more, depending on the specific model, overclocking, and other amenities, which seems to challenge the lower price of the 5700. If you want a custom factory overclocked RX 5700, I’d go up to the 5700 XT first. Sure, that’s an extra $50, but it’s less than the price of a typical game and you’ll be able to enjoy improved performance in for every game you play.

    With Nvidia’s updated RTX line and AMD’s reduced starting price for the RX 5700 line, the direct competitor to the RX 5700 is the GTX 2060 (not Super). Both retail for $349, though the 2060 can be found a bit cheaper now. Generally speaking, I expect the RX 5700 to be faster in many games thanks to the extra 2GB of memory and higher specs. However, you need to decide if you want to play around with new and upcoming ray tracing games. AMD does not currently support the Microsoft DXR (DirectX Raytracing) or Vulkan-RT API. Ray tracing can be done with compute shaders, and Nvidia has released drivers that do just that for the GTX 10/16 series GPUs, but AMD doesn’t support ray tracing yet.

    It may not matter over the life of the cards — the RTX 2060 already struggles with even modest ray tracing effects. But with AMD’s next-generation consoles adding hardware support for ray tracing, there’s potential to be left behind. I’m not sure if it’s because AMD failed to prepare hardware support for RT in time, or if it’s holding back this feature for consoles, but it’s certainly something that will influence your buying decision.

    Let’s move on to testing, where we’re using our standard GPU testbed — the full specs are on the right. An overclocked Core i7-8700K running at 5.0GHz helps make sure the CPU isn’t the bottleneck, along with DDR4-3200 CL14 memory and fast SSD storage for the same reason. Processor performance can make a difference, especially at 1080p, less so at 1440p and 4K. We conducted testing using the latest drivers available at the time of testing, including retesting older GPUs to ensure our results are up to date. For AMD we used 19 drivers.16. 2 on previous generation GPUs, with new drivers provided prior to launch for RX 5700 cards.

    The list of games we use for GPU testing has been updated and we are not using DXR or DLSS for any of the tests. This allows for meaningful comparisons between different GPUs since AMD does not currently support DXR. The 11 games we use are a fairly even mix of AMD and Nvidia promoted titles: The Division 2, Far Cry 5, Strange Brigade, and Total War: Warhammer 2 are AMD branded, while Assassin’s Creed Odyssey, Metro Exodus, and Shadow of the Tomb Raider promotes Nvidia. DirectX 12 is used in most cases where possible, with the exception of Total War: Warhammer 2 where «DX12 Beta» performance is particularly poor on Nvidia GPUs.

    Each card is tested at four settings: 1080p medium (or equivalent) and 1080p / 1440p / 4k ultra (unless otherwise noted — for example, Metro Exodus is tested using the high preset). Each setting is tested multiple times to ensure consistent results and we use the best result. The minimum FPS is calculated by summing all frames above the 97th percentile and dividing by the number of frames, so it’s an «average minimum fps» and not an absolute minimum. This makes it a reasonable representation of the lower end of the performance scale rather than looking at just one worst frame rate from the test run.

    Here are the results starting at 1080p. And if that seems like a no-brainer, it can be hard to get the most out of a 144Hz monitor, even with an RTX 2080 or 2080 Ti.

    Radeon RX 5700 performance

    Above you can see the performance in our four test settings, and you can scroll through each gallery to see individual game results. Our initial testing of the RX 5700 revealed a few oddities, notably the minimum fps in some games is much lower than expected. However, these kinds of driver issues for a new architecture and product are not uncommon and should be resolved in the coming weeks.

    Overall, no matter what settings you choose, the Radeon RX 5700 outperforms the similarly priced RTX 2060. It’s 5 percent faster at 1080p on average, 8 percent faster at 1080p ultra, 11 percent faster at 1440p ultra, and 15 percent faster. faster at 4K ultra — not that I would necessarily recommend trying to play games at 4K ultra on the card. There are a few games where Nvidia comes out ahead (Assassin’s Creed Odyssey and Total War: Warhammer 2), but the extra 2GB of VRAM and the associated higher memory bandwidth definitely puts AMD in the lead.

    What about competition from AMD’s own cards? The RX 5700 is $349 and the RX 5700 XT is $399, a 14 percent price difference. And the performance goes well with that: the XT is 9 percent faster at 1080p on average, 11 percent faster at 1080p ultra, 14 percent faster at 1440p ultra, and 12 percent faster at 4K ultra. The RX 5700 is also 5-10 percent faster than the RX Vega 64 and 15-22 percent faster than the Vega 56. 55W less than Vega 56 and 135W less than Vega 64). Or, if you prefer, it draws about 10W less than the 8GB RX 580 while delivering 55-80 percent more performance.

    Those AMD claims of 50 percent or more improvement in performance per watt? They are absolutely correct based on our independent testing. The only minor downside (besides the lack of DXR capable drivers) is that the noise level is slightly higher than Nvidia cards (based on testing by AnandTech).

    If you’re just looking at the price of a new graphics card and its performance, then the RX 570 4GB is almost impossible to beat. It’s usually available for $120 / £118 (although you might need to pay €140 or more in other parts of Europe). That’s just over twice as fast as the RX 5700 for about a third of the price. What’s not to like? Real performance in latest games. Even 1080p ultra is a stretch in some games, and 1440p ultra can drop below 30fps in the most demanding games. If you want smooth frame rates and want to include all the graphical bells and whistles, the incredibly low price of some GPUs might look amazing, but you need something faster.

    Also keep in mind that the graphics card is just part of the whole. A typical mid-range PC will cost around $750/£675/€730, not counting the graphics card. The second set of charts shows the relative value (FPS per currency) when looking at a complete mid-range PC build, and suddenly spending a lot more money on a GPU could make sense. This is where the RX 5700 XT takes the top honors, with the RX 5700 sitting in the third or fourth slot. The incredibly affordable RX 570, meanwhile, comes in fourth from bottom.

    Both merit charts are noteworthy — there is no single way to rate the value of certain features. People who want to play in 4K no matter the cost will have a different point of view. If I were to use a high-end build rather than a mid-range PC, things would change even more in favor of buying the fastest graphics card, at least in terms of gaming. The fact is that the performance and price of a video card are not the only important indicators. 9The 0003

    RX 5700 is a step up from the 5700 XT at a reasonable $50 savings.

    If you’re an AMD fan or just tired of Nvidia’s stranglehold on the GPU market, the new AMD Navi graphics cards are a great addition. The performance and even the price isn’t a huge improvement over the Vega cards, but the even slower RX 5700 tends to outperform the Vega 64 in most games. The fact that it can do this with just over half the power (not counting the power used for the processor and other components) is more important in my book. All other things being equal, I’d rather have a quieter, less power-hungry GPU, and the RX 5700 definitely fits that description. In fact, it roughly matches the RTX 2060 in terms of power consumption, while still delivering more performance, and it consumes 10-15W less than the 2060 Super. Less power means less noise, less heat, and possibly a smaller power supply.

    Improvements come from several vectors. TSMC’s 7nm manufacturing process certainly plays a role, but AMD’s Navi/RDNA architecture improvements are clearly important. And while the RX 5700 is a modest step up from the RX 5700 XT, the lower clock speeds also result in more efficient performance — sort of like the old R9 Nano approach, though not quite as extreme. But that doesn’t mean the RX 5700 series is a clear winner.

    To be honest, I prefer the RX 5700 XT to the RX 5700 and the $50 surcharge. It’s not just about higher performance, though that’s the most important factor. Another factor is long-term stability, as I’ve had questionable luck with AMD’s second-tier products over the last few generations. With the RX 570, I had two different cards from two different manufacturers early on, which are a little unstable at best (the third 570, released half a year later, works fine). I need to run MSI Afterburner and tweak the voltage and fan speed curves so the cards are completely stable during gaming sessions. My RX Vega 56 reference model also has a few quirks and needs some customization to avoid period glitches.

    Compare this to the RX 580 and Vega 64 cards which generally worked fine and there is a call to pay more for better performance and a more powerful GPU. I haven’t seen anything special about the 5700 series yet to make me think, but the bundling process I discussed earlier means that XT cards get better GPUs, especially at this early stage in the life cycle. Also, early driver issues severely limited my ability to explore overclocking potential, so I can’t fully test how much headroom the 5700 has. Waiting a month or two for custom cards to arrive before moving to the RX 5700 might be smart. — and necessary if you do not need a fan-cooler.

    There is also a question about API support. Like it or not, DirectX Raytracing (DXR) is now a Microsoft standard. This means more ray-traced games are coming and even AMD plans to support DXR with hardware acceleration… but not yet. If DXR catches on and optimizations continue to improve performance without sacrificing image quality, Navi 10 GPUs may look like a dubious purchase in a year or two. It’s not the end of the world to miss out on a few extra reflections or better shadows and lighting, obviously — we’ve been «missing» these features for decades — but personally I’d be inclined to spend the extra $50 on the 2060 Super over the RX 5700, or sacrifice a few fps compared to the 5700 XT at the same price.

    However, it’s impossible to say exactly what will happen in the coming months and years, and right now the RX 5700 is a high-performance card at a reasonable starting price of $349. It outperforms Nvidia’s direct competitor, the RTX 2060, and also outperforms previous generation AMD Vega cards. You also get three months of free access to Microsoft Xbox Game Pass if you purchase the RX 5700 card — that’s (temporary) access to over a hundred games, although I’m not sure if that’s actually better than buying two or three games at once.

    Overall, the Radeon RX 5700 is still a great card and is on the list of potential GPU upgrades. If you’re looking for the best $350 graphics card today, it’s the RX 5700, even if six months or two years from now it might not be the best. There is also hope that street prices will drop slightly after the initial hype wears off. (Fingers crossed!) Perhaps most importantly, whether you’re looking to buy an AMD or Nvidia graphics card, there’s more competition now, and that results in better prices for everyone.

    Radeon RX 5700

    80%

    Total

    The RX 5700 is a cheaper alternative to the 5700 XT. It’s as fast as the Vega 64 and consumes significantly less power, but still lacks DXR support.

    Review and testing of the video card amd radeon rx vega 56

  • AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 hashrate on different algorithms
  • Profitability of mining on AMD Radeon RX Vega 56
  • Payback AMD Radeon RX Vega 56
  • How to increase Vega 56 hashrate with overclocking
  • Conclusion
  • Radeon RX Vega 56 was announced in August 2021, along with RX Vega 64 and RX Vega 64 Liquid. According to benchmarks, it competes in performance with the GTX 1070 and 1070 Ti, while being more affordable. For example, on the same Ethash mining algorithm, the model is one and a half times ahead of the RX 570 and RX 580.

    Owners of the RX Vega 56 note the high level of energy consumption. In addition, sometimes there are complaints about too much heating of the case. Otherwise, it is difficult to find fault with the model: its characteristics are still decent.

    Miners are especially interested in what hashrate Vega 56 has on Ethereum, as it is one of the most profitable cryptocurrencies for mining at the moment. In the article, we will consider the parameters and characteristics of the card, how much Vega 56 megahash gives out on the air and what kind of performance the card has on other algorithms.

    What to mine, profitable algorithm

    How productive is ether mining on vega 56? AMD GPUs are traditionally focused on mining coins of the Ethash algorithm. The hashing speed of the vega 56 video card in ether mining depends on the overclocking potential of a particular model.
    On Ezil.me and Rustpool.xyz servers, you can set up Merged mining of ETH+ZIL cryptocoins. Merged mining differs from the traditional dual mining previously widely practiced on red cards for Ethereum mining. You mine ETH by connecting through one of the specified services to another pool (for example, Ethermine), and at the same time the system periodically switches you to the ZIL mining round (once every 1. 5 hours). At the end of the round, you will be returned back to mining ETH. Essentially, every merged mining implementation has an auxiliary chain and a parent blockchain. A prerequisite for collaboration is the use of the same hashing algorithm. Money is also paid in two coins. As a result, you will receive an additional 10-12% profit.

    According to information from mining forums, to increase productivity, bios from the flagship model vega rx 64 is uploaded to vega rx56 cards. But each owner does this at his own peril and risk, and no one guarantees the success of such experiments.

    The cards of this line have a high hashrate based on the Cryptonight algorithm. Before Monero switched to the RandomX algorithm, the mining of this altcoin was profitable, but this is already in the past. As of 06/22/2020, the first place in terms of mining profitability for vega 56 is the HavenProtocol (XHV) coin based on the CryptoNightHaven algorithm. Slightly less revenue comes from Conceal (CCX), the CryptoNightConceal algorithm. Forks of the kryptonite algorithm do not heat up graphics adapters to excessively high temperatures, so it is recommended to transfer the rig to the production of these tokens during the hot season. Moreover, they occupy the top lines of the rating in online services for calculating the profitability of mining.

    AMD Vega series video cards performed well with the new MimbleWimble POW protocol. Altcoins MWC-CT31 (algorithm Cuckatoo31) and Grin-CT32 (algorithm Cuckatoo32) are almost as profitable as digital coins cryptonight and Ethash.

    For the fastest assessment of the market situation, experts use the mining calculator. Of course, the results given by them are very approximate

    The real hash rate and the amount of income can differ by 10-15% both in plus and minus, but still you should pay attention to the data from these sites

    Mining calculators:

    • Wattomine.
    • Coincalculator.

    Most users use the simple Nicehash service, where, after installation and a little tweaking, a smart program finds a profitable algorithm on its own. It is recommended to visit the service https://minerstat.com, here you will find hashrate indicators and a list of profitable cryptocoins for most models of video cards and ASICs.

    Hashrate on different algorithms

    Hashrate indicators may vary depending on the manufacturer of the video card, overclocking settings, operating system and mining software installed on a particular PC. New profitable projects periodically appear on the blockchain platform. 100 600 80 200Вт CryptoNightHeavy: (Haven) 1380 H/s 100 600 80 200Вт ProgPow: (Bitcoin Interest, 15.5 Mh/s 100 600 80 250Вт Zhash: (Bitcoin Gold, Anon, BitcoinZ) 34 Sol/s 100 600 80 230Вт CryptoNightConceal: (Conceal) 3600 H/s 100 600 80 250Вт NeoScrypt: (Halcyon, Dinero, Vivo) 1600 kh/s 100 600 80 230Вт X16R: (Ravencoin, Gravium, HelpTheHomeless, Motion, Nicehash-X16R) 11 Mh/s 100 600 80 180Вт KawPow: (Ravencoin) 15. 5 Mh/s 100 600 80 250Вт Cuckatoo31: (MWC-CT31) 1,2 H/s 100 600 80 230W

    The owner of an rx vega 56 mining farm must constantly monitor the market in search of the most profitable developments. Unless, of course, he wants to quickly recoup the investment.

    Ethereum Mining

    On the Claymore, after 10 minutes of warming up, the test showed about 34.5 megahash. With a 20% reduction in power consumption, we managed to fix on 32.3 hashes. The difference in output power is 2.3 MH/s from overclocking. This percentage setting will save money on electricity. You need to overclock the GPU gradually, raising the frequency of the memory and core.

    Mining on Vega 56 of the Etherhash and Monero algorithm is welcome. For other algorithms, the power used will not be as profitable.

    AMD Radeon RX Vega 64

    AMD Radeon RX Vega 64

    AMD radeon rx vega 64
    video card review

    However, as it turned out, in fact, it was a common error in the program itself and no lost blocks appeared. But, nevertheless, the firmware itself is bearing fruit — firstly, the maximum consumption limits are expanding, and secondly, the voltage on the HBM2 memory is increasing, which favorably affects overclocking. The base frequencies also change.

    We decided not to miss the chance and test the benefits of unlocking ourselves.

    The process itself is very simple — download the required BIOS version (,) , and using ATIWinflashv2.77 (older versions of AMD Radeon RX Vega do not support) flash it into AMD Radeon RX Vega 56.

    Uninstaller (DDU) reboot into safe mode and remove the Radeon Software Crimson ReLive Edition driver. Reboot and install the latest video driver. Congratulations, we have a slightly cropped AMD Radeon RX Vega 64.

    It is worth noting that without any special tricks, our copy of the video card worked at a frequency of ~ 1600 MHz for the core, and the HBM2 frequency was increased to a maximum of 1100 MHz (by the way, in the next review we will bypass this limitation).

    Playfully, the card showed itself in all its glory, while power consumption increased slightly, since we did not use the full potential of the voltage.

    Dependence of performance on overclocking and BIOS version is shown in the following graph:

    How to increase Vega 56 hash rate by overclocking

    Vega 64 hash rate can be much higher than stated. It is better to overclock the GPU for mining with the MSI Afterburner program. The interface of the utility is very simple. To overclock the video card, we need two sliders:

    • Core Clock — overclocking the core, increases the frequency of the core;
    • Memory Clock — memory overclocking, increases the frequency of the memory.

    Change the frequency values ​​little by little. Then test the stability of the work. If everything is fine, then you can increase the frequency even more. If the video card starts to fail or drivers crash, then just reduce the frequency and that’s it. There will be no harm.

    Review and test of the amd radeon rx 480 8gb

    The WattMan section in the Radeon RX Vega driver settings contains three preset power profiles — Power Save, Balanced and Turbo, with which you can either reduce power consumption or increase it relative to the nominal 100%. For the Vega 64 we have specific profile data: Power Save reduces the power limit by 25% and Turbo increases it by 15%. Plus, there’s a BIOS backup that cuts each profile by 7-10 watts. In the case of Vega 56, the effect of this option will have to be determined experimentally.

    In Turbo mode, which we chose for the main performance tests of Vega 56, the card’s energy ration is indeed much lower than that of Vega 64 (as can be seen from measurements in FurMark), but in terms of average system power in gaming applications, both Vegas compete with GeForce GTX 1080 Ti. And even the strictest restrictions imposed by the Power Save mode cannot bring Vega 56 closer to its main competitor — the GeForce GTX 1070.

    The maximum frequency of the Vega 56 core is 1590 MHz — much higher than the 1471 MHz indicated in the table. Recall that the “upper” frequency in the Vega specifications, unlike past AMD accelerators, means the maximum that the GPU can be guaranteed to take under a standard load, but not at all the maximum and, on the other hand, not a guaranteed stable frequency. Judging by the measurements in Crysis 3, even in Turbo mode, the GPU frequency in Vega 56 fluctuates around 1431 MHz, although Vega 64 gives out a hundred more in the same conditions. In sparing power modes, Vega 56 is forced to reset frequencies to 1341 and 12

    One way to fix the situation is to flash the BIOS from Vega 64. This way, it is impossible to return the GPU computing units blocked in production, but at least the power limit will no longer affect frequencies. Satisfactory results can also be achieved by simply lowering the GPU voltage. Our copy at such a low voltage as 1.05 V allowed us to set the limiting frequency at 1612 MHz. At the same time, in the Crysis 3 test, the frequency reached 1591 MHz and stabilized at around 1575 MHz.

    By the way, undervolting Vega 64, in our experience, only makes sense to appease the card’s energy cravings and reduce the load on the cooling system. Even at the stock voltage of 1.2 V, the Vega 64 core barely overclocks above the default 1630 MHz. The road to higher frequencies will only be opened by a BIOS modification or upcoming motherboards of the original design, which will allow higher voltage to be applied to the GPU.

    The HBM2 memory in Vega 56 works at lower frequencies relative to Vega 64 for a reason. Apparently, our copy uses chips from another manufacturer (AMD orders them from SK hynix and Samsung at the same time) or simply lower quality assemblies. If in Vega 64 the memory was easily overclocked from the standard 900 to 1095 MHz, then in Vega 56 stable operation is not possible at frequencies above 950 MHz.

    Overclocking increased system power in games by 52W over Turbo mode, but as we learned with the Vega 64, things would have been even worse without the voltage reduction. Now, at least, we see the standard picture, when the fan running at maximum speed (4647 rpm) lowered the temperature of the overclocked GPU by 17 ° C compared to the temperature at standard settings, which means that in everyday use a compromise can be found between heat and CO noise without sacrificing clock speeds.

    Note: hereinafter, in the diagrams and tables for overclocked Vega cards, the maximum frequency of the GPU is indicated, for non-overclocked cards, the Boost Clock frequency according to the specifications.

    How to reduce power consumption

    The powerful 3D graphics accelerator is quite power hungry. The consumption of Vega 56 in mining is higher than stated by the manufacturer in the technical parameters of the video card. Undervolting (lowering the core voltage) is necessary to avoid excessively high electricity costs. 9 will help here again0546 program WattTool .

    In the program window, you need to change the voltage indicators in paragraphs P6 and P7 (when controlled in manual mode, the voltage at lower frequencies will drop automatically). For rx 56 vega, a 12% reduction (1.070 mV) would be optimal, which will reduce the consumption of vega 56 in mining by 50 watts.

    Also in the MSI Afterburner program, the voltage is conveniently regulated by the line Power Limit. The optimal value is 80%, some video cards are able to hold less voltage, which has a positive effect on the payback period of the video card.

    Video card in mining, main characteristics

    Overview of the video card msi radeon rx570 armor oc: 8 GB and 4

    Main characteristics:

    • Architecture — GCN 1.4.
    • Chip technology — 14 Hm.
    • Graphics core area — 486 mm².
    • Number of transistors — 12500 million
    • Number of TMUs — 224.
    • Number of ROPs — 64.
    • Number of shredder units — 3584.
    • Core clock — 1156 MHz.
    • Core clock (TURBO) — 1471 MHz.
    • Memory frequency — 953 MHz.
    • Video memory type — HBM 2.
    • Video memory size — 8GB.
    • Bus bandwidth — 2048 bits.
    • Additional power supply — 8+8 pin.
    • Power consumption — 210 Watts.

    In terms of hashing speed, the GPU is not inferior, and on many coins it is superior to its competitors. If we compare radeon rx vega 56 vs 1080 ti, mining on the «red» card is more productive on the popular Ethash and Cryptonight algorithms. Thanks to the dual BIOS, when mining on rx 56 vega, you can change the parameters of the video card by moving the lever on the device panel. The backup BIOS has write protection, this makes it possible to restore the video accelerator after an unsuccessful firmware.

    Which model is better for mining?

    In the first place Gigabyte vega 56 is the best card for mining in AMD’s line of vega graphics accelerators. The exclusive WindForce 2x cooler, with powerful fans, copper heat pipes and a 2-section heatsink, protects against overheating under heavy loads. A low-noise, cold and relatively inexpensive video card is an excellent option for building a mining farm for the extraction of the XMR cryptocurrency.

    Msi AIR Boosts Vega 56 has high mining performance. The manufacturer overclocks GPUs at the factory. Setting the Boost mode accelerates the core to the level of 1450 MHz, this is the best indicator in this line of Vega video cards. Hot air is removed by a two-slot cooling system with a powerful turbine.

    The powercolor vega 56 is available in several versions:

    • The PowerColor Radeon RX Vega 56 Nano Edition is a compact card with a single fan and no BIOS switch.
    • PowerColor Radeon RX Vega 56 Red Devil is made in the original style. The main feature of this model is 3 BIOS switching options: standard, silent and OC BIOS. The function allows you to adjust the power consumption and the temperature of the fans with one click of the toggle switch.
    • PowerColor Radeon RX Vega 56 Red Dragon looks like Red Devil, but has a shorter PCB, only two BIOS versions and a 6+8 pin auxiliary power connector instead of the usual 8+8 on other rx vega 56 models.

    On video accelerators of the PowerColor radeon rx vega 56 series, mining is quite complicated in the settings, but with proper overclocking, the card shows good hash rates, and three fans reliably protect against overheating.

    The Asus ROG Strix RX Vega 56 OC 8 GB video accelerator is equipped with the Asus GPU Tweak II proprietary utility, with the function of automatic tuning to the maximum allowable frequencies. Led-backlight allows you to visually control the degree of heating of the asus rx vega 56 video card in the process of mining cryptocurrency.

    Double Edition Vega RX 56 graphics processor from the American company XFX, has a 20% reduced size compared to the reference version. The card does not have factory acceleration, so the core frequency remains at standard values.

    This concludes the review of models from different manufacturers. The test results showed that Vega cards for mining are quite promising. The full disclosure of the capabilities of the new architecture depends on the development of new software for mining cryptocurrencies.

    The new model line Nvidia 2080 competes well with Vega series video cards. The video card needs to be overclocked in mining, otherwise it will consume electricity in vain.

    Using the program MSI Afterburner it is possible to quickly overclock the video card. The optimal values ​​are selected individually for each video card. For this video card, the optimal kernel settings will be:

    • Core Clock +100
    • Memory Clock +600
    • Power Limit 80

    The hash rate increases and the graphics card becomes profitable. For overclocking settings rx 56 vega, you can also use the utility WattTool .

    ⇡#Vega 10 GPU

    At the heart of the Radeon RX Vega family, the Vega 10 GPU represents the biggest change to the Graphics Core Next architecture since it was first introduced in 2011-2012. Nevertheless, Vega 10 is true to the priorities that AMD set in the early days of GCN: the formula for computing units of the latest GPU is still shifted towards shader ALUs, based on a predominantly non-graphics or mixed workload. In fact, the Fiji configuration was repeated in the new GPU (Radeon R9 seriesFury), which includes 4096 shader ALUs, 256 texture mappers and 64 ROPs, adjusted for a different organization of access to the cache memory and twice the size of the L2 cache. Additional transistor budget (and in Vega 10 it is increased by 40% compared to Fiji) AMD spent on optimizing existing logic and introducing new features.

    In particular, AMD has expanded the computing capabilities of Vega by «densifying» operations of reduced bit depth. So, instead of 128 operations per clock on FP32 numbers that a single NCU (the main building block of a GCN containing 64 shader ALUs) performs, 256 FP16 operations or 512 FP8 operations can be performed. Mathematics of reduced accuracy in discrete GPUs is still in demand mainly in machine learning tasks, but over time it can be widely used in graphics, because now both NVIDIA and AMD provide such an opportunity.

    AMD Vega 10 Block Diagram

    Despite AMD chips still focusing on computational workload, Vega’s creators didn’t ignore fixed functionality blocks related to 3D rendering. Polaris chips have already taken a big step forward compared to their predecessors (Tonga and Fiji) in memory bandwidth efficiency and geometry processing at the initial stages of the rendering pipeline , and a relatively small number of texture mapping units for such a large GPU compensates for tile rendering. Finally, Vega has the most comprehensive DirectX 12 hardware support of any modern GPU, an area where AMD has long been a catch-up player.

    The merit of AMD, and before that ATI is the initiative to introduce new types of RAM and ways to work with it. Vega became the first GPU in the consumer market to use HBM2 memory, and pioneered for AMD GPUs the use of address space paging, which allows the GPU’s local memory to be used as a L3 cache and access «far» memory (system RAM) at the driver level — in the same way as it is arranged in central processing units.

    You can read more about the features listed here and other features of Vega in our AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 review. In general, we can say that AMD has turned out to be a more balanced, versatile and in many ways advanced graphics processor than in previous generations. However, many of the innovations in Vega 10 (as has happened more than once with AMD chips) are an investment in the future, and do not bring benefits here and now, or are aimed at professional and prosumer market niches. On the contrary, in games, AMD only burdens the desire to make a universal chip for graphics and computational tasks. Or perhaps the GCN architecture itself has already encountered fundamental limitations that only a radical paradigm shift within the walls of the Radeon Technologies Group will eliminate.

    ⇡#Performance: 3DMark

    3DMark shows AMD processors in the best possible light. Just as the Radeon RX Vega 64 is confidently ahead of the GeForce GTX 1080 in the «synthetics», so the Vega 56 turned out to be 14% faster than the GTX 1070. The advantage of the new product over the flagships of the previous generation (Radeon R9 Fury X and GeForce GTX TITAN X) was 23 and 19 % respectively. Resolution AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (1471/1600MHz, 8GB), Turbo AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 (1546/1890MHz, 8GB), Turbo AMD Radeon RX 580 (1340/8000MHz, 8GB) AMD Radeon R9 Fury X (1050/1000MHz, 4GB) NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X (1000/7012MHz, 12GB) NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (1506/8008MHz, 8GB) NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (1607/10008MHz, 8GB) Fire Strike 1920 × 1080 19 848 22 503 13 631 16 105 17 115 17 519 21 694 Fire Strike Extreme 2560 × 1440 9 488 10 711 6 090 7 559 7 928 8 298 10 264 Fire Strike Ultra 3840 × 2160 4 774 5 400 3 051 3 821 4 042 4 079 5 001 Time Spy 2560 × 1440 6 +13% -31% -17% -14% -9% Min. +13% -34% -19% -16% +13% −36% −20% −19% −15% +5%

    Productivity: Games (1920 × 1080, 2560 × 1440) even with the resolution of the screen 1080p and 1440p when AMD’s GPUs aren’t fully exploited, the Radeon RX Vega 56 outperforms the GeForce GTX 1070 in average frame rates. Moreover, the AMD accelerator holds a solid lead in most tests, and in only two games (Crysis 3 and GTA V) does the GTX 1070 unconditionally dominate. As we remember from previous reviews, there were more games that were inconvenient for Vega 64 in the fight against GTX 1080. Vega 64 itself provides for 7– AMD Radeon R9 Fury X (1050/1000MHz, 4GB) NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X (1000/7012MHz, 12GB) NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (1506/8008MHz, 8GB) NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (1607/10008 МГц, 8 Гбайт) Ashes of the Singularity MSAA 4x + TAA 4x 34 37 24 32 31 36 45 Battlefield 1 TAA 117 131 82 91 85 87 118 Crysis 3 MSAA 4x 60 65 44 61 66 70 79 Deus Ex: Mankind Divided MSAA 4x 35 38 25 33 30 31 38 DiRT Rally MSAA 4x 81 85 57 65 84 86 101 DOOM TSSAA 8TX 200 200 138 166 151 162 200 GTA V MSAA 4x + FXAA + Reflection MSAA 4x 62 64 45 55 67 74 84 Metro: Last Light Redux SSAA 4x 79 87 51 69 74 74 92 Rise of the Tomb Raider SSAA 4x 51 57 35 42 47 47 63 Tom Clancy’s The Division SMAA 1x Ultra + TAA: Supersampling 74 81 51 61 54 66 82 Total War: WARHAMMER MSAA 4x 65 71 39 54 59 61 71 The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt AA + HairWorks AA 4x 70 72 46 50 62 68 88 Макс. +12% AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 (1546/1890MHz, 8GB), Turbo AMD Radeon RX 580 (1340/8000MHz, 8GB) AMD Radeon R9 Fury X (1050/1000MHz, 4GB)

    Ashes of the Singularity MSAA 4x + TAA 4x 26 28 19 26 25 29 34 Battlefield 1 TAA 94 97 59 62 62 67 89 Crysis 3 MSAA 4x 38 41 27 39 41 43 53 Deus Ex: Mankind Divided MSAA 4x 22 24 16 19 19 19 25 DiRT Rally MSAA 4x 61 64 41 49 61 62 73 DOOM TSSAA 8TX 132 147 89 110 100 108 136 GTA V MSAA 4x + FXAA + Reflection MSAA 4x 44 48 31 39 48 53 63 Metro: Last Light Redux SSAA 4x 45 50 28 41 44 43 52 Rise of the Tomb Raider SSAA 4x 31 36 22 27 29 28 38 Tom Clancy’s The Division SMAA 1x Ultra + TAA: Supersampling 51 59 36 44 39 45 56 Total War: WARHAMMER MSAA 4x 45 47 26 38 40 40 49 The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt AA + HairWorks AA 4x 52 59 35 9

    40 49 52 63 Avg. +16% -27% +3% +9% +20% Min. +9% -32% -14% -9% +3% -42% -34% -34% -29% -5%

    ⇡#Conclusions

    Radeon RX Vega 64 could not unconditionally overcome its main rival, the GeForce GTX 1080, and only at the cost of incomparably higher power consumption did AMD achieve the level of gaming performance that NVIDIA conquered more than a year ago. But Vega 56 hit right on target. The junior model in terms of gaming performance won a difficult victory over the GeForce GTX 1070 in the 1080p and 1440p resolutions, which are key for this category of accelerators, and confidently leads in 2160p.

    Another advantage Vega 56 has over its main competitor is its overclocking potential. The GTX 1070 generally cannot be overclocked to the level of the GTX 1080. NVIDIA has separated the two models both by the type of RAM and by selecting the most promising GPU dies for the GTX 1080.