AMD GPU Generational Performance Part 1 @ [H]

Discussion in 'Video Cards' started by Kyle_Bennett, Sep 4, 2018.

  1. Kyle_Bennett

    Kyle_Bennett El Chingón Staff Member

    Messages:
    54,837
    Joined:
    May 18, 1997
    AMD GPU Generational Performance Part 1

    Ever wonder how much performance you are truly getting from GPU to GPU upgrade in games? What if we took GPUs from AMD and compared performance gained from 2013 to 2018? This is our AMD GPU Generational Performance Part 1 article focusing on the Radeon R9 290X, Radeon R9 390X, Radeon R9 Fury X and Radeon RX Vega 64 in 14 games.

    If you like our content, please support HardOCP on Patreon.
     
    LigTasm, fuzzylogik, c3k and 15 others like this.
  2. TangledThornz

    TangledThornz Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    298
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2018
    This article is depressing. AMD is kicking ass on the stock market today and I hope they do the same soon with new GPUs.
     
    R_Type, Fleat, Mr. Bluntman and 2 others like this.
  3. Raffin

    Raffin Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    131
    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2009
    I'm not real familiar with AMD video cards. Where do the RX 570 / RX 580 fall on the performance spectrum? I'm guessing between Fury and Vega?
     
  4. cageymaru

    cageymaru [H]ard|News

    Messages:
    19,447
    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    290 (x) / 390 (x) maybe?
     
    Darth Kyrie and Chimpee like this.
  5. Chimpee

    Chimpee [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,184
    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2015
    It should be below Fury for the 570/580.
     
  6. DejaWiz

    DejaWiz Oracle of Unfortunate Truths

    Messages:
    19,771
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2005
    Pretty impressive jump from the 290X/390X to Vega64. I'm really looking forward to seeing what Navi can do!

    Thanks for putting in the time and effort to bring this type of comparison review to the world, [H]!
     
  7. atp1916

    atp1916 [H]ard|DCoTM x1

    Messages:
    3,657
    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2004
    Great information for folks 'on the fence' about pulling the trigger on that GPU upgrade, whether AMD or Nvidia.

    Thanks Kyle_Bennett Brent_Justice
     
    c3k, DrezKill, AlphaQup and 7 others like this.
  8. psyclist

    psyclist Gawd

    Messages:
    807
    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Glad I sold my 290X's during the mining craze and jumped to the V56's. Awesome cards, both clock to 1650/1100 (and was one of the lucky few who got em at MSRP) Looking forward to the 7nm iteration and Navi following!
     
    Neapolitan6th and Darth Kyrie like this.
  9. Stoly

    Stoly [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,018
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2005
    No 4k testing? Remember how AMD used to market the FuryX as a 4k card? I'd love to see how it fared. I think I know the answer though.
     
  10. Kyle_Bennett

    Kyle_Bennett El Chingón Staff Member

    Messages:
    54,837
    Joined:
    May 18, 1997
    That said, there have been a few cards marketed as 4K cards, and as we have told you guys repeatedly, it just was not so. The 1080 Ti was the first true 4K card in our eyes. But, let's keep this on the topic, please.
     
    R_Type, ricson, DrezKill and 3 others like this.
  11. Stoly

    Stoly [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,018
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2005
    BTW people bitching about the 35%+ performance increase on Turing vs Pascal should take a look at this.

    Anyway can't wait for the next installment. Good job.
     
    Nima84, ricson and Armenius like this.
  12. Business6

    Business6 [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,624
    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2011
    These articles are fun and bordering on nostalgic :D

    Good work!
     
    atp1916 and AlphaQup like this.
  13. Corporate Goon

    Corporate Goon n00bie

    Messages:
    45
    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2006
    I really like these articles - as someone who generally skips a generation or two between updates, it's great to see what the real difference between my 290 and a modern high-end card is.

    Gotta say though, while I know everyone has their own performance preferences, calling performance that never drops below 30fps "unplayable" is just asinine, and I've seen this comment come up a lot in recent articles. It may not be ideal for some people, but performance that averages in the 40-50fps and *never drops below 30fps* is far from "unplayable".
     
    sabrewolf732 and Darth Kyrie like this.
  14. Brent_Justice

    Brent_Justice [H] Video Card Managing Editor Staff Member

    Messages:
    17,811
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2000
    Mainstream

    RX 580 MSRP - $229
    RX 570 MSRP - $169

    The cards we evaluated today starting at $549 (290X) and $449 (390X refresh at the cheapest) up to $649 for Fury X and $499 for Vega 64 air-cooled

    That should put Polaris in perspective for you.
     
  15. Brent_Justice

    Brent_Justice [H] Video Card Managing Editor Staff Member

    Messages:
    17,811
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2000
    And we all know how that turned out.....

    4K testing would be a nightmare on Fury X, we all know Vega 64 would surpass it greatly.

    I wish there was a good 4K comparison we could make with AMD cards, but even Vega 64 struggles in most games at 4K since it is only "on par" with 1080 performance, there is no match for the 1080 Ti.
     
    Fleat, DrezKill and Armenius like this.
  16. Brent_Justice

    Brent_Justice [H] Video Card Managing Editor Staff Member

    Messages:
    17,811
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2000
    Very dependent on the game, some games are acceptable at lower framerates, some are not. We base our experiences on not just the framerate, but how the gameplay experience feels while playing, looking for lag, hitches or pauses, inconsistencies, changes in fps that we can notice, and take all this into consideration, not just what the fps number is.
     
    Knurrus, DrezKill, Armenius and 4 others like this.
  17. Matt Christie

    Matt Christie n00bie

    Messages:
    25
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2018
    Great work Kyle! A very enjoyable read, and great comparisons. Thanks!
     
    AceGoober likes this.
  18. Kyle_Bennett

    Kyle_Bennett El Chingón Staff Member

    Messages:
    54,837
    Joined:
    May 18, 1997
    Well, Brent_Justice wrote it, so he should get the thanks. I just made sense of what he wrote. ;)
     
    Fleat, Knurrus, DrezKill and 5 others like this.
  19. Teenyman45

    Teenyman45 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,181
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2010
    These comparison graphs really remind me of my prior concern that one of the greatest issues holding back Fury and especially Vega has been the limited memory bandwidth. Although anecdotal due to my small sample size, with all the prior generations of ATI/AMD (and my one not too, too ancient Nvidia) graphics cards I've overclocked when core clock and memory bandwidth increased by the same percentage then frame rate scaled linearly. However increasing core count or core speed without commensurate memory bandwidth would eventually lead to rapidly diminishing returns.

    The 290/390 transition to Fury had a more than 40% increase in cores with only a 1/3 increase in memory bandwidth along with a real problem in only having 4GB of memory. Remember how before Vega came out many of us thought there would be a 40-50% plus improvement in frame rate based on the core speed increase and possible architecture improvements. And yet with Vega there's a roughly 40-50% general increase in core clock speed (depending on heat soak) with a REDUCTION in memory bandwidth leading to a mere 20-30ish percent overall gain.
     
  20. CleverBullet

    CleverBullet n00bie

    Messages:
    2
    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2018
    This article makes me feel better about my impulse upgrade from my Fury Nano to a Vega 64 LE (at MSRP, thankfully). I think next card, i'd like something not weirdly power limited for a change.
     
    Dayaks likes this.
  21. TheHig

    TheHig Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    388
    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2016
    Really enjoying this series of articles. I get asked all the time by people about upgrading and builds so this is a terrific source of information to pass along.

    Thanks for all the hard work guys!
     
  22. psyclist

    psyclist Gawd

    Messages:
    807
    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Soft powerplay tables mod will fix the power limiting issues, my clocks are rock solid and not all over the map as ive seen on many reviews. Its an extra step in overclocking, but its worth it IMO
     
    Armenius likes this.
  23. Nolan7689

    Nolan7689 Gawd

    Messages:
    961
    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2015
    Pretty fun read, I had the Nvidia part 1 article open at the same time and I’ve gotta say I’m actually impressed by the 290x/390x at how they compared to the 780 and 980. They aged much better in my opinion (but yes, I do realize the Ti cards are better.)

    I wonder i how the 290x held up slightly makes the ~80% improvement to Vega seem smaller when compared with the 780/1080 numbers. Granted, once again, Ti versions throw a wrench to that theory. AMD needs something to compete above the non-Ti level.

    Great article! Any chance there will be anything looking at Polaris?
     
    Sulphademus likes this.
  24. SIS

    SIS [H]Lite

    Messages:
    88
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2014
    Cough... GameWorks.... cough.

    Also... this isn't just about AMD but also about GlobalFoundries, correct? The process that AMD was forced to buy Vega on (due to the wafer agreement and other issues) was optimized for low power, as far as I understand it. It is inferior in performance, at higher clocks, to the TSMC process Nvidia has been able to use.
     
  25. sabrewolf732

    sabrewolf732 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,717
    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    Would have liked to see wolfenstein in there as well, you said fc5 was the only game to have rpm but wolfenstein II does as well?
     
  26. FlawleZ

    FlawleZ Gawd

    Messages:
    670
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    Fantastic article. Fury X actually holds it's own at 1440P still in most titles despite only having 4GB of VRAM. Would have been interesting seeing 7970 compared here as I feel that card held onto being relevant longer than the others, but alas it's a tad too old to keep in line with Nvidia comparison and the game suite.
     
  27. Kyle_Bennett

    Kyle_Bennett El Chingón Staff Member

    Messages:
    54,837
    Joined:
    May 18, 1997
    The point of the article is to show gaming performance, not evaluate technical and business decisions of the devs and foundries. So, let's stay on topic please. There are plenty of other threads to take those discussions up in.
     
    Armenius and GDI Lord like this.
  28. lostin3d

    lostin3d [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,535
    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2016
    Thanks Brent & Kyle for this series.

    Been team green since MS Vista. My last red card was an HD2600(not sure if pro or xt). Got it on a black friday sale for ~$100 and loved it, at least when my games didn't crash in my old Pentium IV rig. Still have it. It was awesome because aside from it's speeds it also allowed some DX10 functionality on XP. Have a feeling if I fired that thing up now I might be able to grab an updated driver that would help it a bit.

    I could never really wrap my head around AMD's naming schema's so your history here really helped. Fascinating about that custom closed loop on the R9 Fury X-pretty cool.
     
  29. Kyle_Bennett

    Kyle_Bennett El Chingón Staff Member

    Messages:
    54,837
    Joined:
    May 18, 1997
    As reported by AMD, you are correct. Wolf2 did support RPM. https://gaming.radeon.com/en/wolfenstein-2-new-colossus-recommended-settings/

    Wolfenstein® II took full advantage of the Vulkan™ API and latest features found on Radeon RX Vega graphics cards. By using the advanced features on the “Vega” GPU such as rapid packed math, multi-threaded command buffer recording, asynchronous compute and shader intrinsics, I averaged 60+ fps at 3440×1440 with Radeon™ RX Vega 56 and at 4K with Radeon™ RX Vega 64.

    FYI Brent_Justice
     
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2018
    noko, DrezKill, Armenius and 2 others like this.
  30. SIS

    SIS [H]Lite

    Messages:
    88
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2014
    Go ahead and ban me for discussing something your article discusses — features like Rapid Packed Math being implemented by developers and how that impacts gaming.

    GameWorks is very similar to Rapid Packed Math. It is one company's tech vs another's (Rapid Packed Math). Clearly, Nvidia has been more successful than AMD at getting such game performance enhancement tech (for their cards) implemented by devs.

    If you can prove what I wrote isn't on-topic, as it pertains directly to the quoted text from your article, then I will retract my posts.
     
    The_Capulet likes this.
  31. Kyle_Bennett

    Kyle_Bennett El Chingón Staff Member

    Messages:
    54,837
    Joined:
    May 18, 1997
    Should you wish to discuss the technology and how it impacts performance, I would love to discuss that. However you seem to want to discuss the politics behind the technology and the foundry process, which is something I do not want to discuss in this review thread. There are plenty of other threads for that.
     
    The_Capulet, R_Type and Armenius like this.
  32. Vader1975

    Vader1975 Gawd

    Messages:
    668
    Joined:
    May 11, 2016
    You mean bitching about the price increase per performance gained. Price to performance ratio.
     
  33. Deathroned

    Deathroned Gawd

    Messages:
    525
    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2015
  34. Armenius

    Armenius [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    16,228
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    Just one little nitpick. It looks like the article doesn't say whether DX11 or DX12 was used in Rise of the Tomb Raider and Deus Ex: Mankind Divided, unless it is implied by "Highest Settings."
     
  35. Brent_Justice

    Brent_Justice [H] Video Card Managing Editor Staff Member

    Messages:
    17,811
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2000
    DX11 is used in those games in all articles unless otherwise specified specifically, DX11 is faster in those games in our testing.
     
    DrezKill, AlexisRO and Armenius like this.
  36. DuronBurgerMan

    DuronBurgerMan [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,037
    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2017
    Vega struck me, since its release, as a stretch for AMD. They really had to milk it to get 1080-level performance out of it. Where Ryzen exceeded many performance targets, Vega only just barely made it.

    Seeing these benchmarks, Vega isn't bad. But it's not what AMD really needed, either. It's somewhere in between. Neither an utter failure or an unqualified success. Still, this is better than no high end presence at all.

    I hope the next GPU out of AMD brings us more competition. Nvidia is killing it from a performance angle, but their pricing and anti-competitive practices are just screaming for real competition again.

    And, lol, my old 7970 still continues to serve in my HTPC, and dual 7970s still run my old arcade/console emulator build. GCN forever, lolol.
     
  37. GoodBoy

    GoodBoy [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,074
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2004
    Excellent review [H]!

    I love looking back at the older cards, and see how much performance increases between generations. Should make some of us rethink our impulsive, every generation upgrade tendencies.. since they are not always much of an upgrade.

    What is also interesting, is how certain games just perform insanely better than all of its peers (Doom). I know the Vulkan api helps, but I doubt it accounts for all of the difference. You guys are really familiar with all of the "eye candy features" in these games. Would you think that Doom has less of those features than say Crysis 3? I pick Crysis since it is on the other end of the performance spectrum, but when you lowered the in game options to really low, it almost performed as well as Doom. In doing that, what visual quality differences or sacrifices were there? Or does doing that just put them at the same visual quality level, explaining the performance? Or is Doom just that much faster while looking great?

    Any chance once the AMD series is done, that the 2080 and 2080Ti can get thrown into this blender? Even if the games don't support the ray tracing features, it will be a great jumping off point to be able to compare the new cards performance to all these generations going back 5 years in all these older games.
     
  38. Colonel_Blimp

    Colonel_Blimp n00bie

    Messages:
    19
    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2017
    interesting and good job.

    Can't see the point in having a 290x and 390x and ignoring the 280x.
     
  39. Stoly

    Stoly [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,018
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2005
    Really? I was under the impression that DX12 was faster in those games on AMD hardware.
     
  40. Brent_Justice

    Brent_Justice [H] Video Card Managing Editor Staff Member

    Messages:
    17,811
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2000
    Really.
     
    Nuby1Canuby and Armenius like this.