Custom 5700s start showing up

Ready4Dis

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
2,491
And one of the interesting qoutes to those worried about big Navi power draw...
"AMD’s new RDNA architecture on the 7nm manufacturing process has managed to pull ahead of Nvidia’s vaunted power efficiency, delivering more performance at less peak power."
 

GoodBoy

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 29, 2004
Messages
2,257
$9 over the standard cards prices is a no brainer for better cooling.

The Trixx, that's built into most graphically "demanding" games, called resolution scaling. Not sure of any games that would benefit from resolution scaling that do not support it, but there have to be some.. Crysis (1) comes to mind. If it works with a framerate "target" and adjusts the scaling on the fly to meet that, could be pretty useful, especially for a typical midrange pc. Or just spend $50 more and get the 2060 Super, and retain the image quality. Good to have options.
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2013
Messages
756
The biggest question I came away with from that review was why on earth would anyone buy a 2070 super at 550+dollars??
 

illli

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 26, 2005
Messages
1,441
The biggest question I came away with from that review was why on earth would anyone buy a 2070 super at 550+dollars??

People who don't read reviews or do their research I guess. Then I suppose theres some that just feel like "money is no object" and don't care about best bang for the buck etc.
 

ccityinstaller

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Messages
4,241
$9 over the standard cards prices is a no brainer for better cooling.

The Trixx, that's built into most graphically "demanding" games, called resolution scaling. Not sure of any games that would benefit from resolution scaling that do not support it, but there have to be some.. Crysis (1) comes to mind. If it works with a framerate "target" and adjusts the scaling on the fly to meet that, could be pretty useful, especially for a typical midrange pc. Or just spend $50 more and get the 2060 Super, and retain the image quality. Good to have options.


The 260 Super is slower than a 2070, which is slower then a 5700XT, which is a few percent slower then a 2070 Super (while costing 35+% less)so I'm not really sure what you are on about.


Even a vanilla 5700 with 2 simple adjustments are going to give a 2060 super a run.
 

cjcox

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 7, 2004
Messages
2,244
plethora.png
 

misterbobby

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 18, 2014
Messages
3,814
And one of the interesting qoutes to those worried about big Navi power draw...
"AMD’s new RDNA architecture on the 7nm manufacturing process has managed to pull ahead of Nvidia’s vaunted power efficiency, delivering more performance at less peak power."
And how in the hell does that make any sense? The 5700XT uses a little more power than the 2070 Super while being SLOWER. And the non reference cards use even MORE power while still not quite matching the 2070 Super. :rolleyes:

https://tpucdn.com/review/asus-radeon-rx-5700-xt-strix-oc/images/relative-performance_3840-2160.png

https://tpucdn.com/review/asus-radeon-rx-5700-xt-strix-oc/images/power-gaming-peak.png

https://tpucdn.com/review/asus-radeon-rx-5700-xt-strix-oc/images/power-gaming-average.png


"With roughly 250 W, power draw is a bit higher than for competing NVIDIA cards"

It seems perfectly legit to be worried about big Navi power draw when the relatively small 5700 XT is already using that kind of power.
 
Last edited:

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
12,630
Welp, in this case, I wish the thread title was 5700 XT's start showing up. Right now, the 5700's themselves are no where to be found, other than the reference card, of which I have one. Truth is, my reference 5700 works great, does not overheat, is not all that hot and is not loud. Keep in mind, the best overclock I can get is 1850 with any gaming stability and it is actually running at about 1750 consistently.
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
12,630
The 260 Super is slower than a 2070, which is slower then a 5700XT, which is a few percent slower then a 2070 Super (while costing 35+% less)so I'm not really sure what you are on about.


Even a vanilla 5700 with 2 simple adjustments are going to give a 2060 super a run.

I have the Vanilla 5700 and I want to know what these 2 simple adjustments are please? Thanks.
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
12,630
Um isn't the max frequency capped on the non XT 5700?

Nope, just so long as you use the registry power mod. However, the 5700 is limited because that is simply the the 5700 GPU is, which is incapable of running at the same speed as the 5700 TX. But CCityInstaller, do you think it is worth doing the washer mod on the vanilla 5700?
 

Ready4Dis

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
2,491
And how in the hell does that make any sense? The 5700XT uses a little more power than the 2070 Super while being SLOWER. And the non reference cards use even MORE power while still not quite matching the 2070 Super. :rolleyes:

https://tpucdn.com/review/asus-radeon-rx-5700-xt-strix-oc/images/relative-performance_3840-2160.png

https://tpucdn.com/review/asus-radeon-rx-5700-xt-strix-oc/images/power-gaming-peak.png

https://tpucdn.com/review/asus-radeon-rx-5700-xt-strix-oc/images/power-gaming-average.png


"With roughly 250 W, power draw is a bit higher than for competing NVIDIA cards"

It seems perfectly legit to be worried about big Navi power draw when the relatively small 5700 XT is already using that kind of power.
Not sure why the scaling isn't that great honestly. Could be a few things I guess. They had to sacrifice power to get the higher speeds? Possibly different reviewers using different measurements? Hard to say, maybe the downside of pushing early 7nm silicon; high leakage currents? Honestly don't know, but if you find a solid answer please follow up!
 

misterbobby

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 18, 2014
Messages
3,814
Nope, just so long as you use the registry power mod. However, the 5700 is limited because that is simply the the 5700 GPU is, which is incapable of running at the same speed as the 5700 TX. But CCityInstaller, do you think it is worth doing the washer mod on the vanilla 5700?
Pretty much every review said the plain 5700 was capped around 1800.

"This allowed the 5700 to average a core frequency of 1780 MHz at 70 degrees. Unfortunately, we were unable to push the core any higher as there appears to be a frequency cap at the moment and it’s not clear if AMD will remove it."

https://www.techspot.com/review/1870-amd-radeon-rx-5700/
 
D

Deleted member 184142

Guest
That's the XT, this was the non XT.

The link is about custom cards coming out, PCWorld just happened to only get the cheaper card from AMD for review, which is why I linked the XT video, as they are both launching today.

"We received the more affordable Sapphire Pulse RX 5700 for testing"
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
12,630
Pretty much every review said the plain 5700 was capped around 1800.

"This allowed the 5700 to average a core frequency of 1780 MHz at 70 degrees. Unfortunately, we were unable to push the core any higher as there appears to be a frequency cap at the moment and it’s not clear if AMD will remove it."

https://www.techspot.com/review/1870-amd-radeon-rx-5700/

I was able to push to core higher with the registry mod. That said, my card really did not have the ability to maintain those clocks without a game doing a CTD. Not much higher than the already capped 1850, anyways.
 

ccityinstaller

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Messages
4,241
I was able to push to core higher with the registry mod. That said, my card really did not have the ability to maintain those clocks without a game doing a CTD. Not much higher than the already capped 1850, anyways.


I totally forgot abouy that..As far as the washer mod, it seems to offer some better performance for literal pennies. Pair it with a good TIM and you should be able to get the temps down a fair amount.

My 5700xt 50th had some super thick TIM...it covered the die fully but I think there was way too much there.

I never tried the washer mod myself since I knew the cooler was coming off for a block.
 

Uvaman2

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
3,143
And how in the hell does that make any sense? The 5700XT uses a little more power than the 2070 Super while being SLOWER. And the non reference cards use even MORE power while still not quite matching the 2070 Super. :rolleyes:

https://tpucdn.com/review/asus-radeon-rx-5700-xt-strix-oc/images/relative-performance_3840-2160.png

https://tpucdn.com/review/asus-radeon-rx-5700-xt-strix-oc/images/power-gaming-peak.png

https://tpucdn.com/review/asus-radeon-rx-5700-xt-strix-oc/images/power-gaming-average.png


"With roughly 250 W, power draw is a bit higher than for competing NVIDIA cards"

It seems perfectly legit to be worried about big Navi power draw when the relatively small 5700 XT is already using that kind of power.
Pc world measured whole system, which is easy to measure accurately... This card only measurements seem questionable becuase of that.
 

viivo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 7, 2005
Messages
1,698
My reference 5700 XT is doing amazingly well after re-pasting and increasing clamping pressure. But then I'm guessing no TIM at all would have been an improvement over the crooked stock thermal pad that didn't cover the whole die.
 

Ready4Dis

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
2,491
My reference 5700 XT is doing amazingly well after re-pasting and increasing clamping pressure. But then I'm guessing no TIM at all would have been an improvement over the crooked stock thermal pad that didn't cover the whole die.
Good to know, I always apply my own thermal paste on my CPUs but haven't done so on GPUs, but it makes sense. Maybe help the therms a bit from mass production.
 

GoodBoy

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 29, 2004
Messages
2,257
The 260 Super is slower than a 2070, which is slower then a 5700XT, which is a few percent slower then a 2070 Super (while costing 35+% less)so I'm not really sure what you are on about..

The linked review was on a 5700, not a 5700XT. The linked card is $359, the 2060 super can be found for $399. The super 2060 fits between this card and the 5700XT in performance.

So "what I was on about" was that its an option to spend $40 more, and get the faster card. This isn't rocket science. And the 2060 Super has overclocking headroom that the 5700 and 5700XT do not have...

And if someone is on a tighter budget, they should be happy with the $359 card, and that the extra $9 is worth it (in card longevity if anything, plus it's quieter, even if not much faster).
 

GoodBoy

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 29, 2004
Messages
2,257
TechJesus said:
"The Sapphire has a real cooler..."
"At the end of the day all FPS is equal between reference and the pulse"
 
Last edited:

ccityinstaller

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Messages
4,241
There have been posts with 5700XTs with 2100+ on the core so I don't know what you're talking about the 5700s not having headroom..........

https://hothardware.com/news/amd-radeon-rx-5700-xt-22ghz-overclock-heavy-duty-cooling

GoodBoy , it was my mistake...i see that vid cap showing the 5700xt and got confused. Sorry if I caused any offense.

You make a good point that the 5700 is cheaper then the 2060 super...the 5700/2060/5700xt cover the $299-$400ish market well, but I really wish there cheaper.


Then again we all do. AMD really needs to get NAVI 14 out, so as to force Nvidia to adopt yo price pressure or release a new budget Ti depending on where 14 slots in.


As for headroom, they have plenty with decent cooling...Both noko and myself here alone can do 2150+ on the crappy blower. If I turn the blower up, I could maintain 2200Mhz with the PL mod.

I just got my rads flushed, and scrubbed all my fittings and pump housing. Going to finish the GPU block and then hopefully get it finished.
 
Top