Radeon RX Vega 64 vs Radeon R9 Fury X Clock for Clock @ [H]

Discussion in 'AMD Flavor' started by Kyle_Bennett, Sep 12, 2017.

  1. oldmanbal

    oldmanbal Gawd

    Messages:
    743
    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2010
    Thank you for writing up this review Brent. Same clock analysis was exactly what I asked for in the thread for the lasy fury vega comparison which oddly people sort of laughed off at the time. Cutting through the generic and offering variation to the world of measuring fps will continue to differentiate hardocp from less apt sites. I believe your conclusion of brute force is a rather apt summary of the Vega launch. The relatively identical clock to clock numbers really underlines the lack of measurable innovation in the architechture that has been counted on for so long. With node shrinks being more engineering intensive, I can see AMD continuing to tow the line of brute force and delayed gpu releases. I'm not sure if this should be a celebration of how successful Vega is going to be, which essentially any mid to upper end gpu would be successful in this current environment, but more of a kudos to the Fury architecture and how much more potential was left on the table.
     
  2. Brent_Justice

    Brent_Justice [H] Video Card Managing Editor Staff Member

    Messages:
    17,683
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2000
    Power is talked about on the conclusion page.
     
    Curtis Grove likes this.
  3. Curtis Grove

    Curtis Grove n00bie

    Messages:
    2
    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2017
    Thanks! So a good 30% lower power at the same clocks (full system power). Not bad.
     
  4. Quartz-1

    Quartz-1 [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,278
    Joined:
    May 20, 2011
    Excellent work. But doesn't being able to cope with higher clocks count for something? You can't clock the Fury to Vega speeds, can you?
     
  5. Presbytier

    Presbytier [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,071
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    I want my Vega with four 8-pin power connectors and i want it now!
     
    Armenius likes this.
  6. Kyle_Bennett

    Kyle_Bennett El Chingón Staff Member

    Messages:
    46,482
    Joined:
    May 18, 1997
    Fully address in the article more than once. Reading is fundamental.
     
    Syntax_Error and GoldenTiger like this.
  7. primetime

    primetime [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,882
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2005
    Extremely well done article and explained quit a few things. I bet having double the vram helps in certain games as well, but thats a different subject.
     
  8. rgMekanic

    rgMekanic [H]ard|News Staff Member

    Messages:
    2,830
    Joined:
    May 13, 2013
    absolutely outstanding work Brent and Kyle, I really hope theres some performance in Vega waiting to be unlocked
     
  9. noko

    noko 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,870
    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    Two thumbs up on this article.

    I actually thought Vega would do worst from a number of opinions expressed on the forums. Brent did an outstanding investigation with good number of data points. If only a few tests were done it could look like a 6%-8% gain or virtually nothing. Just enough to nail it in other words.

    AMD: ,(just in case AMD can respond here)
    • Can we expect performance gains in future drivers that are significant as in 10% or more in current select games? Like GTA 5 or others?
    • Also gains from hardware ability in Vega not exposed or used yet in the drivers?
     
  10. noko

    noko 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,870
    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    That is exactly what I would like to know.
     
  11. Kranium

    Kranium Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    405
    Joined:
    May 27, 2011
    Awesome article guys! Very interesting stuff and you even went the extra mile to get the memory as close to parity as possible. Hard to argue with these results.
     
  12. KazeoHin

    KazeoHin [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,501
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Guys, guys... This is the biggest change in Radeon graphics architecture since GCN™.
     
  13. ole-m

    ole-m Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    176
    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2015
    As power draw is concerned it seems to be something for seriously warm countries.
    I'm down 67watts, up 67 mhz average clock, down a couple of DB of noise.
    And I like my room quite warm....

    Warmer climates = more heat = more voltage.
    Also add in some room for bad psu voltage ripples and you got a seriously high stock voltage.

    Any Vega 64 should do 1050 without anything done.
    I tested 1125 on mine(Samsung) and 1100 on V56 with V64 bios, and yes it's very much very stable.

    Although the benefits of HBM plummets past 1050mhz suggesting that these cards are not bandwidth starved as many "internet experts" seems to suggest.
    There doesn't seem to be good scaling above 1650 mhz core either.
     
  14. IKV1476

    IKV1476 Lurker

    Messages:
    77
    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2005
    Great article.
    But what is the deal with the pcie 3.0 dropping to 1.1?
    I would think 3.0 vs 2.0 vs 1.1 etc would be a pure bios setting that shouldn't change through software?
    Honestly I don't know much about how this works, but it just seems like it shouldn't do that.
    Any insight into this, from anyone, would be great.
     
  15. noko

    noko 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,870
    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    I don't know about that, at 1050 my 64 LC locks up in Supersition, 1020 ok. It will depend on the card on hand.

    Either way works to get parity on HBM bandwidth if stable.
     
  16. Mugato

    Mugato Gawd

    Messages:
    687
    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2014
    Very much appreciated Kyle and Brent, you guys deliver like always!

    I would have more to add but getting ready for elk hunting, no time for thoughts, just action!
     
  17. Ocellaris

    Ocellaris Ginger Ale, an alcoholic's best friend.

    Messages:
    17,955
    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2008
    PCIE slots drop down to slower modes to decrease power consumption.
     
    Armenius and razor1 like this.
  18. noko

    noko 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,870
    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    Yes that is normal and with the slower clocks that maybe getting the drivers to do that.
     
  19. cybereality

    cybereality 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,292
    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Looks all the new hot features are either disabled or not working properly. Can a driver update solve this? We'll see.
     
  20. noko

    noko 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,870
    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    I wonder if Microsoft will need to do an update to DX as well? Really only AMD can answer this. Or it just shows up in driver releases.
     
  21. Presbytier

    Presbytier [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,071
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    I think all of that is wishful thinking. Lets just accept Vega for what it is an overclocked Fiji with extra math capabilities. I don't think there will be a driver that magically unlocks all of these features. if it existed AMD would have launched with it. You only get one launch.
     
  22. cybereality

    cybereality 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,292
    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    If that is true, it seems like a huge wasted effort.
     
  23. Quartz-1

    Quartz-1 [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,278
    Joined:
    May 20, 2011
    I'm sorry, but having re-read the article, I still can't see it. All I see is the odd line like 'All performance advantages Vega 64 has over Fury X is down to clock speed differences.' (from page 9).
     
  24. Uvaman2

    Uvaman2 [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,270
    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    All AMD needs to do, glue and hammer in a Ryzen core inside a Vega core, to help it run faster.
     
  25. Kyle_Bennett

    Kyle_Bennett El Chingón Staff Member

    Messages:
    46,482
    Joined:
    May 18, 1997
    Would you like me to come to your house and read it out loud for you. I guess you are asking me to cut and paste from the article here? Reading is fundamental.
     
    Quartz-1 likes this.
  26. lostin3d

    lostin3d Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    237
    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2016
    Thanks Kyle and Brent for all these various AMD articles. I've been learning a lot about the newest gens from them. Having been team blue/green for so long now AMD is almost like a foreign language but I know that significant strides have been made in the last couple of years.

    Found it really interesting about the logic of power consumption for HBM2 in order to maintain proper power for the rest of the board. This goes with the logic Kyle spoke of in terms of OC'ing Vram and keeping it slightly lower than max to have higher stable core clocks. Having practiced that now and enjoying the benefits all I can say is thanks, convincing others isn't so easy. I'm now also beginning to understand the relevancy for voltage across the board tests you do for MOBO's and OC'ing. It's all relative.

    Hopefully AMD can get dev's to use some of those unused features you mentioned to further awaken these sleeping dragons!
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 13, 2017
  27. illli

    illli [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,046
    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2005
    As much as I like to root for the underdog, I am just scratching my head trying to figure out what they were doing these past 2 years. Just waiting for HBM2... and call it a day?
     
    _mockingbird and Stimpy88 like this.
  28. Nobu

    Nobu [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,110
    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    I'm thinking vega is testing ground for HBM2 and a step up from Fury for those who need a bit more oomph on the AMD side. I expect the next gen to leverage their findings with vega and take a more impressive leap in performance (or at least perf/watt).
     
  29. Armenius

    Armenius [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,866
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    This discussion about a magic driver seems oddly reminiscent of the HD 2900 XT.
     
    Syntax_Error and razor1 like this.
  30. GoodBoy

    GoodBoy Gawd

    Messages:
    884
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2004
    I love [H] for doing these kinds of reviews.

    My thoughts (without having read a bunch of whitepapers) is that portions of the pipeline have had some tweaks. Some game engines will benefit more than others.

    If the die shrink allowed for higher clocks, it is still an improvement.

    I think the pipeline type tweaks only result in a percent or 2 here and there in IPC increases. Worth doing but it's just not like the old days where performance jumped 50% or more each generation.
     
  31. bobzdar

    bobzdar Gawd

    Messages:
    969
    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    I mean, they got 8% in some games so there is deifnitely some improvement. If they can get that across the board, it would be pretty decent, but yeah I'm still struggling to see what took them 2 years unless they had to completely re-lay the thing out to get it to clock at 14nm...Which could be the case.
     
  32. Presbytier

    Presbytier [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,071
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    Completely out of my ass guess here, but I think they where blindsided by Pascals performance. If we look at what Vega is you realize it sacrifices cooling and power to go toe to toe with the GTX 1080, but when you you use the lower power bios and under-volt Vega suddenly it drops power and heat incredibly and still performs well but can no longer match a 1080. I think those lower power requirements was where Vega was originally designed at, but once the GTX 1080 came out they did not want to be seen as behind NVIDIA yet again.
     
    sabrewolf732 likes this.
  33. Stoly

    Stoly [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,201
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2005
    I was just about to say pretty much the same. I also think AMD was forced to increase the voltage and clockspeeds on Vega to meet its performance at the cost of powerdraw. As you point out Vega suddenly becomes much more power efficient once its under volted.
     
  34. Chebsy

    Chebsy Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    208
    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    That was an interesting comparison. There must have been some architecture improvements over the Fury X as there is no way in hell that the Fury X would reach Vega clock speeds. Whatever we all think about the Vega series GPU's, they are more competitive now that they have been for a long time which gives people a choice of the mid to high cards.
     
  35. fuzzylogik

    fuzzylogik Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    443
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2012
    Very interesting! Thanks for the review :)
     
  36. Folterknecht

    Folterknecht n00bie

    Messages:
    33
    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2016
    Brent_Justice Kyle_Bennett


    The two results with +8% for Vega got me thinking ... . Did you guys check memory usage with FuryX? I mean with only 4GB VRAM @1440p and relative high ingame settings wouldn't it be possible Fury is starting to run into memory limitations and has to start shuffle things around a bit, resulting in slightly lower performance? Crosstesting @1080p should shed some light on to it maybe.
     
  37. Presbytier

    Presbytier [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,071
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    I would be surprised very very few games use more then 4gb of VRAM. In fact Rise of the TOmb Raider can use up to 6gb and there was less than 1% difference between the cards there, so i would say VRAM does not factor very much into play if at all.
     
  38. J3RK

    J3RK [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,872
    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    I have Scotch and cigars.
     
    Armenius, Kyle_Bennett and razor1 like this.
  39. razor1

    razor1 JustReason is my Lover

    Messages:
    9,275
    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2005
    if its over 12 years aged, I'm there!
     
    Kyle_Bennett likes this.
  40. J3RK

    J3RK [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,872
    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Typically Macallan 18. (I go for highlands usually.) Lately though I've gotten back into wine a bit more, but it doesn't go quite as good with the cigars. (well, depending on the wine)
     
    Kyle_Bennett, razor1 and Algrim like this.