DudeRandom84 has benchmarked two new games on the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition. According to the results, and similarly to DOOM, the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition runs both Battlefield 1 and The Witcher 3 faster than the NVIDIA GTX1080.
DudeRandom84 run both games in 4K at max settings (he completely disabled the Hairworks effects in The Witcher 3 in order to offer an apple-to-apple comparison).
As we can see, in both titles, the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition was about 4-5 frames faster than the NVIDIA GTX1080. There were some scenes during which the NVIDIA GTX1080 was able to slightly surpass the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition, however – and for the most part – AMD’s new workstation graphics card was faster.
Naturally, and as with DOOM, the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition was unable to come close to the GTX1080Ti. Moreover, the performance difference between these two cards was around 20-25%.
We’ve already said that the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition is a graphics card that is not meant for gamers. Still, and since AMD has not revealed any benchmarks as of yet, this will give us a slight idea of what we can expect from the gaming variant of the Vega GPU.
AMD will release RX Vega at the end of this month, so stay tuned for more!
John is the founder and Editor in Chief at DSOGaming. He is a PC gaming fan and highly supports the modding and indie communities. Before creating DSOGaming, John worked on numerous gaming websites. While he is a die-hard PC gamer, his gaming roots can be found on consoles. John loved – and still does – the 16-bit consoles, and considers SNES to be one of the best consoles. Still, the PC platform won him over consoles. That was mainly due to 3DFX and its iconic dedicated 3D accelerator graphics card, Voodoo 2. John has also written a higher degree thesis on the “The Evolution of PC graphics cards.”
Contact: Email
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Vega-C…ion-1232684/3/
I’m just looking at the gaming benchmarks and, as of now, maxed out @1600MHz it’s still on average behind a stock 1080.
@Auto it’s closer to the stock 1070.
Fury X = 56.8
1070 (stock ~1683) = 64.8
Vega FE (Auto/stock) = 69.6
Vega FE (maxed out @1600MHz) = 75.1
1080 (stock ~1733) = 79.6
Titan Xp (stock ~1582) = 100
so basiclly even a cheap aftermarket 1080 easily demolishes the Vega
AMD is truely dead…
Not bad for a pro card. But I’m not interested in a pro card for gaming, as it’s mostly irrelevant. Let’s see what we get at the end of the month.
Really? Not bad for $1300 card vs. a $500 card?!? Who cares about if it is for “pros” or not. The real test would be pitting it Vs. the Titan XP. At least they’re in the same price range…
It appears RX Vega will slightly outperform a GTX 1080. It’ll have to be priced right to be a win for AMD. Time will tell.
/edit: sorry, the reply was for Kyle.
Time will tell, couldn’t agree more.
A ACTUAL pro card from Nvidia runs games just as well as its GTX version. So very VERY bad for a “pro” card.
Although AMD does not even sell this as a pro card… It is a pro-sumer card. Like titan. AMD’s pro line is called “Pro” lol.
Yeah, but nVidia’s Titan XP is based on Pascal, an architecture which has more mature drivers. Vega has new tech; it might not be fully implemented in AMD’s drivers yet (you know their driver division is a bit slow to say something).
Last I heard was that in a pair of heavy compute test the Vega Frontier Edition was outperforming the Titan XP (though I read that a month ago if I recall correctly).
Oh so now all of a sudden AMD’d driver division is slow again 0-o
I have been hearing so many AMD fans claim the opposite since a year but whenever it suits you they are slow again. Convenient.
Its a year newer GPU with SIXTEEN GB HBM2. it can barely keep up with a 1 year and 3 months old car.
And i thought all you AMDuh’s claimed Nvidia gimps their drivers and now all of a sudden they mature just like fine wine ?
I really cannot take you people serious :*)
When did I claim that nVidia gimped their drivers? I’ve read a lot of outrage supposedly because nVidia dropped Kepler early and their cards were taking a beating VS old AMD GCN cheaper cards in new games, but I never took the time to read all those long threads. Even though I owned a GTX 770 before my GTX 1070.
As I remember I said that AMD drivers no longer suck, as some people like to say. And that’s the truth actually, they do not suck. They’re a bit slow to deliver, granted, but they’re getting better. I suffered that some years back when I decided to go for a GTX 660 over the HD7870; a month after I got the 660, AMD released a GCN performance driver and the whole line saw improvements. The HD 7870 gained some extra 20% performance and was wiping the floor over nVidia’s equivalent offer, the GTX 660 that I’d just got.
And keep calling me AMD fan and AMDuh; I thought you were above petty name-calling. Funny thing: my current VGA is from green team, as I believe I told you.
/edit: In fact, my three last cards have been from nVidia.
Tell me when have AMDuh’s not claimed gimped drivers for Nvidia but fine wine maturing drivers for amd ?
Get real.
Right. After you tell me when I claimed that nVidia gimped their drivers.
If i find the time and will to go through your posting history i will show you what you yourself already know. That you have.
Sure nViduh, whatever. I’ve tried to stay clear of the whole ‘nVidia is gimping Kepler and favoring Maxwell’ argument as best as I can, but who knows, I might have slipped before. Guess you’ll tell me. I can always say that I was young and reckless 😛
In the meanwhile the article where I ‘heard’ that in two heavy compute test Vega FE was performing better than Titan XP was approved by the moderator here. You can find it a few posts above.
“I might have slipped before. Guess you’ll tell me. I can always say that I was young and reckless :P”
I see you are already trying to cover your self up went into full DMG CTRL bracing for impact.
Jeez dude, that was a joke. I was just trying to lighten up the mood there. Is this so important to you? I mean, if you prove me wrong, then you’re right and I’m wrong; It’s not like I’m losing a finger or a hand. Don’t see the big deal.
Now, if I was serious about this, I would be betting some pie. Lemon pie.
”Its a year newer GPU with SIXTEEN GB HBM2. it can barely keep up with a 1 year and 3 months old car.”
Actually, Pascal has still Maxwell base, so practically they should share optimizations as well. Pascal is just shrunk down improved Maxwell, made on high frequency process.
same is true for vega, its basically polaris with a die shrink and some improvements.
Sort of. Vega is indeed FuryX running about 55% higher clocks, but with a lot of new tech under the hood that may not be fully implemented driver side.
No but Vega is Fury. Considering that it has the exact same IPC.
Yeah you “heard”.
Well, I said in between brackets (last part of the post) I read it. I’ll search and post a link in the next post, it’ll take some time since DSO mods have to approve the link.
well its bad coz the title seems reversed. 1080 in the video is ahead of vega FE.
Skimmed thru the Witcher 3 video and it seems that the 1080 runs a few frames faster in many situations and the same framerate in others. Not that it matters in real use but you can’t say it is faster if it is mostly just on par or tiny bit slower.
+1; 1080 runs Witcher faster. Since a long time… which makes the AMD card basically obsolete before even here…
Maybe drivers can change that, but meh, next generation Nvidia will be here sooner or later also.
To be fair though, The Witcher has always been a game that favors Nvidia.
So?? 1080 is more then a year old by now…
still irrelevant
the vega is a 1000$ card and the 1080TI is 700$
unless people buy this card for mining…
Hey John… Watch the video again! The 1080 was faster at ALL TIMES in the Witcher 3! What are you talking about the Vega was faster?!?! Seriously, watch the video again man! Yes, in Battlefield the Vega was a bit faster. But 100% the 1080 was ALWAYS about 2-5FPS ahead of the Vega… You need to double check your articles before you post them man.
He did this with the doom benchmark as well.
So much AMD fanboying this week. For a card no one will buy. It’s not even a workstation card, although you could buy 4 of them for the price of a Quadro. Next Nvidias will likely destroy the vegas I’m sure, within the next year.
Price is important for rx vega not how fast it is not how much power it take. And AMD have one win with ryzen, probably not much money left for GPU this year anyway. You know the thing about money nvidia have much more money intel too. Intel suck market with 4 cores forever. Nvidia jump ahead plenty just on pascal really. Sorry for my rubbish English.
“As we can see, in both titles, the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition was about 4-5 frames faster than the NVIDIA GTX1080. There were some scenes during which the NVIDIA GTX1080 was able to slightly surpass the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition, however”
LOL oh my :*)
Vega – the trainwreck
No worries man . Magic driver will increase its performance by %30
“poor volta”
/s
Not meant for gamers? It’s not a firepro card, it’s the AMD equivalent of a Titan. I guess the titan isn’t meant for gamers huh?
If the gamer card lands and runs comparably to the 1080 but is significantly cheaper, that’s a win for everyone. Let’s hope. We need the competition.
I’m not too optimistic when it comes to pricing of this line of cards. Will the vega have 8 and 16gb of HBM2 memory? if so how could AMD possibly keep the prices down? Before fanboys jump on this comment. understand this is only a question and as a PC gamer that has zero brand loyalty i would be extremely happy if the vega line was better than the 1080 for 100-150 dollars less.
It’ll likely cap out at 8GB. They seem pretty confident about HBCC, so it shouldn’t hit vram limits till 8k @ 8GB. The gpu being able to handle it is another story. Won’t find out till 3rd party reviews. Theres supposed to be other performance benefits due to less read/writes going on at the same time, so it sounds cool. I do hope their Lara Craft demo showing it using under 2GB of VRAM and getting damn good performance is what we’ll see, but marketing and all. Was a simulation and not actually gameplay so I’m hopeful but don’t expect it to blow our minds.
I think if i block every piece of garbage nvidia fanboy on this site i may no longer see comments.
AMD cards are so slow
AMD cards equivalent of a Titan can barely keep up with a 1080GTX
loool!!!
oh those are broken benchs lol, even a 1080 scores more thn this cinebench result. please put real benchs. check this 1070 cinebench its way faster thn your posted vega.
http://proclockers.com/reviews/video-cards/msi-geforce-gtx-1070-gaming-8g-graphics-card-review/page/0/5
Well, the test system is different. The article you linked was done on an i7 4790K, while the article I linked used a Ryzen 1800X.
Also, google ‘vega fe vs titan xp compute’ and you’ll find plenty of articles stating that the Vega FE beats the Titan XP in heavy compute workloads. And I mean, articles from last month, not from 2016 like the one you linked.
‘Please put real benchs’. Jeez. Kids this days.
the problem is you linked cinebench which is broken for both amd and nvidia compute gpus. that titan score was less thn the score a 1070 gets so i was pointing that these synthetic benches aint going to work. there is no point defending amd or even nvidia titan Xp. a 1080ti is enough even for content creators and it cost way less.
Ok then, point me to a link where there’s proof that Cinebench R15 is broken for those GPUs. And please, not something from last year.
Right now, what I see is that a different platform was used in those tests (an i7 4790 in yours and a Ryzen 1800X in the one I linked), which might be the cause for the disparity in the results. When you test anything between several GPUs, you make sure they all use the same system, else they will yield unreliable results.
And by the way, you only looked at the Cinebench score? The article says they ran several synthetic compute benchmarks, and Vega FE outperformed the Titan XP by 15% to 50%. Read the whole article please.