# AMD Radeon RX 5700



## W1zzard (Jul 7, 2019)

The Radeon RX 5700 is the second Navi card AMD launches today. Priced at $349, it is more affordable than anything NVIDIA has to offer in this segment, yet brings more performance to the table than the RX Vega 64. What really impressed us is the greatly improved power efficiency that's just as good as many NVIDIA Turing cards.

*Show full review*


----------



## birdie (Jul 7, 2019)

> We were shocked to see Radeon RX 5700 beat the power efficiency of many NVIDIA Turing cards. AMD has achieved the unthinkable!



Um, no. A large part of NVIDIA's *12nm* die is dedicated to Ray Tracing/Tensor Cores which means Turing is a lot more power efficient as seen by the GTX 1660 Ti card which is comfortably beating AMD offerings in this metric.

While I applaud AMD for Navi it leaves a bitter taste in the mouth:

In less than a year from now they will release _proper_ RDNA with hardware ray tracing acceleration. These cards are yet another example of AMD saying "We are not dead" in the GPU business.
These are middle-range cards, right? Then why are they priced so high? $50 less and they would have been hugely successful.
Why has AMD chosen such prices (even after the last-minute price adjustment) that AMD offering match NVIDIA's almost exactly while not offering accelerated RT? This reeks of collusion.
The blower fan is idiotic and must have died years ago - AMD lovers who are eager to get NAVI should wait for custom designs.
"High multi-monitor power draw" - seriously? A brand new GPU arch and you're still carrying this bug?


----------



## Frick (Jul 7, 2019)

Better than I expected actully. Now to see what the prices in Sweden will be.


----------



## Zubasa (Jul 7, 2019)

birdie said:


> Um, no. A large part of NVIDIA's *12nm* die is dedicated to Ray Tracing/Tensor Cores which means Turing is a lot more power efficient as seen by the GTX 1660 Ti card which is comfortably beating AMD offerings in this metric.


RTRT is off in all of the tests, so those RT cores are inactive this whole time.
Also if the RTRT is on all it means is the GPU hits the same TDP cap and clocks lower anyway.
So all it means is with RTRT on the perfomance / watt just goes down on RTX Turing.


----------



## Pumper (Jul 7, 2019)

So as expected. The $50 price difference vs 5700XT is too small - should be max $329, and the fan noise is unacceptable. DOA until we see aftermarket cards.


----------



## sutyi (Jul 7, 2019)

Pumper said:


> So as expected. The $50 price difference vs 5700XT is too small - should be max $329, and the fan noise is unacceptable. DOA until we see aftermarket cards.



Blower cards were and will be always noisy compared to AIB cards. I'll wait for Sapphire PULSE two fan axial and get one when its on sale. GTX 1080 per for 300US would've been nice on launch, but in this market... even this I consider a small miracle.


----------



## unikin (Jul 7, 2019)

Was 36 watts multi-monitor power draw tested with 2 or more monitors?  would it draw the same 36W or more power when 5-6 monitors are connected?  I'm not worried about power consumption per se, but the fan noise that comes with GPU being warmer. Thanks.


----------



## W1zzard (Jul 7, 2019)

unikin said:


> Was 36 watts multi-monitor power draw tested with 2 or more monitors?  would it draw the same 36W or more power when 5-6 monitors are connected?  I'm not worried about power consumption per se, but the fan noise that comes with GPU being warmer. Thanks.


2 monitors as listed in the article. I haven't tested it, but don't think it'll go higher


----------



## Dristun (Jul 7, 2019)

Gotta buy a new card and a CPU this summer before moving to study to the EU in September (prices in Russia are anywhere between 10-20% lower so I'd rather not wait), so absent some miracle Sapphire Pulse launch at the same msrp in August it looks like the videocard part of my money will go to nvidia this time. Shame about the blower!
At least the new Ryzens look super good and meet all of my expectations.


----------



## B-Real (Jul 7, 2019)

birdie said:


> These are middle-range cards, right? Then why are they priced so high? $50 less and they would have been hugely successful


True, it would be great if it was selling for $300, but NV just released the 2060 Super for $50 more and not for the same price as with the 2070S and 2080S.


----------



## Metroid (Jul 7, 2019)

Thanks for the review, this review show us why amd released the radeon vii before navi.


----------



## steen (Jul 7, 2019)

birdie said:


> A large part of NVIDIA's *12nm* die is dedicated to Ray Tracing/Tensor Cores...



Is it? How much %, roughly?

@W1zzard, bizarre V/clk curve indeed. Fan table is screwed up too.


----------



## wheresmycar (Jul 7, 2019)

impressed by the value and performance and decent improvement in power efficiency. A nice kick in the teeth for $$-hungry NVIDIA.

When it comes to power draw and thermals (https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-5700/32.html), the 5700 looks decent but the XT variant hitting load temps @ 92c?? That's a little on the heavy side for my personal liking.

When can we expect AIB partner cards to emerge? As much as I fancy the performance advantages with NAVI i'm equally attentive to noise levels and thermals for a more complete solution. Something I'm more than happy to splash out an additional 25-50 bucks before considering blower type cards and undervolting.


----------



## IceShroom (Jul 7, 2019)

birdie said:


> Um, no. A large part of NVIDIA's *12nm* die is dedicated to Ray Tracing/Tensor Cores which means Turing is a lot more power efficient as seen by the GTX 1660 Ti card which is comfortably beating AMD offerings in this metric.


When you test a non DXR game those unit dont work and gives false power consumption for the card. RTX cards power consumption should be measured running a game that supports DXR.

Is those temperature for Navi is for junction temperature or surface temperature like other GPUs??


----------



## Solaris17 (Jul 7, 2019)

I am absolutely blown away by AMD with Navi and Zen2. I am so happy for them. @W1zzard  the reviews specifically for Zen2 and Navi, wow what can I say? If I thought they were comprehensive before, this is on a whole other level. Thank you very much for spending the hundreds of hours this must have took!


----------



## Vya Domus (Jul 7, 2019)

The 5700XT is indeed clocked way out of it's optimal power envelope as I suspected. Navi is very efficient otherwise so great prospects for potentially scaled up chips.


----------



## unikin (Jul 7, 2019)

Uf, prices in EU are a bit higher (€369/419 ->$417/473 MindFactory).  I hope it's just temporary, otherwise I see no reason to buy Navi.


----------



## 0x4452 (Jul 7, 2019)

1% better perf per dollar compared to last year's 2060, while noisier and no ray tracing.

Honestly, other than fanboyism, why is this card exciting other than providing NVIDIA with competition?


----------



## wheresmycar (Jul 7, 2019)

0x4452 said:


> 1% better perf per dollar compared to last year's 2060, while noisier and no ray tracing.
> 
> Honestly, other than fanboyism, why is this card exciting other than providing NVIDIA with competition?



That's odd, how is the "performance per dollar" worked out?? Both the 2060 and 5700 are currently priced at $350 and yet the 5700 beats the 2060 by a pretty sizeable margin in 3 of my favourite and currently played titles:

About 22% increase in FPS with Battlefield V

11%+ in Metro Exodus

13%+ in Far Cry 5

Performance-wise the 5700 gets my vote but i'm a little baffled as to how the PPD is worked out

p.s. I'm far from a fan-boy and I have no desire in buying loud-ass blower cards, although interested in AIB partner cards to see how they stack up in terms of thermals and acoustics. I'm just glad AMD's got a foot through the mid-performer door in challenging Nvidias so-called "relative pricing" which is better defined to day-light-robbery.


----------



## ShurikN (Jul 7, 2019)

A proper aftermarket cooler will probably make this the best GPU in class. Although it should have been around 300USD on launch.


----------



## unikin (Jul 7, 2019)

Why such a difference between guru3d review of RX 5700 XT and TechPowerUp? Driver issues?
RX 5700 XT is trading blows with GTX 1080TI in their test:








						AMD Radeon RX 5700 and 5700 XT review
					

In this review, we look at the two new graphics cards released by AMD, the Radeon 5700 and 5700 XT. Both cards are based on the new NAVI GPU, fabricated at a 7nm node and capable of battling with NVI... DX12: Metro: EXODUS




					www.guru3d.com


----------



## biffzinker (Jul 7, 2019)

After reading through @W1zzard's review for the Radeon RX 5700 I get the impression AMD might of rushed the release.


----------



## Assimilator (Jul 7, 2019)

Ugh, once again good hardware that is prevented from possibly being great by broken firmware and drivers. And once again, AMD's attempt to ape NVIDIA's lucratively successful Founder's Edition program falls flat on its face.

Now before all the fanboys rush in to beat me to death with the old and tired "AMD will fix it later/fine wine" comments: I buy computer hardware as if the company that sells it will go out of business tomorrow. If that happened to AMD, I would be stuck with a card with broken fan curves, broken undervolting, broken overclocking. NVIDIA... not so much.

Broken s**t on launch day, whether software or hardware, is indefensible (yeah I'm looking at you, so called "AAA" games/publishers). I remember the HD 5850 I bought on launch day... it just worked. Will we ever see that AMD again, I wonder?

Anyway, looks like it's (once again) up to AMD board partners to produce graphics cards that people actually want to buy. Let's just hope that AMD doesn't pull another Vega - hopefully this time, they have more than a dozen working Navi 10 GPUs that they can supply to partners.

Oh, and remember all those people crying about lack of SLI on RTX 2060? They seem to be very quiet about no CrossFire on these cards... I wonder why?


----------



## Aerpoweron (Jul 8, 2019)

To be honest Assimilator, i trust AMD more in getting the drivers for the new cards fixed than i would nvidia. Nvidia has just screwed the customers too many times for me. Sadly AMD has learned that a little from them.
And i can remember when a buddy bought a GTX680 just a few days after release. It took almost a year until the drivers worked reasonably well on that card.
Both companies have had rushed launches pushed on them from the marketing departent. But i have to agree that AMD should have learned something from the Radeon VII launch.
And the lack of SLI or Crossfire support? It is just not relevant any longer the GPUs are powerful enough. I argued that even when Nvidia dropped the support. It might be nice for Benchmarking, but most games barely support it any longer. 

Don't forget that AMD has also pulled of a great CPU launch. So some slack should be given if not everything is perfect. I hope they can improve on Navi to catch Nvidia sooner or later. Navi is a step in the right direction.


----------



## EatingDirt (Jul 8, 2019)

0x4452 said:


> 1% better perf per dollar compared to last year's 2060, while noisier and no ray tracing.
> 
> Honestly, other than fanboyism, why is this card exciting other than providing NVIDIA with competition?



Most mid-ish range cards are unexciting. Enthusiasts love high end cards, they're like fast cars, super fast and  most people can't actually afford them. So yes, this card is boring, but it's not a bad card because like you stated, competition is great, it brings down the price for of these GPU's for all of us... also because raytracing on a 2060 is basically worthless: Techsport DXR Review


----------



## BLu3HaZe (Jul 8, 2019)

> Their secret sauce is undervolting—the chip runs at below 1 V all the time, whereas the XT card runs at up to 1.2 V.



@W1zzard - Can it also be that RX5700 is running more like the standard voltage for TSMC 7nm and 5700XT is overvolted to get the maximum performance close to 2GHz core clock or is ~1.1V still the baseline for 7nm? I can remember my 28nm cards running around the same voltages under load and I thought operational voltage trends down with smaller nodes.



Assimilator said:


> Oh, and remember all those people crying about lack of SLI on RTX 2060? They seem to be very quiet about no CrossFire on these cards... I wonder why?



Did CrossFire ever really work even as well as SLI (which wasn't even good to begin with)? And the abysmal power consumption and heat of older Radeon cards meant it was impractical for even the 1% who wanted multi-GPU.

For RX5700, it would have made more sense but looking at the state of their drivers, it may take a while before things get stable and also, if two of these upper mid-rangers would compete with a 4096/320/128 flagship later, that would harm their top end sales.


----------



## W1zzard (Jul 8, 2019)

BLu3HaZe said:


> Can it also be that RX5700 is running more like the standard voltage for TSMC 7nm and 5700XT is overvolted to get the maximum performance close to 2GHz core clock or is ~1.1V still the baseline for 7nm?


I have no idea. But all V-F curve points bunched up right to each other on 5700 suggests that's the special one, not the 5700 XT, where it's the expected stairs pattern


----------



## s3thra (Jul 8, 2019)

Great review W1zzard, thank you. Hopefully by the time the board partners come out with their custom cooling designs, the other issues will have been ironed out by then. Drivers will have improved also, making this a potentially much better card than what we have here today.

Not ideal at the moment, but this card seems to lay down a good foundation for something that will inevitably be improved upon down the track.

Just looking inside AMD's own product stack, and given that I guess this card is a replacement for both the RX 570 and Vega 56 by combining the SKUs, it improves on Polaris for performance (blows it out of the water!), and it improves on Vega 56 by being much more power efficient. Again, thermals won't be fully realized until the board partners get their hands on it, but a fundamental improvement for AMD all round.


----------



## FeelinFroggy (Jul 8, 2019)

AMD has not released a $200 GPU in 2.5 years.


----------



## BLu3HaZe (Jul 8, 2019)

W1zzard said:


> I have no idea. But all V-F curve points bunched up right to each other on 5700 suggests that's the special one, not the 5700 XT, where it's the expected stairs pattern



Great point, totally overlooked that! Guess we'll have to wait and see how nVidia 7nm behaves in a couple of months or see if AMD fixes the voltage scaling on 5700.


----------



## wheresmycar (Jul 8, 2019)

Assimilator said:


> Ugh, once again good hardware that is prevented from possibly being great by broken firmware and drivers. And once again, AMD's attempt to ape NVIDIA's lucratively successful Founder's Edition program falls flat on its face.
> 
> Now before all the fanboys rush in to beat me to death with the old and tired "AMD will fix it later/fine wine" comments: I buy computer hardware as if the company that sells it will go out of business tomorrow. If that happened to AMD, I would be stuck with a card with broken fan curves, broken undervolting, broken overclocking. NVIDIA... not so much.
> 
> ...



lol you sound serious!!

No optimism whatsoever?


----------



## Assimilator (Jul 8, 2019)

wheresmycar said:


> lol you sound serious!!
> 
> No optimism whatsoever?



I'm optimistic that third parties will be able to deliver RX 5700 series products that enthusiasts actually want to buy. I just wish that AMD had been the one to deliver those products.


----------



## mechtech (Jul 8, 2019)

Nice review W1z, thanks.

I'm assuming you reported all the weird issues to AMD?


----------



## medi01 (Jul 9, 2019)

FeelinFroggy said:


> AMD has not released a $200 GPU in 2.5 years.


AMD's under $200 GPU still beats 1050/1050Ti/1650.


----------



## rhythmeister (Jul 9, 2019)

Seemingly not much of a reason to upgrade from a GTX 1070Ti then, disappointing 



medi01 said:


> AMD's under $200 GPU still beats 1050/1050Ti/1650.


Remember the REAL 1650...the ATi X1650 XT? ​


----------



## kapone32 (Jul 9, 2019)

0x4452 said:


> 1% better perf per dollar compared to last year's 2060, while noisier and no ray tracing.
> 
> Honestly, other than fanboyism, why is this card exciting other than providing NVIDIA with competition?



You just answered your own question



FeelinFroggy said:


> AMD has not released a $200 GPU in 2.5 years.



Has anyone?


----------



## John Naylor (Jul 9, 2019)

wheresmycar said:


> That's odd, how is the "performance per dollar" worked out??   Both the 2060 and 5700 are currently priced at $350 and yet the 5700 beats the 2060 by a pretty sizeable margin in 3 of my favourite and currently played titles:



I find the way "performance per dollar" is normally done a weak barometer of value.  Also "performance ranking".  Lets tackle the 2nd one 1st

1.  In the performance summary, TPU lists the 5700 as 100% and the 2060 at 96% @ 1080p.   That's "outta the box"; do you run your GPUs at the speeds they left the factory ?  If not the data is not relevant to you ... to most.  The 5700 overclocked 2.6%.  All data from TPU reviews

5700 = 100% x 102.6 / 100 = 102.6
2060 = 95% x 109.5 / 100 = 105.1

5700 = 100% x 102.6 / 100 = 102.6
2060 = 95% x 109.5 / 100 = 104.0  .... 2060 is faster @ 1440p

5700 = 100% x 102.6 / 100 = 102.6
2060 = 94% x 109.5 / 100 = 102.9  .... 2060 is faster @ 2160p

So if you are like 95+ % of this forum's audience, you have to do a little math to see what is best for you.  Since the 2xx series, the historical difference between AMDs and Nvidias OC ability has been large and it's a significant undertaking to account for that in reviews, especially considering "your mileage may vary".

2.  Performance per dollar is affected not only by the above but but "real cost" .... real purchase + ongoing, ....  Let's do initial 1st:

You are building a new 1080p build and set a budget of $1200.  Now is your purchase price $350 for the card  ? ... or is it $1200 for the build ?  You can not play games with just a video card.    A faster card makes the whole system go faster, not just the card.  Let's say the 2060 is available for $360 and the 5700 is available for $350.  Will multiply both by 1000 so as to get numbers left of the decimal

5700 = 102.6 x 1000 / $1200 = 85.5
2060 = 105.1 x 1000 / $1210 = 86.9 ... better value

Now of course if this is an upgrade, argument could be made either way.  In it's truest sense should be done the same way, ... on the other hand, it's probably just as valid to say,...  'that's history' in which case the value is new card purchase versus old card sale.

3.  But is that it ?

Power usage and heat are factors and for the 1st time in almost a decade, AMD has kept it close here.   In the past, this killed AMD w/ cards > 100 watts above the competition .... but now with just a difference of 10 watts:

a)  You don't need to spend extra money on a bigger PSU.
b)  You don't need to spend money on extra fan(s) to handle the extra heat
c)  Difference in power costs over the build's lifetime @ average US rate of $ 0.11 per kw are now under $10

So with the 5700 you can pretty much ignore this... not with the Radeon VII.  This is the biggest change with the 5700 series and AMD deserves a big pat on the back here

Secondary considerations ...

5700 = 83C / 2060 = 73C ... that's 10C
5700 = 43 dbA / 2060 = 32 dbA ...* that's 2.14 times louder*.

Unfortunately, to ask a reviewer to do all this for us is a monumental task.  Would be great to have a performance value tool that pulled in all the referenced numbers including current web pricing.  I have done a spreadsheet version with the upper tier cards but it still requires manual input and doesn't just spit out an answer.

My view of the 5700:

a)  It's a wake up call for nVidia ... in a sense.   AMD almost matched nVidia in power efficiency and I think this is the biggest takeaway
b)  AIB 2060s are selling as low as $294.99 on newegg.   Tho with both cards OC'd, nVidia gets the win, it's close enough that we can ignore the performance difference.    But with AIB 2060s costing less, the reference 5700 can not maintain the $350.    I have since seen MSI, Powercolor, Gigabyte etc cards and they are the same reference design.
c)  Given the sound and temperature differences ... I'd want to save at least $50 to put up with just the noise on its own but I am very discerning oin that issue.  For most buyers tho, I think they might bite at $25 cheaper.
d)  OTOH, every 5700 card we have seen so far is a reference design .... on the 2060 side, AIB designs come with better cooler, passive 0 dbA idle cooling and improved performance.   That's worth another $25.

In summary, looking at the 2060s position, the 5700 needs to be priced at $20 - $50 less than the AIB 2060 in order to appeal to all but the most ardent AMD fans.   But now we already have AIB 2060 Supers... and I am talking the 'top end' AIB ones, selling for $399.  At that price, it's real hard to make an argument for the 5700.

Nevertheless, this was a "shot over the bow" so to speak by AMD.  They didn't win a battle but they showed they are getting close and this is important.   Unfortunately, nVidias profit margins are much higher than AMDs ... they could more easily afford a $50 price cut ... AMD has already done that, it will be a lot harder to do that again.

It must be considered that this is only AMDs 1st shot at this die size; that is important.   It can be reasonably expected their next iteration,( their "Super" if you will)  will see a substantial improvement.




Assimilator said:


> I'm optimistic that third parties will be able to deliver RX 5700 series products that enthusiasts actually want to buy. I just wish that AMD had been the one to deliver those products.



You think this will happen ?  I read that they would be out in August.  But now w/ just about every AMD card parttner already out with reference designs on newgg, I'm 2nd guessing that.   If so that might be a game changer but they won't be able to sell them much above the reference pricing given current AIB 20160 pricing




medi01 said:


> AMD's under $200 GPU still beats 1050/1050Ti/1650.



Good 580 models are now at $185 ... so it fits that price break ... but it's seeing competition from the 1660 now which is down to $215 ..... that's 18% faster for a 16% increase in price.... and that's w/o factoring in the 1660s better OC ability


----------



## kapone32 (Jul 10, 2019)

John Naylor said:


> I find the way "performance per dollar" is normally done a weak barometer of value.  Also "performance ranking".  Lets tackle the 2nd one 1st
> 
> 1.  In the performance summary, TPU lists the 5700 as 100% and the 2060 at 96% @ 1080p.   That's "outta the box"; do you run your GPUs at the speeds they left the factory ?  If not the data is not relevant to you ... to most.  The 5700 overclocked 2.6%.  All data from TPU reviews
> 
> ...


----------



## medi01 (Jul 10, 2019)

John Naylor said:


> [let me compare blower type piece of shit cooler driven chip of one company, to overpriced AIBs of another]
> 
> So if you are like 95+ % of this forum's audience, you have to...


Wait for OC results of 5700 AIBs, wondering why MSI alone is preparing 7 (yep, seven) variations of 5700/XT Navi.

Oh, and in TPUs tests AIB supers did like 3-4% more perf, for 10% more power consumption and 10-15% higher price.


----------



## kapone32 (Jul 10, 2019)

Apparently AMD has the voltage control locked on these cards. However it looks like the cards will run consistently at whatever the clock is set to most of the time too. I do believe that we are not seeing the true potential of these GPUs. It has been stated and I agree that it would further eat into the Vega cards as they would have to sell them at a loss (HBM2) so they have locked the cards (5700). Apparently the 5700XT can OC to over 2000 MHZ which is insane. So maybe the Vega 7 was the last iteration of Vega. Well at least they support crossfire though but there are not enough people into that to keep it going.


----------



## medi01 (Jul 10, 2019)

kapone32 said:


> Apparently AMD has the voltage control locked on these cards.



Hmm...








						Undervolting - Seite 26 - Hardwareluxx
					

Zweimal RNDA in Navi: Die Radeon RX 5700 und Radeon RX 5700 XT im Test




					www.hardwareluxx.de


----------



## Assimilator (Jul 10, 2019)

medi01 said:


> Hmm...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Posting things not in English on an English forum... bold move Cotton.


----------



## medi01 (Jul 11, 2019)

Assimilator said:


> Posting things not in English on an English forum... bold move Cotton.


Given how widespread the Chrome browser is, I expect people on tech forum to know about right click => translate.


----------



## Assimilator (Jul 11, 2019)

medi01 said:


> Given how widespread the Chrome browser is, I expect people on tech forum to know about right click => translate.



I expect someone on a tech forum to know that not everyone uses Chrome.

For everyone who doesn't speak German, the above link translated: https://translate.google.com/transl...on-rx-5700-und-radeon-rx-5700-xt-im-test.html


----------



## wheresmycar (Jul 11, 2019)

Appreciate the detailed explanation.

I was under the presumption that PPD was based on actual cost / stock FPS performance. Now factoring in Nvidias overclocking headroom, it all makes sense! 



> Secondary considerations ...
> 
> 5700 = 83C / 2060 = 73C ... that's 10C
> 5700 = 43 dbA / 2060 = 32 dbA ...* that's 2.14 times louder*.



This is what caught me off guard with AMD's newer cards - actually quite disappointed. Initially, all the news of lower power draw, 7nm, blah blah had me convinced we'd be seeing much better improvements with the founder cards (although I was hoping for AMD to sail past blower cards). For me personally, the quieter the card the better hence a robust cooling solution is always worth spending a little more for ($25/+). Disappointed but hoping the AIBs offer significantly better overall performance. 



> It must be considered that this is only AMDs 1st shot at this die size; that is important. It can be reasonably expected their next iteration,( their "Super" if you will) will see a substantial improvement.



I hope so! Nvidia needs a bigger kick in the teeth IMO for more equitable options (esp. at the higher end)


----------



## Toddni8022 (Jul 12, 2019)

Can’t seem to find the answer anywhere but do both the 5700 and the 5700 xt have  led lighting I know the Xt does?


----------



## W1zzard (Jul 12, 2019)

The 5700 non-XT does not have LED lighting


----------

