Thursday, July 6th 2017
AMD RX Vega Reportedly Beats GTX 1080; 5% Performance Improvement per Month
New benchmarks of an RX Vega engineering sample video card have surfaced. There have been quite a few benchmarks for this card already, which manifests with the 687F:C1 identifier. The new, GTX 1080 beating benchmark (Gaming X version, so a factory overclocked one) comes courtesy of 3D Mark 11, with the 687F:C1 RX Vega delivering 31,873 points in its latest appearance (versus 27,890 in its first). Since the clock speed of the 687F:C1 RX Vega has remained the same throughout this benchmark history, I think it's fair to say these improvements have come out purely at the behest of driver and/or firmware level performance improvements.
The folks at Videocardz have put together an interesting chart detailing the 687F:C1 RX Vega's score history since benchmarks of it first started appearing, around three months ago. This chart shows an impressive performance improvement over time, with AMD's high-performance GPU contender showing an improvement of roughly 15% since it was first benchmarked. That averages out at around a 5% improvement per month, which bodes well for the graphics card... At least in the long term. We have to keep in mind that this video card brings with it some pretty extensive differences from existing GPU architectures in the market, with the implementation of HBC (High Bandwidth Cache) and HBCC (High Bandwidth Cache Controller). These architectural differences naturally require large amounts of additional driver work to enable them to function to their full potential - full potential that we aren't guaranteed RX Vega GPUs will be able to deliver come launch time.
Sources:
Videocardz, 3D Mark's latest 687F:C1, 3D Mark's first 687F:C1
141 Comments on AMD RX Vega Reportedly Beats GTX 1080; 5% Performance Improvement per Month
BTW. I wonder if there will be any OC potential. If this Vega hits 1800, it might get interesting.
I think they meant another benchmark score when they wrote "compared to some older benchmark results (~3 months old) ", certainly not one of those 687F:C1 benchmark links listed.
Lowest score :
Highest score :
Let's say stock vs stock an RX Vega is 5% faster than a GTX 1080.
14 months late, with a TDP of 275W or higher compered to 180W, and at about the same price... just doesnt do justice.
The only way i could find RX Vega attractive is if it would actually be 100$ cheaper. There's nothing else really redeemable about this product. I don't even wanna imagine OC capabilities between the two, knowing how more than decent the GTX 1080 is
You bought a Ti, and ever since doing that, you've switched camps and gone full bashing/negativity; for months now. Is it not time to cease?
If i've got your point/emotional response to it all, i'd bet you the oldies here have as well, sooner than i did too.
..We get it. Honestly :)
What would you be posting if Nvidia released this year something 5% faster than RX480?
@Kommanche According to reviews here on TPU, 1080 doesn't push an average of 60 fps (and exactly 60 fps average is not that great since it means half the time you're not getting 60fps). If you say it's better in real life, that's great.
I'm pretty sure you guys do this on purpose, turning yourself slowly into a tabloid.
Also 1800 boost clocks sound impressive but fake, they'd have to move away a lot from GCN right up until Polaris & I don't see that happening without some major compromise, perhaps in GPGPU?
All scores have the same driver.
Top score was archived on an Intel system.
The other scores used a Ryzen 1800X, some scores with turbo at 4.0GHz, some with turbo at 3.7GHz.
Read carefully next time please.
And don't forget Vega FE: slightly faster than Titan Xp, still needs more power to pull it off. Much cheaper, though.
Yet you already know that...+1
In my experience, the gaps between cards grow as you get to 'heavier' benchmarks past 3d11. 3d11 is fairly cpu heavy and cuts off some extremes due to how it tests (lower res, textures, etc)
And if it is priced at 600$ it will be too expensive for my taste, and this is comming from an AMD GPU Fan (not fanboy).
You guys do remember that the R9 FURY X in DX12 is also neck a neck to the 1080 and VEGA barely beats the 1080?
Price wise this would not be a smart move since you can find a FURY X as low as 350$ and it is maybe 5 - 8% slower than the VEGA at almost same TDP ( FURY X has 300W+ TDP)?
I hope AMD release a better VEGA chip since this one is not any better than the FURY X.