AMD Radeon RX 6800 and RX 6800 XT GPU OpenCL Performance Leaks

[AleksandarK]

AMD has just recently announced its next-generation Radeon RX 6000 series GPU based on the new RDNA 2 architecture. The architecture is set to compete with NVIDIA Ampere architecture and highest offerings of the competing company. Today, thanks to the well-known leaker TUM_APISAK, we have some Geekbench OpenCL scores. It appears that some user has gotten access to the system with the Radeon RX 6800 and RX 6800 XT GPUs, running Cinebench 4.4 OpenCL tests. In the tests, the system ran on the Intel platform with Core i9-10900K CPU with 16 GB DDR4 RAM running at 3600 MHz. The motherboard used was ASUS top-end ROG Maximus XII Extreme Z490 board.

When it comes to results, the system with RX 6800 GPU scored anywhere from 347137 points to 336367 points in three test runs. For comparison, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 scores about 361042 points, showcasing that the Radeon card is not faster in any of the runs. When it comes to the higher-end Radeon RX 6800 XT GPU, it scored 407387 and 413121 points in two test runs. Comparing that to GeForce RTX 3080 GPU that scores 470743 points, the card is slower compared to the competition. There has been a Ryzen 9 5950X test setup that boosted the performance of Radeon RX 6800 XT card by quite a lot, making it reach 456837 points, making a huge leap over the Intel-based system thanks to the Smart Access Memory (SAM) technology that all-AMD system provides.


View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[ExcuseMeWtf]

That's a lot of variability per run...

 

[Vya Domus]

I should point out that OpenCL kernels are not that hardware agnostic in terms of performance and are rather notorious for running extremely slow or fast depending on the characteristics of the CUs.

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

so we have to 'match-up' the card and the CPU to get the best performance?

 

[dj-electric]

so we have to 'match-up' the card and the CPU to get the best performance?

That's Smart Access Memory's whole point with Ryzen 5000 and X570. You've skipped much of the GPU event I reckon?

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

That's Smart Access Memory's whole point with Ryzen 5000 and X570. You've skipped much of the GPU event I reckon?

you missed the presentation on sarcasm?

 

[BackSlash]

OK..... let's do it....Ryzen 5xx + x570 + RX6xxx... cool
at the end, it seems that smart memory access works.

 

[deu]

you missed the presentation on sarcasm?

So you ask a question in plenum to show that you are mad at AMD for inventing technology resulting in better performance when supported? God thing that you are on team red, because not accepting that would have been impossible supporting nvidia given the hardware and software 'performance-boost' technologies they have developed. AMD there is a pretty good reason to the performance being hardware driven (could not have happened without them developing their hardware in unity), but with nvidia you see software limitations to try to strangle the compatition.

 

[Uroshi]

There are actually 2 results for 6800 and 3 for 6800XT.

And 350k and 400k are respectable results.

 

[EarthDog]

That's Smart Access Memory's whole point with Ryzen 5000 and X570. You've skipped much of the GPU event I reckon?

I'm thinking that people's concerns are over being encouraged (forced) to buy into the ecosystem to get these results or the GPU will be 2-13% slower (according to their slide, several percent on average). I know every company puts their best foot forward, however, it feels a bit misleading considering how few are actually running that setup. to me, as a current intel user (and not changing for years with the CPU I have), it's critical to see these results without SAM and where the cards stand.

Right now only, what...four mobos, work with it? Surely most will add support, but just in reality, an overwhelming majority of users are running Intel systems or X470 on down mobos, or would need to pay to upgrade to the 5000 series (sucks for those who bought Zen2).

resulting in better performance when supported?

when supported.... yeah. See above.

 

[TechLurker]

so we have to 'match-up' the card and the CPU to get the best performance?

The writing was on the wall as early as 2018 or 2019 when AMD announced their Infinity Architecture plan; where they aim to allow an all AMD ecosystem eventually act as one giant gestalt APU, sharing all appropriate resources, maximize efficiency, and killing or reducing bottlenecks/latency wherever they can. It also makes sense; AMD needs to find every edge they have to compete against giants, and they're quite unique in having plenty of experience with both CPU and GPU designs. Not to mention, some of that work was likely influenced by the SoC projects they've been working with MS and Sony.

The nice thing about this though is that AMD is thus far leveraging mostly open source standards to do some of their tricks and features. As far as SAM goes, Intel and NVIDIA can also do similar, but they would have to pay for validation and driver maintenance (and more than likely will limit it as a feature to top-end SKUs to cut down on testing costs).

You can bet that Intel will do SAM-like capabilities once their Xe GPU matures enough; they would also need every bit of edge possible to pump up their numbers. And they too will eventually pursue their own take at an Intel-based heterogeneous computing ecosystem like AMD's IA. The only concern on the Intel side really is whether or not they will lock it to high-end SKUs to push high-margin silicon, or if they will follow AMD and allow it up and down the product stack. In the meantime, Intel could play nice and validate a variant of SAM between Intel and Radeon, even if it's only on the upper CPU SKUs (10600+). Intel has already worked with AMD once before with their weird NUC, and could do so again and just manage the drivers and compatibility lists between Intel CPUs and Radeon GPUs.

NVIDIA would have to implement, test, and complete validation of a SAM-like feature for both Intel and AMD CPUs at their own dime, should they have any desire to squeeze out every last bit of performance. And they would also have to maintain the drivers/compatibility lists since Intel and AMD aren't likely to do so. Either they limit such a feature to their high-end cards, or they permit it up and down the stack. Problem is they will probably pass on the testing/maintenance fees of such a feature into the card's MSRP; thus inflating it again.

 

[Vayra86]

I'm thinking that people's concerns are over being encouraged (forced) to buy into the ecosystem to get these results or the GPU will be 2-13% slower (according to their slide, several percent on average). I know every company puts their best foot forward, however, it feels a bit misleading considering how few are actually running that setup. to me, as a current intel user (and not changing for years with the CPU I have), it's critical to see these results without SAM and where the cards stand.

Right now only, what...four mobos, work with it? Surely most will add support, but just in reality, an overwhelming majority of users are running Intel systems or X470 on down mobos, or would need to pay to upgrade to the 5000 series (sucks for those who bought Zen2).

when supported.... yeah. See above.

Yep, SAM is definitely not a bloke to pre order thats for sure.

Several percent... not enough to ignore other featureset differences. But I reckon for many in honest comparison this synergy will just be coming on top of an already pretty neat combo to base a rig on. Kinda struggling to see why you'd ignore the new Ryzen gen, its matured enough now on pretty much all fronts. Even just the IPC uplift... wow.

 

[EarthDog]

Yep, SAM is definitely not a bloke to pre order thats for sure.

Several percent... not enough to ignore other featureset differences. But I reckon for many in honest comparison this synergy will just be coming on top of an already pretty neat combo to base a rig on. Kinda struggling to see why you'd ignore the new Ryzen gen, its matured enough now on pretty much all fronts. Even just the IPC uplift... wow.

I've got an i9-10980XE, previously a 7960x (see FS section, lol) for the cost of a 5950x... I'm not touching Zen3 with that monster. An upgrade from Zen2 to Zen3 doesn't make much financial sense to me (their prices are a lot higher this round), even with the performance boost in some games. I don't see why anyone would move from a 9900K or better to these outside of core count. Adoption to B550/X570/5000 series combos will be slow, IMO... a severe lack of supply isn't going to help at all. That said, I'm not ignoring it... just aware that those with 9900K+ or Zen2 owners likely won't be making this move anytime soon.

Also, we've seen a few notable teething issues, especially with memory. Updated BIOS' are coming in updating the AEGESA (not version, but patching) to resolve those issues. While normal, I'd say since these were available a few days ago, the teeting is just starting and this platform is nowhere near mature using the Ryzen new gen.

 

[Vayra86]

I've got an i9-10980XE, previously a 7960x (see FS section, lol) for the cost of a 5950x... I'm not touching Zen3 with that monster. An upgrade from Zen2 to Zen3 doesn't make much financial sense to me (their prices are a lot higher this round), even with the performance boost in some games. I don't see why anyone would move from a 9900K or better to these outside of core count. Adoption to B550/X570/5000 series combos will be slow, IMO... a severe lack of supply isn't going to help at all.

Also, we've seen a few notable teething issues, especially with memory. Updated BIOS' are coming in updating the AEGESA (not version, but patching) to resolve those issues. While normal, I'd say since these were available a few days ago, the teeting is just starting and this platform is nowhere near mature using the Ryzen new gen.

Sure but for the rest of us mortals...

I don't have any reason for an upgrade to this 8700K either, but if you're running anything lower clocked and earlier gen... I mean all those Kaby Lake and Skylake quads? Perfect jump for them.

 

[EarthDog]

Sure but for the rest of us mortals...

I don't have any reason for an upgrade to this 8700K either, but if you're running anything lower clocked and earlier gen... I mean all those Kaby Lake and Skylake quads? Perfect jump for them.

You did say why "I" ignore them... so...........yeah.

I discussed the 'rest of you mortals'. You took it another generation older not needing an upgrade, even... lol

I'll reiterate.... Those with a 9900K+ or Zen2 likely won't touch these... it just doesn't make sense. Anything before that, sure. That being said again, I still don't see adoption rates for the whole ecosystem taking shape for several months at least, likely a year+. These CPUs are less available than NV GPUs. Have you seen the emails from etailers touting availability of 2021 at the earliest? B&H said March, even.

What about those who held on to X470 for 5000 series support? They don't get these benes without buying a mobo now.

Again, all I am saying is that I'd really like to see performance running on an Intel system too so those, the majority, know how these will actually perform.

EDIT: I edited my previous post....note.

 

[deu]

I'm thinking that people's concerns are over being encouraged (forced) to buy into the ecosystem to get these results or the GPU will be 2-13% slower (according to their slide, several percent on average). I know every company puts their best foot forward, however, it feels a bit misleading considering how few are actually running that setup. to me, as a current intel user (and not changing for years with the CPU I have), it's critical to see these results without SAM and where the cards stand.

Right now only, what...four mobos, work with it? Surely most will add support, but just in reality, an overwhelming majority of users are running Intel systems or X470 on down mobos, or would need to pay to upgrade to the 5000 series (sucks for those who bought Zen2).

when supported.... yeah. See above.

I agree that it raises other issues, but given the fuckery nvidia have performed in regard to technology my point simply is: It is hard not to expect AMD to do the same. The thing is that this has not been done out of counter competitive efforts i would argue (even though it is portrayed as such and eventhough that an inconvinient sideeffect is). AMDs complete ecosystem is going to run on both consoles; systems that hunger for performance to meet an fps demand. AMD creating this optimization for sure makes nvidia and intel envious from top to bottom but I personally cant blame them for doing it (eventhough it effectively entrences the user to an AMD upgrade-plan. In short if the main goal is performance: okay; if the main purpose is entrencing; bummer, but kinda expected. (Again the first 99 example of precedent Nvidia have set through the years with technologies that have been locked only due to software constraints)

 

[EarthDog]

I agree that it raises other issues, but given the fuckery nvidia have performed in regard to technology my point simply is: It is hard not to expect AMD to do the same. The thing is that this has not been done out of counter competitive efforts i would argue (even though it is portrayed as such and eventhough that an inconvinient sideeffect is). AMDs complete ecosystem is going to run on both consoles; systems that hunger for performance to meet an fps demand. AMD creating this optimization for sure makes nvidia and intel envious from top to bottom but I personally cant blame them for doing it (eventhough it effectively entrences the user to an AMD upgrade-plan. In short if the main goal is performance: okay; if the main purpose is entrencing; bummer, but kinda expected. (Again the first 99 example of precedent Nvidia have set through the years with technologies that have been locked only due to software constraints)

Not sure what NV even has to do with this... or their 'fuckery'...w/e TF that means....feels like an oddly inserted poke...

Who portrays this as counter competitive efforts? Maybe some hardcore clueless fanboys...?

Consoles don't hunger for anything. It's a closed ecosytem that is easy to optimize for (think Apple).

Nvidia and Intel envious? lol... I doubt that.



So again......... I just want to see benchmarks that reflects what the MAJORITY of users will see. I want to see BOTH results so everyeone is aware of exactly how these cards perform on a SAM system and those without.

 

[kapone32]

The fact that millions of new builds are actually Ryzen this is fine. In the reviewer world it kind of sucks because it means more testing but don't think for a minute that there is not enough market penetration (world wide) for SAM to be popular with existing consumers. You can buy B550 boards for $99 US.

 

[DR4G00N]

It's for outdated GB4 benchmark:

RX 6800 XT

To compare with RTX 3080:

RTX 3080

GeForce is quite faster but again these are leaked results from God knows whom.

Not to mention Nvidia cards can utilize CUDA instead of OpenCL for a significant performance boost. And since a fair amount of programs support CUDA it doesn't make sense to compare both with OpenCL.

 

[WikiFM]

the system with RX 6800 GPU scored anywhere from 347137 points to 392643 points

The 392643 result belongs to the 6800XT not the 6800, look the picture @AleksandarK, so 3070 is faster than 6800 on this test

 

[EarthDog]

The fact that millions of new builds are actually Ryzen this is fine. In the reviewer world it kind of sucks because it means more testing but don't think for a minute that there is not enough market penetration (world wide) for SAM to be popular with existing consumers. You can buy B550 boards for $99 US.

Millions? Millions of PCs exist.. sure, but there are very few B550/X570/5000 series combos out. Also, getting a CPU, and apparently before 2021, also seems difficult. Additionally, (this second) only four boards support it (more/all in time, indeed). Penetration of B550/X570/5000 series I don't believe will be quick.

SAM being 'popular' or not has nothing to do with it if you don't have the hardware to implement in the first place. It can only become popular when people go balls deep into specific (chipset) boards and 5000 series CPU. Also, I don't want a $99 B550 board, lol.... but I get your point.

It's going to take more time than you think.


Whoever is reviewing these things.......... just show BOTH results so ALL users have an accurate idea of performance.

 

[Chrispy_]

What I'm seeing is exactly what I'm expecting to see from the specs:

Vanilla 6800 scores 85% of the 6800XT with twelve fewer CUs.

 

[kapone32]

Millions? Millions of PCs exist.. sure, but there are very few B550/X570/5000 series combos out. Also, getting a CPU, and apparently before 2021, also seems difficult. Additionally, (this second) only four boards support it (more/all in time, indeed). Penetration of B550/X570/5000 series I don't believe will be quick.

SAM being 'popular' or not has nothing to do with it if you don't have the hardware to implement in the first place. It can only become popular when people go balls deep into specific (chipset) boards and 5000 series CPU. Also, I don't want a $99 B550 board, lol.... but I get your point.

It's going to take more time than you think.


Whoever is reviewing these things.......... just show BOTH results so ALL users have an accurate idea of performance.

I understand your sentiment but the 5000 series will sell like hotcakes. Watch the used market get flooded with 1st, 2nd and even 3rd gen CPUs. The reason I say this is the 5000 series are discernably faster than any AM4 CPU before it. I also feel the 5600X will suffer the same fate as the 3300x.

When you talk about GPUs the 6000 series is faster then any AMD card that has come before. That alone is an objective reason to get it. Then you add the hardware benefit (that is important) of SAM that works with X570 and B550 but it's not like it's going to go away so it's an innovation, is that not reason alone to buy if you are an enthusiast?

The motherboard is important because as I said you can get B550 boards for $99 US. The point though is that right now most X570 and some B550 boards are attractively priced here in Canada. If I had a B450 board right now I would definitely be looking at something like the MSI B550 Pro. Even though that board has a "weak" VRM compared to others I can't see a 5600x or 5800X based system drawing more than 120 Watts from the CPU.

The key for these systems though is having a high refresh rate (Freesync2) monitor to allow the system to show it's true potential. Trust me if a 5600x system (I am finding that out right now) is indeed discernably faster by 20+% than the 3600 (I am using a 5700)in Gaming it's Game over. The 5600X has already increased by $50 on Newegg.ca. The 5800X is $600+ here in Canada but no one would be disappointed replacing what they have with one ( 9 series excluded).

 

[EarthDog]

I understand your sentiment but the 5000 series will sell like hotcakes. Watch the used market get flooded with 1st, 2nd and even 3rd gen CPUs. The reason I say this is the 5000 series are discernably faster than any AM4 CPU before it. I also feel the 5600X will suffer the same fate as the 3300x.

When you talk about GPUs the 6000 series is faster then any AMD card that has come before. That alone is an objective reason to get it. Then you add the hardware benefit (that is important) of SAM that works with X570 and B550 but it's not like it's going to go away so it's an innovation, is that not reason alone to buy if you are an enthusiast?

The motherboard is important because as I said you can get B550 boards for $99 US. The point though is that right now most X570 and some B550 boards are attractively priced here in Canada. If I had a B450 board right now I would definitely be looking at something like the MSI B550 Pro. Even though that board has a "weak" VRM compared to others I can't see a 5600x or 5800X based system drawing more than 120 Watts from the CPU.

The key for these systems though is having a high refresh rate (Freesync2) monitor to allow the system to show it's true potential. Trust me if a 5600x system (I am finding that out right now) is indeed discernably faster by 20+% than the 3600 (I am using a 5700)in Gaming it's Game over. The 5600X has already increased by $50 on Newegg.ca. The 5800X is $600+ here in Canada but no one would be disappointed replacing what they have with one ( 9 series excluded).

I don't have the time RN to pick this, so we'll agree to disagree on the ramp up.

All I want is to see both systems tested so users have accurate performance results for their systems.

 

[moproblems99]

I'm thinking that people's concerns are over being encouraged (forced) to buy into the ecosystem to get these results or the GPU will be 2-13% slower (according to their slide, several percent on average). I know every company puts their best foot forward, however, it feels a bit misleading considering how few are actually running that setup. to me, as a current intel user (and not changing for years with the CPU I have), it's critical to see these results without SAM and where the cards stand.

Right now only, what...four mobos, work with it? Surely most will add support, but just in reality, an overwhelming majority of users are running Intel systems or X470 on down mobos, or would need to pay to upgrade to the 5000 series (sucks for those who bought Zen2).

I put this in the same group as Gameworks or hell RTX. It only ever works well on the highest models of NV cards. Which few people have. Is it annoying? Yes. Give me a brand you are not forced into buying the ecosystem. I suspect most of the people complaining about this are posting from iPhones.