AMD Radeon VII GPU Reviews

StereoVSN · Feb 9, 2019

Monster Zero said:
The 2080 crushes the 1080ti in games that use Vulkan.

I wonder how much of that is due to the fact of Nvidia driver support for older cards being pretty damn bad.

One thing AMD does quite well is providing driver improvements even for older cards. Nvidia I believe sometimes makes performance worse on newer drivers for older gen hardware.

Bomblord · Feb 9, 2019

Digital Foundry's video was interesting they made a decent case for the card but nothing revelatory it outperforms a slightly overclocked 2080 in some games and not others with the performance difference almost always being less than 10% in either direction. The more interesting part was the segment at the end on non-4K gaming. They made a point to talk about CPU bottlenecks and how even an Overclocked 8700K is a bottleneck to either of those cards in 1080p/1440p performance I'll need to keep that in mind when people are asking for 1080p high fps gaming builds.

Durante · Feb 9, 2019

StereoVSN said:
I wonder how much of that is due to the fact of Nvidia driver support for older cards being pretty damn bad.

One thing AMD does quite well is providing driver improvements even for older cards. Nvidia I believe sometimes makes performance worse on newer drivers for older gen hardware.

I can't believe that myth is still around. Every actually well-researched and somewhat structured approach at measuring this over many driver releases, years, and architectures has shown that it just isn't the case.

Bomblord said:
They made a point to talk about CPU bottlenecks and how even an Overclocked 8700K is a bottleneck to either of those cards in 1080p/1440p performance I'll need to keep that in mind when people are asking for 1080p high fps gaming builds.

Another thing to keep in mind when targeting a high framerate build is that for basically all DX11 games AMD will run into CPU limits at a lower framerate than NV (on the same CPU).

·feist· · Feb 9, 2019

Reducing fan noise and overclocking:

Overclocking & Undervolting Radeon VII – A Stability Nightmare?

Optimum Tech's review that was already in the OP, has more OC results and frametime graphs:

7nm Radeon VII Performance Review — Gaming & Rendering vs. RTX 2080!

Bomblord · Feb 9, 2019

·feist· said:
Reducing fan noise and overclocking:

Overclocking & Undervolting Radeon VII – A Stability Nightmare?

Optimum Tech's review that was already in the OP, has more OC results and frametime graphs:

7nm Radeon VII Performance Review — Gaming & Rendering vs. RTX 2080!

That's a pretty significant amount of undervolting room. He reduced power consumption by a staggering 45 Watts and that's with the overclock. I wonder why AMD went so insanely high?

1-D_FE · Feb 9, 2019

I had zero interest in these cards (for all the obvious reasons that came true), but I guess it's just accepted at this point that Navi isn't actual next-gen architecture? And it's once again AMD's fabled "the next gen is the one that's next gen" non-sense?

Isee · Feb 9, 2019

Bomblord said:
That's a pretty significant amount of undervolting room. He reduced power consumption by a staggering 45 Watts and that's with the overclock. I wonder why AMD went to so insanely high?

Sample size 1.

Vega 64 was descent at undervolting, we have no idea if most VIIs need that amount of voltage to hit the advertised 1750 MHz or not. It's too early to ask questions like that imo.

Bomblord · Feb 9, 2019

1-D_FE said:
I had zero interest in these cards (for all the obvious reasons that came true), but I guess it's just accepted at this point that Navi isn't actual next-gen architecture? And it's once again AMD's fabled "the next gen is the one that's next gen" non-sense?

This card isn't Navi it's a 7nm Vega as far as that goes.

GrrImAFridge · Feb 9, 2019

1-D_FE said:
I had zero interest in these cards (for all the obvious reasons that came true), but I guess it's just accepted at this point that Navi isn't actual next-gen architecture? And it's once again AMD's fabled "the next gen is the one that's next gen" non-sense?

That appears to be the case.

1-D_FE · Feb 9, 2019

Bomblord said:
This card isn't Navi it's a 7nm Vega as far as that goes.

Yeah. That's what I meant. 7nm Vega was something I had zero interest in, but Navi news/comments haven't been so promising of late either.

JaseC said:
That appears to be the case.

*sigh*

I suppose we can still cling to the slight hope that the dueling rumors existed at one point, but since AMD isn't shouting from the rooftops, I'm inclined to accept this is the truth:(

Deleted member 4346 · Feb 9, 2019

floridaguy954 said:
I may be biased as a current owner but the GTX 1080 TI's staying power is impressive as hell for a high end card.

As a fellow owner, I agree 100%.

ThereAreFourNaan said:
Yes, with the caveat that Nvidia at least does have a (very expensive) card that offers meaningful uplift over 1080ti, and AMD needed a new major process node to go head to head with 1080ti/2080. If we factor out die space that houses rt/tensor cores on Turing it seems as if 7nm Vega is only doing slightly better than 12nm Turing in a perf/mm2 sense, while using far more costly memory in larger quantities with stupendous bandwidth. This illustrates the gap in architectural efficiency quite well, I would say.

I don't think Vega VII is a bad card for consumers at all, it's ballpark competitive in price and perf to 2080 (varying region to region). It is a bad card for AMD though, for the same reason Vega in general has been - its expensive to make but not very performant for that cost which means they sell at lower margins than nvidia without significantly undercutting nvidia's pricing. The sooner they can dump Vega the better, methinks.

The upgrade for the 1080 Ti costs 75-85% more than what I paid for my 1080 Ti, though. That's kind of a non-starter.

But no, I agree, AMD really needs a new architecture. Vega, even on the new process, just barely manages to be competitive with the 2080, and is more power-hungry and more expensive to produce.

Monster Zero said:
The 2080 crushes the 1080ti in games that use Vulkan.

The 1080 Ti wins some games too, though. 2080 versus 1080 Ti is basically a wash in performance, but the 2080 is more costly than the two year old card. That's pretty awful, I stand by that statement.

Monster Zero · Feb 9, 2019

Apharmd said:
As a fellow owner, I agree 100%.

The upgrade for the 1080 Ti costs 75-85% more than what I paid for my 1080 Ti, though. That's kind of a non-starter.

But no, I agree, AMD really needs a new architecture. Vega, even on the new process, just barely manages to be competitive with the 2080, and is more power-hungry and more expensive to produce.

The 1080 Ti wins some games too, though. 2080 versus 1080 Ti is basically a wash in performance, but the 2080 is more costly than the two year old card. That's pretty awful, I stand by that statement.

You should check the prices of new 1080ti again. I didn't just say win in Vulkan we are not talking a slight edge difference. The 2080 crushes it in Vulkan.

Deleted member 4346 · Feb 9, 2019

Monster Zero said:
You should check the prices of new 1080ti again. I didn't just say win in Vulkan we are not talking a slight edge difference. The 2080 crushes it in Vulkan.

The 1080 Ti was $700. I paid $720 for my aftermarket-cooled, factory OC 1080 Ti two years ago! The 2080 is scarcely available for that price, most models are $800, and some are close to $900, for negligible performance improvement. And RTX features which, 5 months after release, are useless.

There's no way to spin that into a positive. Vulkan performance? LOL for the 2-3 games that use Vulkan? If you don't play those games, the 1080 Ti arguably offers more. You can buy a used 1080 Ti for $500 and, given the reliability issues that have been reported with RTX cards, that's a pretty safe path forward.

Honestly I'm shocked that you'd even try to offer a defense of the 2080... at least, although the price is sky-high, the 2080 Ti does offer a significant performance leap over the 1080 Ti. The 2080 offers nothing, literally nothing, for 1080 Ti owners... ~~RTX in BFV is barely playable at 1080p on the card~~ RTX is playable at 1080p but for 60Hz, and 1440p is unplayable.

Monster Zero · Feb 9, 2019

Apharmd said:
The 1080 Ti was $700. I paid $720 for my aftermarket-cooled, factory OC 1080 Ti two years ago! The 2080 is scarcely available for that price, most models are $800, and some are close to $900, for negligible performance improvement. And RTX features which, 5 months after release, are useless.

There's no way to spin that into a positive. Vulkan performance? LOL for the 2-3 games that use Vulkan? If you don't play those games, the 1080 Ti arguably offers more. You can buy a used 1080 Ti for $500 and, given the reliability issues that have been reported with RTX cards, that's a pretty safe path forward.

Honestly I'm shocked that you'd even try to offer a defense of the 2080... at least, although the price is sky-high, the 2080 Ti does offer a significant performance leap over the 1080 Ti. The 2080 offers nothing, literally nothing, for 1080 Ti owners... RTX in BFV is barely playable at 1080p on the card.

Most people don't want to spend hundreds of dollars on used electronics. The 2080 and 1080ti cost the same but the 1080ti has less features and on average performs worse with it being a huge gap using Vulkan API. That's not even taking in consideration the variable rate shading 20 series cards are capable of. You can find 2080s for $699 everywhere online.

Deleted member 4346 · Feb 9, 2019

Monster Zero said:
Most people don't want to spend hundreds of dollars on used electronics. The 2080 and 1080ti cost the same but the 1080ti has less features and on average performs worse with it being a huge gap using Vulkan API.

The 1080 Ti isn't widely available new at this point, so comparing prices new:new with the 2080 is irrelevant. And the overall performance difference between the cards is in the single digits, with the 1080 Ti even winning in some games.

Monster Zero said:
You can find 2080s for $699 everywhere online.

https://www.nowinstock.net/computers/videocards/nvidia/rtx2080/

There are a few 2080s at $699. It's not true that they are available everywhere at that price.

After two years NVIDIA achieved performance parity with their last flagship card, at the same or higher price. That's unheard of in the GPU market. It's been a disaster and sales have reflected this.

·feist· · Feb 9, 2019

Isee said:
Sample size 1.

Vega 64 was descent at undervolting, we have no idea if most VIIs need that amount of voltage to hit the advertised 1750 MHz or not. It's too early to ask questions like that imo.

GPU hits ~1790-1800mhz out of the box, completely stock.

You don't have to undervolt to hit that boost clock.

Ada said:
Noise level

Sounds nothing at all like that.

Isee · Feb 10, 2019

·feist· said:
GPU hits ~1790-1800mhz out of the box, completely stock.

You don't have to undervolt to hit that boost clock

No, I meant that we don't know the amount of VIIs that could hit that clockspeed at a lower voltage.

Undervolting is an overclocking technique where you allow your GPU to reach higher clockspeeds by reducing the amount of heat they produce. So to speak.

·feist· · Feb 10, 2019

Isee said:
No, I meant that we don't know the amount of VIIs that could hit that clockspeed at a lower voltage.

Undervolting is an overclocking technique where you allow your GPU to reach higher clockspeeds by reducing the amount of heat they produce. So to speak.

Heh. A while after replying I re-read your post and it did seem that clarification was what you had meant.

Stock my Radeon VII is at ~1150v GPU core. Lowered that to 1000v and drove that hard for hours. Maxed settings in DX12 games @ 4K, clocks were mostly ~1795mhz, with periods of ~1775 - 1812mhz.

I haven't yet tried finding a lower stable voltage.

Multiple users have reported running 950-1000v stable. IIRC, AMD had recommended tweakers to drop ~80 being conservative.

This user is running The Division 2 beta at 1000v GPU, with graphs on clocks, power use, etc.:

The Division 2: Beta | 1440p Maximum Settings Performance Benchmark | Radeon VII 16 GB, 9900k

Isee · Feb 10, 2019

·feist· said:
Heh. A while after replying I re-read your post and it did seem that clarification was what you had meant.

Stock my Radeon VII is at ~1150v GPU core. Lowered that to 1000v and drove that hard for hours. Maxed settings in DX12 games @ 4K, clocks were mostly ~1795mhz, with periods of ~1775 - 1812mhz.

I haven't yet tried finding a lower stable voltage.

Multiple users have reported running 950-1000v stable. IIRC, AMD had recommended tweakers to drop ~80 being conservative.

This user is running The Division 2 beta at 1000v GPU, with graphs on clocks, power use, etc.:

The Division 2: Beta | 1440p Maximum Settings Performance Benchmark | Radeon VII 16 GB, 9900k

Oh cool. Keep updating how low you can go. Also GZ on being able to get one in the first place.
On a side note. Division 2 on ultra settings is good looking.

Fastidioso · Feb 10, 2019

I don't understand the point of this card. At lower price maybe but I'm literally confused how can help AMD finances such release.

Cosmic Schwung · Feb 10, 2019

Fastidioso said:
I don't understand the point of this card. At lower price maybe but I'm literally confused how can help AMD finances such release.

I'm guessing it's more them showing investors that they're not getting completely left behind in the higher end gpu market, I doubt they expect it to be particularly profitable. It's also a way to make use of failed Instinct chips.

Isee · Feb 10, 2019

Benchmarks with new drivers that aren't crashing. Just in case somebody is interested.

Deleted member 12177 · Feb 10, 2019

Isee said:
Benchmarks with new drivers that aren't crashing. Just in case somebody is interested.

Decent card but there will be severe limitation in it's OC potential while the 1080ti/2080 has a ton of head room. As an enthusiast, you have to really stretch your imagination to pick the VII over a 2080.

jett · Feb 10, 2019

Ada said:
Noise level

why would somebody want to suffer this

Monster Zero · Feb 10, 2019

Isee said:
Benchmarks with new drivers that aren't crashing. Just in case somebody is interested.

Louder fans and weaker performance for the same price. Only thing it has going for it over the 2080 is the VRR on HDMI.

Isee · Feb 10, 2019

Wondered about the graphite pad and if LM would improve performance... Not worth the extra risk imo, like not at all.

Soda · Feb 10, 2019

If it drops to $600 (which seems doubtful), it'll be pretty competitive. Beyond that, eh. Not a BAD card, just overpriced.

JahIthBer · Feb 10, 2019

Monster Zero said:
Most people don't want to spend hundreds of dollars on used electronics. The 2080 and 1080ti cost the same but the 1080ti has less features and on average performs worse with it being a huge gap using Vulkan API. That's not even taking in consideration the variable rate shading 20 series cards are capable of. You can find 2080s for $699 everywhere online.

2080's 8GB's of VRAM will be a problem with Next Gen, if say NG Consoles have 16-20GB's of RAM, they will use around 10GB's VRAM standard, enjoy medium textures for $800 on all games, 2080 is a rip off.

Monster Zero · Feb 10, 2019

JahIthBer said:
2080's 8GB's of VRAM will be a problem with Next Gen, if say NG Consoles have 16-20GB's of RAM, they will use around 10GB's VRAM standard, enjoy medium textures for $800 on all games, 2080 is a rip off.

I will believe it when I see it. Until then I'm not going to worry about the sky falling.

Evilmaus · Feb 10, 2019

Well this is a shame. I didn't really know what to expect, but still.

I'm currently working with a R9 Fury Nitro and it still gets great performance on new releases, but I would like to take that next step. I'll wait for Navi, in the hopes that it brings something special to the table!

dgrdsv · Feb 10, 2019

·feist· said:
Your post reads as a fact-based statement, as opposed to a random comment you made up on a whim.

If it's the former, you should be able to provide evidence that supports your stance.

The evidence is Radeon VII. As I've said already, AMD could've halved its memory capacity - by going with half width bus or with 2hi HBM2 stacks. They didn't do it because it would cost them more to produce a separate version of Vega 20 GPU than to just reuse what is already being made for Instict MI50. Just think about it. If they would be able to sell RVII with 8GBs for the same price (since performance would likely stay the same, especially in a case of using lower HBM stacks) but get a lot higher margins - why wouldn't they? The only possible reason is because HBM isn't the decisive pricing factor here, it's the 330mm^2 7nm GPU itself.

JahIthBer said:
2080's 8GB's of VRAM will be a problem with Next Gen, if say NG Consoles have 16-20GB's of RAM, they will use around 10GB's VRAM standard, enjoy medium textures for $800 on all games, 2080 is a rip off.

You're talking about consoles launching late 2020, 1.5 years from now, and it's highly likely that we won't see launch games using ~10GBs of VRAM simply because they'll be cross-platform till 2022, which is ~3 years from now. It's also worth remembering that PCs have system RAM which is surprisingly of a lot of help when you're VRAM limited. By the time this becomes a reality, 2080 sure as hell won't be $800 and RVII will likely run out of processing power and won't present playable framerates in new titles on top settings.

1-D_FE · Feb 10, 2019

Monster Zero said:
Louder fans and weaker performance for the same price. Only thing it has going for it over the 2080 is the VRR on HDMI.

And even then, it's doesn't have HDMI 2.1 silicon. So it can't do VRR @ 4K @ 120hz.

Isee · Feb 12, 2019

Igor Wallossek from Tom'sHardware.de (?) claims that the graphite pad isn't really a pad. There is only a german video about this, so you have to believe my key points (I guess)

- It's a powder that can be easily applied like a "lipstick"
- Once between package and heat-sink the powder starts to change it's phase at around 51°C.
- First it transforms into a liquid and then it changes back into a solid (it looks like a pad now)
- Once it reaches this second solid form it never changes again
- During this transformation the material increases it's size by ~15%
- This allows the material to perfectly adopt and fill out the space between package and heat-sink. Small scratches, bumps and other irregularities will be corrected because of this. It can even deal with those pesky conclave CPU heat spreaders.
-Thermal transfer rate is excellent, it's better than every "normal" thermal paste out there.
(Note from me: I posted a video from der8auer the other day, removing the "pad" from VII and applying liquid metal didn't improve thermals/performance in a way most people hoped for. So there could be something here...)
-It's silicon free and will never "dry out".
-You can apply it on any kind of material (unlike liquid metal)
-AMD used it to maximize performance, apparently also uses it on their instinct cards.
-He will do some testing and review the material. There will be, at least, one company making and selling the product in the future in germany.
-No info about other regions and pricing.

If true, I'm interested in reading reviews tbh.

icecold1983 · Feb 13, 2019

division 2 benchmarks

AMD does very well in this game but turing does better. pascal fails

'V' · Feb 13, 2019

The reviews from what I've seen are unfavourable. If AMD released this in an attempt to keep consumers interested or aware of AMD existing in the current generation of GPU, then I'd say they've done the exact opposite. People who might have been skeptical about this launch are probably completely put off waiting anymore. I honestly think it would have been better for AMD to just wait it out and take their time just like they did with Ryzen because right now, from what I can gather, most people think AMD are having a laugh with this release. The pricing especially is not what anyone wanted.

Oh AMD.

1-D_FE · Feb 13, 2019

Isee said:
Igor Wallossek from Tom'sHardware.de (?) claims that the graphite pad isn't really a pad. There is only a german video about this, so you have to believe my key points (I guess)

- It's a powder that can be easily applied like a "lipstick"
- Once between package and heat-sink the powder starts to change it's phase at around 51°C.
- First it transforms into a liquid and then it changes back into a solid (it looks like a pad now)
- Once it reaches this second solid form it never changes again
- During this transformation the material increases it's size by ~15%
- This allows the material to perfectly adopt and fill out the space between package and heat-sink. Small scratches, bumps and other irregularities will be corrected because of this. It can even deal with those pesky conclave CPU heat spreaders.
-Thermal transfer rate is excellent, it's better than every "normal" thermal paste out there.
(Note from me: I posted a video from der8auer the other day, removing the "pad" from VII and applying liquid metal didn't improve thermals/performance in a way most people hoped for. So there could be something here...)
-It's silicon free and will never "dry out".
-You can apply it on any kind of material (unlike liquid metal)
-AMD used it to maximize performance, apparently also uses it on their instinct cards.
-He will do some testing and review the material. There will be, at least, one company making and selling the product in the future in germany.
-No info about other regions and pricing.

If true, I'm interested in reading reviews tbh.

That does sound interesting. I'd totally go that route with CPU "thermal paste" if it was an option.

dgrdsv · Feb 14, 2019

icecold1983 said:
division 2 benchmarks

AMD does very well in this game but turing does better. pascal fails

"Fails" is a bit strong for a 17% difference between 1060 and 580 in a pre-release build on non-optimized drivers.

icecold1983 · Feb 14, 2019

dgrdsv said:
"Fails" is a bit strong for a 17% difference between 1060 and 580 in a pre-release build on non-optimized drivers.

id say when you look at all the pascal gpus at all the resolutions its an overwhelming fail. indeed it could change at release, altho given how close to release the game is id say its less likely

Deleted member 25042 · Feb 14, 2019

icecold1983 said:
id say when you look at all the pascal gpus at all the resolutions its an overwhelming fail. indeed it could change at release, altho given how close to release the game is id say its less likely

gamegpu's results are more in line with what you'd expect (with a 1080 Ti who looks more like one)

DX12 @1440p

https://gamegpu.com/mmorpg-/-онлайн-игры/the-division-2-beta-test-gpu-cpu

icecold1983 · Feb 14, 2019

Marmelade said:
gamegpu's results are more in line with what you'd expect (with a 1080 Ti who looks more like one)

DX12 @1440p

https://gamegpu.com/mmorpg-/-онлайн-игры/the-division-2-beta-test-gpu-cpu

In division 1 it was highly scene dependent. Nvidia performed very poorly compared to AMD when in doors. Im not sure if this ever changed. Maybe theres a similar scenario here

sca · Feb 14, 2019

A review and analysis from the person who, I think, leaked the R7

Isee · Feb 14, 2019

Marmelade said:
gamegpu's results are more in line with what you'd expect (with a 1080 Ti who looks more like one)

I guess it highly depends on the scene and benchmark run?
That's my own hardware (manually maxed out ultra, which is above the ultra preset). Of course that's only DX11... Still a 40% difference is not what one would expect.
There definitely is something in this version of D2 that those Game_GPU benchmarks aren't reflecting. For further judgement we have to wait for final code and drivers though.

elzeus · Feb 15, 2019

Isee said:
graphite pad isn't really a pad.

I hope they use these pads on the next gen consoles, never drying up would be a huge benefit.

dgrdsv · Feb 15, 2019

icecold1983 said:
id say when you look at all the pascal gpus at all the resolutions its an overwhelming fail. indeed it could change at release, altho given how close to release the game is id say its less likely

The only card there which is significantly below what you'd expect in a Snowdrop title is 1080Ti but you should consider that they are using DX12 based on how it performs on Turing - and there's no reason why it can't perform totally differently on Pascal. Let's wait for release before saying stuff like "fails" etc as TD2 is an AMD sponsored game this time which likely means that NV doesn't have access to its code prior to release day and can't optimize it or the drivers right now.

AMD Radeon VII GPU Reviews

Self-requested ban

Dark Souls Man

Self-requested ban

Self-requested ban

ONE THOUSAND DOLLARYDOOS

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

Community Resettler

User requested account closure