• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

40 CU 9.75 TFLOPs RX 5700 XT vs 64 CU 12.6 TFLOPs RX Vega 64 ( Different architectures but probably the best way to compare PS5 & Xbox SX for now)

Status
Not open for further replies.

onQ123

Report me for starting troll threads. Ban warning.
May 1, 2010
15,821
4,040
1,275
Why RX 5700 XT vs RX Vega 64 & not RX 590 vs RX Vega 64? My reason for this is because RX 590 is ROP limited with 32 ROPs while RX 5700 XT has the same 64 ROPs as the RX Vega 64.

RX 5700 XT is a newer architecture & benefit from that but at the same time I'm comparing it to the RX Vega 64 & not the RX Vega 56 . it's not a perfect way of comparing PS5 to Xbox SX but it should give a better idea of how everything isn't locked to TFLOPs .

And just so that no stones are left un turned I'll also mention that Xbox SX will have higher memory bandwidth than the RX Vega 64 & will also benefit from having a higher clock rate than the Vega 64 on top of being a newer architecture.

The paper below is from AMD comparing the RX 5700 XT to the RX Vega 64 & most of the things listed to show the advantage of RX 5700 XT are actually results of having a higher clock rate besides the higher Triangle cull rate & the added L1 cache




Now for the results in games






 

TBiddy

Gold Member
Mar 16, 2015
3,393
2,525
650
Denmark
And just so that no stones are left un turned I'll also mention that Xbox SX will have higher memory bandwidth than the RX Vega 64 & will also benefit from having a higher clock rate than the Vega 64 on top of being a newer architecture.
So what you're saying is, that the XSX is faster, has more bandwidth and is an entirely new architecture.. and yet, you felt this comparison made sense. Huh.
 
Feb 10, 2019
248
220
305
Both consoles are costume build hardware based on RDNA2 and Zen2 they are not of the shelf hardware that you can buy. You can not compare them...
 
Last edited:

onQ123

Report me for starting troll threads. Ban warning.
May 1, 2010
15,821
4,040
1,275
How is a comparison between gcn and rdna relevant to two consoles that both use rdna2?
Because they both have 64 ROPs & most of the advantages that RX 5700 XT have over Vega 64 come from having the higher clock rate even though the TFLOP number is way lower.

It's explained that they are not the same architecture
 
  • LOL
Reactions: PharaoTutAnchAmun
Jan 7, 2018
1,078
907
385
Useless comparison.

You will be able to compare pretty accurately when RDNA 2 GPU launch in Q4 this year. I'm sure we'll get mid range [ps5] ~36 CU and high end [xbsx] ~52 CU cards from AMD. Just set the clocks to ~1,9 ps5 and 1,7 for xbsx and you'll have a close presentation of performance difference between consoles.


GPU in XBSX is ~30% faster
 
Last edited:

nosseman

Member
Mar 16, 2020
129
186
205
LOL. No!

Vega 64 had high compute power but lousy game performance compared to Navi - also crippled by memory bandwidth since HBM2 memory was so expensive. It also used GCN Architecture.

Xbox Series X and PS5 use the same architecture (Navi RDNA 2).

If you want to compare like that you have to use the same architecture.

Lets take 5700 XT and 5600 XT - both use Navi RDNA 1. PS5 is like an 5600 XT (shaders, TMU, and CUs) and Xbox Series X is like a 5700 XT but with more shaders, tmus and CUs.
 

onQ123

Report me for starting troll threads. Ban warning.
May 1, 2010
15,821
4,040
1,275
But PS5 and XsX have the same arch 🤷‍♂️
And that's mentioned in the OP but this is the best picture you're going to get with a AMD card that has been designed to take advantage of the higher clocks & not limited by ROPs


AMD is the one that compared these 2 cards showing RX 5700 XT with advantages over Vega 64 that mostly came from the higher clock rate.
 

Aceofspades

Member
Mar 31, 2015
2,894
3,316
670
And that's mentioned in the OP but this is the best picture you're going to get with a AMD card that has been designed to take advantage of the higher clocks & not limited by ROPs


AMD is the one that compared these 2 cards showing RX 5700 XT with advantages over Vega 64 that mostly came from the higher clock rate.
Hasn't anyone on internet tried underclocking vs overclocking of Navi cards?
 

OliverKahn

Report me if I continue to console war
Mar 22, 2020
75
244
325
That doesn't even make any sense.

Why don't you use the same card architecture for comparison? for example turing vs turing, GCN vs GCN, and Navi vs Navi instead of GCN vs Navi?
 

DynamiteCop!

Banned
Mar 3, 2018
4,169
8,992
585
Why would you think it would make sense to compare two completely different architectures like RDNA and GCN (Vega) as if their performance or efficiencies were even remotely the same? Vega is just GCN, and while I enjoy my Vega 64 I know sure as hell that it's no RDNA card, and it's terribly inefficient and better suited to professional hybrid workloads rather than just games.

Some people honestly just shouldn't be discussing this stuff, it's so far out of their element it's embarrassing.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: draliko

Goliathy

Member
Mar 18, 2020
420
1,361
340
What exactly is the goal of this thread? It doesn't make any sense at all, I don't get it. What is OP trying to achieve here?
 

nosseman

Member
Mar 16, 2020
129
186
205
Hasn't anyone on internet tried underclocking vs overclocking of Navi cards?
Its pretty common to underclock. Navi responds bad to higher clocks - uses much more power and produces heat. That is why it is so remarkable for Sony to use a high clock part and downclocking.

If you want a faster AMD card you need more shading units, TMUs, CUs and ROPs - NOT higher clocks.

Big Navi is just that - more hardware but same clock or even lower clock.

2080 TI is an example of this. This is the fastest gaming GPU but it has the lowest clock of all the 20xx series cards. It is slow and wide.

GeForce RTX 2060 - 1680 Mhz
GeForce RTX 2060 Super - 1650 Mhz
GeForce RTX 2070 - 1620 Mhz
GeForce RTX 2070 Super - 1770 Mhz
GeForce RTX 2080 - 1710 Mhz
GeForce RTX 2080 Super - 1815 Mhz
GeForce RTX 2080 Ti - 1545 Mhz

Clockspeed in a GPU matters but the actual hardware (render configuration - shading units, TMUs, ROPs, CUs) is much more important.
 

SatansReverence

Hipster Princess
Mar 30, 2012
4,346
1,753
915
Australia
www.neogaf.com
Of all the damage control, spinning and pearl clutching that has been present on gaming side over the past week or so, this takes it to a whole new level.

AMD is the one that compared these 2 cards showing RX 5700 XT with advantages over Vega 64 that mostly came from the higher clock rate.
No. Just no.

Mod of War Mod of War I think someone needs to lose their thread making privileges after such a doozy.

What exactly is the goal of this thread? It doesn't make any sense at all, I don't get it. What is OP trying to achieve here?
9.2 > 12.1 basically.
 
Last edited:

onQ123

Report me for starting troll threads. Ban warning.
May 1, 2010
15,821
4,040
1,275
That doesn't even make any sense.

Why don't you use the same card architecture for comparison? for example turing vs turing, GCN vs GCN, and Navi vs Navi instead of GCN vs Navi?
Where are these cards that will demonstrate higher fill rate , rasterizing & cache bandwidth while having much lower TFLOPs ?


Test them & the results will most likely come out like what I just showed you.
 

onQ123

Report me for starting troll threads. Ban warning.
May 1, 2010
15,821
4,040
1,275
Of all the damage control, spinning and pearl clutching that has been present on gaming side over the past week or so, this takes it to a whole new level.



No. Just no.

Mod of War Mod of War I think someone needs to lose their thread making privileges after such a doozy.



9.2 > 12.1 basically.
Nope it's not 9.2 > 12.1 its TFLOPS don't mean everything when one console is using higher clocks to boost other parts of the console outside of the compute units
 

Mistershine.

Member
Jan 20, 2018
675
950
375
Because they both have 64 ROPs & most of the advantages that RX 5700 XT have over Vega 64 come from having the higher clock rate even though the TFLOP number is way lower.

It's explained that they are not the same architecture
Rdna has a massive ipc uplift over gnc, meaning that even if the two cards had the same frequency and cu count it would still be a lot faster. Unless you think that the ps5 is secretly using rdna3 then this comparison is irrelevant to your ongoing war.
 

ZywyPL

Report me if I continue to console war > 05/03
Nov 27, 2018
1,737
2,813
595
Both next-gen consoles are using the exact same architecture, so this comparison is invalid from the get go.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SoloKingRobert

onQ123

Report me for starting troll threads. Ban warning.
May 1, 2010
15,821
4,040
1,275
Sorry but this is bullshit since the both consoles using totally the same GPU architecture,tf numbers do matter most.
So fill rate & none of the other things AMD listed as advantages over Vega 64 that came from having a higher clock rate matter huh?

 
Status
Not open for further replies.