• 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.

AMD Radeon RX500 series benchmarks

Based on Anandtech's article Vega is supposed to introduce quite a few changes and enhancements like improved IPC, tiling, different memory access patterns/using onboard memory as a sort of fast virtual cache, and more. It's the biggest change since the transition from VLIW to GCN.
And Polaris was already a decent improvement in efficiency. Just compare the RX 460 to the R7 370, despite the latter's greater sp count and memory bandwidth the 460 often matches or exceeds it.

Do we know yet if Vega tech will filter down into the entire product stack or only be high end while Polaris continues to occupy the mid and low end? I'm mostly curious about Vega's potential to dramatically improve efficiency on smaller GPUs that can fit into ITX cases. Which won't happen anytime soon if AMD decides to continue with Polaris rather than replace it entirely with Vega. My hope is Polaris gets put out to pasture sooner rather than later and we see a Vega based 650/660/670 series asap.
 
Ahem
Sapphire-RX-570-Mini-Pulse-2.jpg

Sapphire_201718142238.jpg

There are low profile RX 460 cards, and the 550 and 560 will probably get LP variants too

I was specifically talking about a low-profile (LP) iteration. That form factor isn't actually LP, tho it is a shorter PCB that'd be awesome for cube-style cases and definitely a step in the right direction! AMD needs some small FF options.
 

Renekton

Member
Do we know yet if Vega tech will filter down into the entire product stack or only be high end while Polaris continues to occupy the mid and low end? I'm mostly curious about Vega's potential to dramatically improve efficiency on smaller GPUs that can fit into ITX cases. Which won't happen anytime soon if AMD decides to continue with Polaris rather than replace it entirely with Vega. My hope is Polaris gets put out to pasture sooner rather than later and we see a Vega based 650/660/670 series asap.
Both will be likely be replaced by Navi down the road. Navi's tagline is "scalability" which suggests it can be scaled from high-end to low-end.

Navi is also the first architecture designed with full participation from Raja Koduri IINM.
 

Marmelade

Member
It's still GCN so no, it won't be something completely new. From what was disclosed so far the biggest performance impacting feature is likely the TBIR mode (as in Maxwell+) but I feel that this will be pretty much irrelevant on an HBM2 powered top end chip. The rest is the usual GCN optimizations which will likely result in <10% gain.

Basically, after how Fiji and Polaris turned out, I prefer to not expect much from Vega.

I worded my answer poorly, obviously it's still GCN and not "something entirely different" but I had never read anything about Vega 10 being Fiji-based except for that one card (MI8, not based on Vega 10) that looks to just be a Nano rebrand
 
It's actually quite a bit faster, like comparing a GTX 960 to the 970

The 280x is bit faster than the 960, while the 470 is alittle bit slower than a 970.

If you want to say that 470 is much more efficient, or a better value than the original price of the 7970 then those statements I can agree with. But it's just not that much faster.
 

dr_rus

Member
AMD Radeon RX 480 can be flashed to RX 580
Haha.

I worded my answer poorly, obviously it's still GCN and not "something entirely different" but I had never read anything about Vega 10 being Fiji-based except for that one card (MI8, not based on Vega 10) that looks to just be a Nano rebrand
Technically Vega 10 looks like an upgraded Fiji - same number of SPs and CUs, same memory bandwidth, HBM again, etc. So basically it's Fiji but with stuff being improved and enhanced enough for it to be GCN5 instead of 3/4.
 
Is the 580 a good upgrade to substitute my HD 7870? I'll probably won't play at 4K anyway for now...

I made the upgrade from 7870 for 480 last year, no regrets. Went from struggling at med-high settings for the newest games at 1080p to Ultra 1080p. Huge upgrade. The biggest gain is the 2GB VRAM to 8 GB, but the raw performance increase is great as well.
 

chaosblade

Unconfirmed Member
vega will probably slot somewhere between 1080 and 1080ti

Depends on the card, there will probably be something sub-1080 too. Feels like all we can safely say is "above Polaris," since the 500 series rebrand would have been even more pointless than it already is if Vega was going to compete in that space.
 

DonMigs85

Member
So dudes, I bought a Gigabyte RX 570 today but it won't produce any video output on my old Core 2 Quad Dell - I'm thinking it's due to legacy BIOS.
I may lend it to my friend since he built an i5-6500 based rig last year but doesn't have a discrete GPU yet, as it'll take me a few months to save enough to build a new Ryzen R5 1600 rig.
 

DonMigs85

Member
Just an update - got the card working using a DVI cable for some reason and was able to install the driver. Will try HDMI for Freesync later
 

VillageBC

Member
The 570 seems like a decent boost and worthwhile of you are in that product segment. Is where I sit in as a 1080p gamer and with the cdn$. 580/1060 decent cards are all sitting in that $350+ price range for the most part.
 

Ploid 3.0

Member
I saw that earlier, good card for people getting very budget cards. Heck I should have got it but when I moved to Intel CPU before I knew about ryzen (if only I had waited a few more months, but I always wait a few more months, I waited too long) I impulse bought a rx 480. Love the card though, I wish I was brave enough to flash it to red devil 580 for the lower temperatures alone.

My Red Devil rx 480 can already hit 1410 but it get very hot and if I want to keep temps down I gotta blast the fans. I undervolt (-78) and over clocked it to 1360 (from 1330) for now. I've been following that Techpowerup thread for a long time and those flashes get 1411 with very low temperatures and voltage, it seems unreal.

If I had a Rx 580 I would undervolt the heck out of it. They give these cards high stock voltage (480 and it seems 580).
 

AmyS

Member
AMD Announces Radeon Pro Duo (Polaris) - Double Polaris for Content Creation

Back in 2016 AMD launched the Radeon Pro Duo, an interesting take on a semi-pro workstation card. As a dual-GPU Fiji card wasn't going to be viable for the consumer market, AMD instead focused their attention on developing such a card for the professional content creation market, where the lack of VRAM would be less of an issue and the second GPU more of an asset. The resulting card was best geared for a niche market, but none the less an important one for the company.

Until now, I hadn't seen any real statistics on how the Radeon Pro Duo was doing in the market or if AMD would follow-up on it with newer products. Now at the 2017 NAB Show we have our answer, as AMD has announced their second Radeon Pro Duo. This time powered by a pair of the company's Polaris 10 GPUs, the latest Radeon Pro Duo is aimed at roughly the same market as the original, but with all of the improvements that Polaris has brought the consumer market in the past year.

Even though it goes after the same market as the last Pro Duo, the new Polaris-based Pro Duo is a much different card in a number of important ways, virtually all of which have to do with the differences in features and design between the previous Fiji GPU and the newer Polaris 10 GPU. Fiji was a high-end GPU that had to be reined in a bit to fit on a dual GPU card &#8211; and even then AMD needed a closed loop liquid cooler &#8211; whereas the Polaris 10 GPUs that go into the modern incarnation have a much more workable TDP from the start. Coupled with that, Polaris 10 doesn't have the fixed VRAM capacity of Fiji, which means AMD can significantly increase the total VRAM. As a result, the new Pro Duo strikes a very different balance than the old card.

By the numbers then, the Polaris-based Radeon Pro Duo is actually slower than the older Fiji version. It has a clockspeed advantage, but this isn't enough to overcome Fiji's total stream processor advantage. All told, at peak rates the new Pro duo is rated for 11.45 TFLOPs of FP32, while the Fiji version was rated for 16.38 TFLOPs. In practice however I don't expect that the gap is quite so large, as Fiji would need to throttle more often, and Polaris enjoys at least a small architectural advantage.

What the new Pro Duo loses in throughput it more than picks up in VRAM. With each Polaris 10 GPU sporting a 256-bit GDDR5 memory bus, AMD has outfit each GPU with 16GB of VRAM, quadrupling their VRAM capacity. AMD's photos don't show the bare PCB, but I believe it to be a safe bet that AMD is running 8Gb modules in clamshell mode, meaning the board is truly maxed out. AMD argued that the smaller VRAM capacity of the Fiji based card was not a major liability last year, and while there's admittedly no reason not to fully equip a Polaris 10 card since the company is back to GDDR5, I do think it's an important step in making the new card more flexible.

The other big change here is that the TBP has come down significantly, from 350W to 250W. Fiji was powerful, but it was also power-hungry, necessitating the original card's closed loop liquid cooler. The Polaris Pro Duo, on the other hand, can get away with a simple blower. In fact this is the first time we've seen a blower-type dual GPU card from AMD in many years. And though an uncommon choice for a dual GPU card, it makes a great deal of sense given the card's professional workstation market, as blowers are expected there, and the Radeon WX cards are already similarly equipped.

Full article here: http://www.anandtech.com/show/11294/amd-announces-radeon-pro-duo-polaris

http://www.amd.com/en-us/press-releases/Pages/the-new-radeon-2017apr24.aspx
 

llien

Member
Feels like i have been waiting forever for Vega just hope its 1080 and above

Given its size of nearly 500 square mm it can NOT not beat 1080, which is 314 mm2.
The question is, how well it fares vs 1080Ti/Titan. (both in 500-ish area)
 

DonMigs85

Member
Given its size of nearly 500 square mm it can NOT not beat 1080, which is 314 mm2.
The question is, how well it fares vs 1080Ti/Titan. (both in 500-ish area)

AMD must lose a lot of potential profit on their huge dies, going back to Phenom.
 
Top Bottom