The AMD Radeon VII Review: An Unexpected Shot At The High-End
by Nate Oh on February 7, 2019 9:00 AM ESTBenchmarking Testbed Setup
To preface, because of the SMU changes mentioned earlier, no third party utilities can read Radeon VII data, though patches are expected shortly. AIB partner tools such as MSI Afterburner should presumably launch with support. Otherwise, Radeon Wattman was the only monitoring tool possible, except we observed that the performance metric log recording and overlay sometimes caused issues with games.
On that note, a large factor in this review was the instability of press drivers. Known issues include being unable to downclock HBM2 on the Radeon VII, which AMD clarified was a bug introduced in Adrenalin 2019 19.2.1, or system crashes when the Wattman voltage curve is set to a single min/max point. There are also issues with DX11 game crashes, which we also ran into early on, that AMD is also looking at.
For these reasons, we won't have Radeon VII clockspeed or overclocking data for this review. To put simply, these types of issues are mildly concerning; while Vega 20 is new to gamers, it is not new to drivers, and if Radeon VII was indeed always in the plan, then game stability should have been a priority. Despite being a bit of a prosumer card, the Radeon VII is still the new flagship gaming card. There's no indication that these are more than simply teething issues, but it does seem to lend a little credence to the idea that Radeon VII was launched as soon as feasibly possible.
Test Setup | |||||
CPU | Intel Core i7-7820X @ 4.3GHz | ||||
Motherboard | Gigabyte X299 AORUS Gaming 7 (F9g) | ||||
PSU | Corsair AX860i | ||||
Storage | OCZ Toshiba RD400 (1TB) | ||||
Memory | G.Skill TridentZ DDR4-3200 4 x 8GB (16-18-18-38) |
||||
Case | NZXT Phantom 630 Windowed Edition | ||||
Monitor | LG 27UD68P-B | ||||
Video Cards | AMD Radeon VII AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 (Air) AMD Radeon R9 Fury X NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti |
||||
Video Drivers | NVIDIA Release 417.71 AMD Radeon Software 18.50 Press |
||||
OS | Windows 10 x64 Pro (1803) Spectre and Meltdown Patched |
Thanks to Corsair, we were able to get a replacement for our AX860i. While the plan was to utilize Corsair Link as an additional datapoint for power consumption, for the reasons mentioned above it was not feasible for this time. On that note, power consumption figures will differ for earlier GPU 2018 Bench data.
In the same vein, for Ashes, GTA V, F1 2018, and Shadow of War, we've updated some of the benchmark automation and data processing steps, so results may vary at the 1080p mark compared to previous GPU 2018 data.
289 Comments
View All Comments
Dr. Swag - Thursday, February 7, 2019 - link
If I had to guess, those tests probably are more dependent on memory capacity and/or memory bandwidth.Klimax - Friday, February 8, 2019 - link
Could be still difference between AMD's and Nvidia's OpenCL drivers. Nvidia only fairly recently started to focus on them. (Quite few 2.0 features are still listed as experimental)tipoo - Thursday, February 7, 2019 - link
That they changed the FP64 rate cap entirely in BIOS makes me wonder, should the iMac Pro be updated with something like this (as Navi is supposed to be launching with the mid range first), if it would have the double precision rate cap at all as Apple would be co-writing the drivers and all.tvdang7 - Thursday, February 7, 2019 - link
I feel AT needs to update the game list. I understand that these are probably easier to bench and are demanding but most of us are curious on how it performs on games we actually play. Lets be real how many of you or your friends play these game on the daily? BF1 and MAYBE GTA are popular but not on the grand scheme of things .Manch - Thursday, February 7, 2019 - link
7 DX 111 DX 12
1 Vulcan
Need a better spread of the API's and denote which games are engineered specifically for AMD or Nvidia or neither. I think that would be helpful when deciding which card should be in your rig.
TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, February 7, 2019 - link
Perhaps tell game developers to get with the times then? You cant test what isnt there, and the vast majority of games with repeatable benchmarks are DX11 titles. That is not Anandtech's fault.Manch - Friday, February 8, 2019 - link
Didn't say it was. Merely a suggestion/request. There are around 30 games that are released with DX 12 support and about a dozen with Vulkan. Some of the DX 11 titles tested for this review offer DX 12 & Vulkan supt. They exist and can be tested. If there is a reason to NOT test a DX version or Vulkan version, for example RE2's broken DX12 implementation, OK fair enough. I think it would offer a better picture of how each card performs overall.Manch - Friday, February 8, 2019 - link
DX11 DX12 Vulkan
BF1 Tested Yes No
FC5 Tested No No
AotS Yes Tested Yes
Wolf Yes Yes Tested
FF Tested Maybe? No
GTA Tested No No
SoW Tested No No
F1 Tested No No
TW Tested Yes No
4 of the games tested with DX11 have DX 12 implementations and AotS has a Vulkan implementation. If the implementation is problematic, fair enough. Put a foot note or a ** but there are games with DX 12 and Vulkan out there on current engines so it can be done.
Ryan, perhaps and article on the games, the engines, their API implementations and how/why you choose to use/not use them in testing? Think it would be a good read.
Manch - Friday, February 8, 2019 - link
Sorry bout the format didn't realize it would do that to it.eddman - Friday, February 8, 2019 - link
"about a dozen with Vulkan"What are these dozen games? Last time I checked there were only three or four modern games suitable for vulkan benchmarking: Wolfenstein 2, Doom, Strange Brigade and perhaps AotS.
IMO Wolfenstein 2 is enough to represent vulkan.
"Wolf Yes Yes Tested"
Wolfenstein 2 is vulkan only; no DX12.
As for DX12, yes, I too think they could add more.