The AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 & RX Vega 56 Review: Vega Burning Bright
by Ryan Smith & Nate Oh on August 14, 2017 9:00 AM ESTGrand Theft Auto V
The other veteran from our 2016 GPU game suite, GTA V is still graphically demanding as they come. As an older DX11 title, it provides a glimpse into the graphically intensive games of yesteryear. Originally released for consoles in 2013, the PC port came with a slew of graphical enhancements and options. Just as importantly, GTA V includes a rather intensive and informative built-in benchmark.
Like its previous appearances, we follow those settings, as GTA V does not have presets. To recap, for "Very High" quality we have all of the primary graphics settings turned up to their highest setting, with the exception of grass, which is at its own very high setting. Meanwhile 4x MSAA is enabled for direct views and reflections. This setting also involves turning on some of the advanced rendering features - the game's long shadows, high resolution shadows, and high definition flight streaming - but not increasing the view distance any further.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
213 Comments
View All Comments
Otritus - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
in the first page on the AMD Radeon RX Series Specification Comparison chart it says vega 56 has 3585 shaders instead of 3584 shadersOtritus - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
gtx 1070 msrp is 349, price drop after 1080 tiTargon - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
I'd be surprised if we don't need another two to three months to see how the Vega performance ends up with the expected driver updates. Every high end card from AMD and NVIDIA gets at least one big driver update to add 5-10 percent performance in games.Cellar Door - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
Thanks for your excellent work Ryan.redwarrior - Tuesday, August 15, 2017 - link
Did you noter that the duynamic cache controller that AMD has touted is disabled at this point since the drivers have not been perfected to operate the cache efficiently. Once they solve that issue performance will jump anywhere from 10 to 15%. There is also some feature with the shaders that is also still disabled. All in all if we exercise a little patience Vega 64 should be a credible performer about half way between 1080 and 1080 Ti in performance. I hope when the drivers are more mature that people will do further reviews on these Vega offerings.AndrewJacksonZA - Tuesday, August 15, 2017 - link
Thank you Ryan.ddriver - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
It seems amd still have a long way to do with the drivers, despite vega being so late... Judging by the battlefield result, a title that has both optimized for amd rather than exclusively for nvidia, and has been optimized on driver level by amd, this is where vega's actual graphics capabilities lie when it comes to the actual hardware, between the 1080 and the Ti.The good (for amd) news and bad (for people like me) is that vega looks like it has exceptional compute performance, which means prices will no doubt go through the roof because of the mining craze. This is not bad for gamers, since nvidia seems like the better value, but people who need compute for stuff other than mining will have to wait a while before vega could be bought at a good price.
TheinsanegamerN - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
If we have to rely on AMD optimizing every single game for VEGA, we will never see its true potential. AMD couldnt manage to do it right in a year and some change.ddriver - Tuesday, August 15, 2017 - link
nvidia is pretty much doing that, they spend a tremendous amount of money doing other's work, money that amd is not in the position to spendScabies - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
SR-IOV?