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
msroadkill612 - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
Anyone who is kinda meh about a vega 56 or a 1070, and plans a ryzen rig, is mad not to get the sibling vega imo.Synergies are bound to pay dividends for some time to come.
Leyawiin - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
lol - "synergies". That was disproved years ago.mapesdhs - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
I remember the days when tech sites were investigating why NV cards seemed to run better on AMD hw, think it was back in the P67 days or somesuch. The issue faded away, but it proved there's not necessarily a benefit to having all the tech from one side of the fence.beast6228 - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
AMD pulled an Nvidia on this one, that touted $499 ended up being $599 and there was very limited supply on launch. I went to Microcenter and they only had 4 cards, 2 Gigabytes and 2 XFX. When I saw the $599 I was like, you can buy a faster, cooler and less power hungry 1080 for $100 less. This performance does not warrant this high price, sorry AMD you failed pretty hard.coolhardware - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
Glad to hear Microcenter at least had *some* stock. Everywhere seems out now and I am just wondering when Amazon is going to finally pull the trigger on their cards and bundles!Aldaris - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
How is it AMD's fault sellers are ignoring RRP?mapesdhs - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
$750 in the UK (equivalent). AMD is responsible for the hype though, and thus arguably for the demand, so if they can't meet the supply then sellers can spike the prices to exploit the demand. Economics 101. AMD must have known that either the power/noise behaviour wasn't so good, or the supply could not be met. They're not directly responsible, but the resulting pricing should not be a surprise. Those buying them at inflated prices are just the ones who either don't know about the performance/power/noise issues or don't care (Vega64 performs better than I expected, but at 20% more expensive than a 1080 FE it makes no sense. Heck, for the cost of a 64/Liquid in the UK one can get a 1080 Ti.BrokenCrayons - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
GPU power consumption was already too high before Vega's release. I think it's a mistake to raise that already high bar even higher.Smell This - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
Good for AMD.You guys touched on it, but this is TSMC 28nm 'big chip' shrunk to GloFo 14nm LPP. Impressive 15% smaller with nearly 50% more transistors.
And, it seems to me with the Infinity Fabric the next logical step is Zen+HBM2+Stars.
Make it so, Dr Su!
FreckledTrout - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
Or vega + vega + HBM2 on a 7nm process aka Navi