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 ESTPower, Temperature, & Noise
Moving on from performance metrics, we’ll touch upon power, temperature, and noise. This is also normally where we’d discuss voltages, but as Vega is a new chip on a new architecture, nothing seems to read Vega 64 and 56 correctly.
In terms of average game clockspeeds, neither card maintains its boost specification at 100% with prolonged usage. Vega 64 tends to stay closer to its boost clocks, which is in line with its additional power overhead and higher temperature target over Vega 56.
Radeon RX Vega Average Clockspeeds | ||
Radeon RX Vega 64 Air | Radeon RX Vega 56 | |
Boost Clocks |
1546MHz
|
1471MHz
|
Max Boost (DPM7) |
1630MHz
|
1590MHz
|
Battlefield 1 |
1512MHz
|
1337MHz
|
Ashes: Escalation |
1542MHz
|
1354MHz
|
DOOM |
1479MHz
|
1334MHz
|
Ghost Recon: Wildlands |
1547MHz
|
1388MHz
|
Dawn of War III |
1526MHz
|
1335MHz
|
Deus Ex: Mankind Divided |
1498MHz
|
1348MHz
|
GTA V |
1557MHz
|
1404MHz
|
F1 2016 |
1526MHz
|
1394MHz
|
FurMark |
1230MHz
HBM2: 868MHz |
1099MHz
HBM2: 773MHz |
With games, the HBM2 clocks ramp up and stay at their highest clock state. Expectedly, the strains of FurMark cause the cards to oscillate memory clocks: between 945MHz and 800MHZ for Vega 64, and between 800MHz and 700MHz for Vega 56. On that note, HBM2 comes with an idle power state (167MHz), an improvement on Fiji's HBM1 single power state. Unfortunately, the direct power savings are a little obscured since, as we will soon see, Vega 10 is a particularly power hungry chip.
As mentioned earlier, we used the default out-of-the-box configuration for power: Balanced, with the corresponding 220W GPU power limit. And under load, Vega needs power badly.
The performance of both Vega cards comes at a significant power cost. For the RX 500 series, we mused that load consumption is where AMD paid the piper. Here, the piper has taken AMD to the cleaners. In Battlefield 1, Vega 64 consumes 150W more system-wide power than the GTX 1080, its direct competitor. To be clear, additional power draw is expected, since Vega 64 is larger in both shader count (4096 vs. 2560) and die size (486mm2 vs. 314mm2) to the GTX 1080. But in that sense, when compared with the 1080 Ti, powered by the 471mm2 GP102, Vega 64 still consumes more power.
As for Vega 64's cut-down sibling, Vega 56's lower temperature target, lower clocks, and lower board power make its consumption look much more reasonable, although it is still well above the 1070.
In any case, the cooling solutions are able to do the job without severe effects on temperature and noise. As far as blowers go, RX Vega 64 and 56 are comparable to the 1080 Ti FE blower.
Not Graphed: Temperature of the actual Vega (Star): 9329C
Noise-testing equipment and methodology differ from past results, with a more sensitive noise meter and closer distance to the graphics card. Readings were also taken with an open case. As such, the noise levels may appear higher than expected.
213 Comments
View All Comments
Lolimaster - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
RXVega56 offwers a damn good value, smashing the 1070 for $100 less-Da W - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
Think my Haswell + 780 rig is closing to retirement. A Vega 56 + Ryzen 1700X combo and a giant screen looks a good replacement.thartist - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
The 1700X won't do any better for gaming if that's what you care about, but the card surely will.Lolimaster - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
4c/8t extra to not care about cpu for a long time on top of being to actually do productivity things while gaming.Da W - Tuesday, August 15, 2017 - link
Actually i want a workhorse that can ALSO game fro time to time. What kids do to a life.......tipoo - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
There's a cryptocurrency specific ISA addition, eh. People wanting it for graphics may hate it, but this may see huge demand from miners.extide - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
Yeah, noticed that one too, heh.NeonFlak - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
So, after reading this review I'm not sure what the point is of the Vega 64 for $100 more than the Vega 56.DanNeely - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
The same thing as the 1080 over the 1070 in Nvidia land; which has a similar price/power/performance tradeoff. It's the fully enabled higher clock speed version for people willing to pay a premium for higher performance and who're less concerned about power/dollar efficiency.Jumangi - Monday, August 14, 2017 - link
Not with its performance and terrible power/heat it does. The Vega 56 is a solid competitor to the 1070 but the 64 does very poorly against the 1080.