AMD Radeon RX Vega Benchmark Review: Vega 64 and Vega 56 Tested

Jump To:

VRMark

VRMark is a relatively new benchmark aimed at those that might be thinking about buying an HTC Vive or an Oculus Rift and knowing what hardware will give them the best VR gaming experience. VRMark includes two VR benchmark tests that run on your monitor, no headset required, or on a connected HMD. At the end of each test, you’ll see whether your PC is VR ready, and if not, how far it falls short.

The Orange Room benchmark shows the impressive level of detail that can be achieved on a PC that meets the recommended hardware requirements for the HTC Vive and Oculus Rift. If your PC passes this test, it’s ready for the two most popular VR systems available today. The orange room rendering resolution is 2264 x 1348, which is 1132 x 1348 per eye and the target desktop frame rate is 109 FPS.

Benchmark Results: The AMD Radeon RX VEGA 56 and Radeon RX VEGA 64 will both give you a solid VR gaming experience as they both scored well over 200 FPS on this benchmark. The goal in this benchmark is to get 109 FPS as that is the number deemed ‘needed’ for VR gaming. Our numbers on VEGA RX nearly doubled that performance threshold. 

The Blue Room is designed to be a more intense test with a rendering resolution of 5012 x 2880 (5K) and the goal is for a desktop PC to maintain a consistent frame rate of 109 FPS or above without dropping frames to pass this test.

Benchmark Results: None of our cards can get close to passing this test and the 45.9 average FPS on the AMD Radeon RX VEGA 64 was ~6 FPS behind the EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FTW2 iCX cooled graphics card. 

Print
Jump To:
  • chrisday85

    Ok, here’s some things ticking me off: The Vega 64 is literally twice the gflops, and twice the memory bandwidth of the RX 580. The gap from the Vega 64 to RX 580 should be huge. The GTX 1060 to 1080 may be basically as large Gflops wise, but is minimal memory bandwidth wise. And what do you notice in these benchmarks? What the bloody hell is going on? The Vega is a new architecture, it’s supposed to be better in all sorts of ways. Yet here we see the same architecture generation from Nvidia performing much better in line with the increases. Allow me to demonstrate:

    Cross multiply Nvidia GTX 1060 Gears 4 1080, using the RX 580 and you find the AMD if scaling as well, should be average 157 in the frame rate, before accounting for any leap from the new architecture. What does it turn in? 128. Nvidia is scaling better in the same generation than AMD is in the new one?

    Fallout IV: It should be 125 if it scaled as well as the NVIDIA card. It is instead 112.

    Ghost Recon:

    95 instead of 106

    Battlefield:

    131 instead of 153

    Deus Ex:

    112 instead of 125.

    Grand Theft Auto is the only one it scales a tiny bit better.

    It’s scaling WORSE in DX 12 than it is in DX 11 I might add, do the math.

    I bought the Vega 64 and I have to say I’m disappointed. I’m hoping these beta drivers are the reason, because this is absurd, and I might add, the card gets to 86c unless I turn the fans to “wind turbine” as well. I also seem to be having an issue with Batman Arkham Knight in frame rate, which I’m just going to chalk up to some weird sort of glitch, because it’s nowhere near where benchmarks peg it. This has got to be one of AMD’s most disappointing launches of a new architecture I have seen.

  • Stephen

    test system, 6950x ivy bridge-e? error

    • Nathan Kirsch

      haha, winner! Fixed and thank you.

  • Sean Kumar Sinha

    Was hoping for a card that’d make NVidia push Volta and create a realistic GPU war. Unfortunately, we got cards that compete with stuff that NVidia has had out for over a year and that draw too much power, in comparison. These are good cards, for sure, but they are a year too late. Vega 56 seems like a good option for some 1080P Freesync gaming, though.

  • James Yarno

    Ethereum hash rate?