Overclocking and Conclusions
Overclocking with water cooling on the Vega Frontier Edition was a much better experience than with the air cooling setup. I did notice that AMD limits the maximum thermal temperature to 70C in Wattman, compared to 90C with the air-cooled card. When I asked AMD for the reason behind this change, they only stated that it was “because they can” due to the vastly improved cooling capability. While true, I would love to see this opened more for the RX Vega derivative as I do think it was holding us back a bit in our maximum overclock capability.
My result with overclocking was a 7% increase in clock speed while moving the power target up to 125% and setting the default fan speed to around 2000 RPM. (We tested this in 350-watt TDP mode, so the 125% power setting would take us to ~440 watts.) The fan on the integrated water cooler is excellent and running it at 2000 RPM was not enough to warrant interest in our office as to the sound coming from the GPU test bed.
This gives us a “rated” clock speed of 1712 MHz, though we couldn’t hit it at a steady state; we still found oscillation to occur between that and the next lower step of frequency, 1637 MHz.
The graph above shows the added performance of the overclock and its impact on total clock speed. The card did exhibit better clock stability by simply moving the power target up to 25% without adjusting anything else in Wattman. This kept the clock at 1600 MHz throughout our testing, so it might be worth the modification for all users that want a less variant frame time experience.
The increase in clock speed and power target does cost some energy though…
As expected, the additional power target of 25% moves the card to 440 watts of directly measured power…ouch! Clearly this is not a level that AMD is going to want to bring to the consumer even with the RX Vega branding, but it does indicate that there is headroom if you are willing to sacrifice power consumption and integrate an amazing cooling solution.
Conclusions
The primary data point from our testing of the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition liquid-cooled card is that the performance delta between it and the air-cooled card were significantly wider than I expected. We measured improved average frame rates that were 10%+ higher with the card in its 350-watt setting, which I expect most consumers to use, the vast majority of the time. At 2560×1440 there were a handful of instances that show only single digit increases, but that was infrequent. As a result, the Vega FE liquid card is much more capable of competing with the GeForce GTX 1080 in our gaming tests, coming within a few percent in most tests (taking away GTA V) and taking the lead in Dirt Rally. Considering my mostly negative outlook on the Vega product family after reviewing the air-cooled card, the liquid cooled version shifts the landscape again.
Which leads to the real question: what does this mean for the upcoming RX Vega product? While I know that testing the Frontier Edition in ONLY gaming is a bit of a faux pas, much of our interest was in using this product to predict what AMD is going bring to gamers later this month. It is apparent now that if the clocks are in the 1600 MHz range consistently, rather than dipping into 1400 MHz and below states as we found with the air cooler at stock, Vega in its current state can be competitive with the GeForce GTX 1080. That’s an upgrade over where it stood before – much closer to GTX 1070 performance.
The question is then can AMD provide that type of gaming experience at the $499 price point and will it require liquid cooling to do so? AMD probably isn’t holding back on some magic air cooler performance tricks it might have for RX Vega, so I don’t expect performance and clock consistency to change much. BUT, board partner cards that don’t design only for blower-style integrations will likely be able to add a lot of RX Vega performance and capability. This is clearly an instance where a better cooling solution can make a dramatic impact; in recent years and with current GeForce cards that isn’t the case. I do think we will see a liquid-cooled version of RX Vega but at a higher cost because of the complexity of the design used here. We might also see that HBM2 memory clocked up another 100 MHz or more, boosting things ever so slightly.
As for there being no professional tests in this review – I apologize for the time constraints. I tried to run LuxMark on this card in both 300 and 350-watt modes and it soft rebooted the system multiple times in each mode. Not sure what is going on there but I have inquiries in with AMD and will be doing more investigation on our side. Once stable, I would expect the same ~10% improvement in performance moving from the air-cooled Vega to the 350-watt water-cooled version.
Despite the added performance, the Frontier Edition pricing scale leaves a lot to be desired. You are going to shell out $500 more for this version of the card, netting you at most 15% added performance for 50% added cost. Yes, the cooling solution design is impressive, and the card maintains an under 65C temperature in our testing at stock settings under full load, but it’s a steep price to pay. If the cooler really DOES cost enough to warrant that change, then it’s bad news for the potential for a water-cooled RX Vega card and its ability to stay within a reasonable price window to compare to GeForce products.
- Radeon Vega Frontier Edition (Air Cooler) – $999 – Amazon.com
- Radeon Vega Frontier Edition (Liquid Cooler) – $1500 – Amazon.com
Before doing this testing, I had dismissed the liquid-cooled version of the Vega Frontier Edition completely, but the performance and improvement in clock rate/temperature we saw today gives me hope that RX Vega will be able to turn in a better-than-expected performance when it hits the scene. There are still plenty of ways that AMD could drop the ball, but if they can launch RX Vega at similar performance to the GTX 1080, as we saw here with the card in its 350-watt state, and prices it correctly, there will be a line up for buyers. And that is despite the obvious power efficiency disadvantage that AMD will have to accept.
We’re only weeks away now folks – time to see what AMD has been building up for.








After reading this review of
After reading this review of the WC Vega FE. I am fairly sure AMD is hitting a wall with their GPU’s. The fact that AMD is slapping a AIO water cooler on their “pro-sumer” card, tells me their ability to provide efficient cards is out the window. Granted, the air cooled version is a bit of a *fart in the wind* situation.
After reading many reviews of the Vega FE (both air and WC), AMD’s drivers are once again the main culprit of their fairly poor GPU performance in games. IMO, the review needed professional/computational benchmarks. Other than that, seeing AMD’s new high end GPU falling below a 1080 is a bit concerning. I have lost a lot of hope in AMD’s RX Vega line up of GPU’s. But, I’ll remain optimistic and ultimately hope AMD steps up to the plate with their upcoming gaming oriented GPU’s. Good review as always. Thanks for posting the reviews Mr. Shrout and take care (same goes with the rest of the PCper crew).
The only reason anyone would
The only reason anyone would buy this or the air cooled model is a fanatical hatred of Nvidia. Even if you went crazy and bought the Titan Xp, you’d still be in for better performance and lower costs than the liquid cooled card. I’m not sure what AMD’s game is here but it doesn’t look good. The release drivers had better produce some impressive gains or they’ve wasted 2+ years of engineering time with this “new” architecture. I will continue to recommend the Polaris parts to anyone with a limited budget that asks. As things stand now I can’t do the same for Vega.
AMD
Another
Major
Disappointm
AMD
Another
Major
Disappointment.
Yeah, Ryzen/EPYC have been
Yeah, Ryzen/EPYC have been soooo disappointing
Something does not seem right
Something does not seem right with this launch going to reserve my judgement until the gaming cards launch.
Ryan, can your team run some High Bandwidth Cache test or is that feature disabled?
From Gamers Nexus:
Screaming
From Gamers Nexus:
Screaming “it’s not a gaming card!” from the front page of the internet doesn’t change the fact that, in actuality, AMD does intend for Vega: FE to sit wedged between gaming and production. This is something the company has confirmed with GamersNexus. It also does not change the fact that the card clearly exhibits driver inadequacies, and it is not on the press to “wait” to review an incomplete product – it’s on the company to ship a complete device which is representative of its marketing. We agree, and have published, that this is not a device best used for gaming. We’re not saying it is a gaming device, and have shown some production workloads where Vega: FE does well. What we’re saying is that, having now spent a week on various aspects of this device, giving AMD a free pass by repeatedly copying and pasting “it’s not a gaming card” into comment boxes isn’t going to encourage the company to fix its inadequacies. The drivers are inadequate to an extent that makes it difficult to tell whether the hardware is any good.
Maybe some commerical bank
Maybe some commerical bank funding from GamersNexus to AMD, or asking the GamersNexus readers to purchase AMD stocks, but Nvidia and JHH are seeing mad revenue growth in the data center, and even the automotive markets, and AMD probably should focus on the Epyc and Radeon Pro WX/Radeon instinct markets until AMD can design a gaming only focused GPU Micro-Arch!
AMD’s Epyc server SKUs need AMD matching GPU accelerator/AI products with even more compute, and ROPs/TMUs be damned, those data center revenues and margins are where the growth is for Nvidia, and where AMD is also going to get the most revenue growth, from Epyc revenues even more than any Radeon Pro WX/Radeon instinct GPU or gaming only GPU sales over the next few years.
When those Epyc revenues arrive, then AMD can divert some funding over to RTG for RTG to design some gaming only focused SKUs. And Navi is going to bring that very same Zen/Zeppelin die ecomomy of scale to AMD’s GPU development process and allow AMD to go back to providing yearly updates accross all of its GPU lines/GPU markets mainstream to flagship, and even mobile GPUs, where AMD really lacks a presence. Zen/Vega APUs will help there also.
JHH over at Nvidia, sure has spent extra time talking up other markets, and it’s those GPUs for Data Center/Automotive where Nvidia is getting its largest Y/Y revenue growth increase figures from.
GamersNexus has just published(7/18) some new undervolting/etc. benchmarks for the Vega FE, and there is some better gaming figures/power usage figures to be had. But AMD does need to hire more software/driver engineers and the Epyc revenue stream will provide some much needed funding for that and other R&D. AMD needs to still plow all its revenues back into the business, including forgoing any profits to dividends payouts. Let the AMD share holders earn via equity over the next few years, but it’s reinvest like mad for AMD over the next few years.
With AI and other “Big
With AI and other “Big Data”-type applications really taking off, coupled with nVidia withholding its newest architectures for gamers in favor of releasing datacenter-oriented devices with logically huge pricetags, it makes a lot of sense for AMD to position Vega for non-gaming use first (to me at least.) Unfortunately, that leads to lots of high-pitched squealing on the Internet … and not from the professional crowd.
Yep, AMD fanbois out in force
Yep, AMD fanbois out in force for this article.
I’ve purchased AMD video cards for the last few generations and was waiting to see if Vega would leapfrog Pascal… and it looks like it won’t unless AMD really does some magic with their drivers.
I like reading about magic in fantasy books, but don’t believe in it in real life… so after the first Vega benchmarks came out, I decided to fork over $700 for a 1080 Ti.
I am now back with the green team… and am very satisfied with the card. I don’t have to create a custom resolution to support my Cinema 4K monitor, it just works, unlike with my AMD/ATI graphics card…
I’ve put my money where my mouth is and committed to a 1080 Ti. I really doubt that the highest end RX Vega gaming card will come close to 60fps gaming on a 4K monitor with decent quality settings.
I bet you that the bullshit
I bet you that the bullshit AMD said about “RX Vega will be better compared to Vega Frontier in gaming” is just empty words. Nobody does a different GPU for gaming & compute. So, the only chance that RX Vega will be better in gaming is to have more CUs, which I highly doubt.
Also, RX Vega is not yet on the market because HBM2 is very buggy and it costs a lot, so they considered (and rightfully so) that it is better to launch first the more expensive “compute” cards for the professionals and then, when HBM2 starts to ramp up (which didn’t happen yet) they will launch the same GFX card but with different name, 8GB of VRAM, same 300W TDP and same close to, but not quite there, GTX 1080 performance.
If I were them I would sue Micron and whoever works on making HBM2, because they lost an awful lot of time, of money, of market share, but also, I would fire all the engineers from power-optimization department, because consuming 300W for a GTX 1080 – 180W comparable performance is just lame. Global foundries might have something to do with that, but as we saw with Ryzen, 14nm process from GF has the potential to be very energy efficient.
Read the review again. it
Read the review again. it needs 350W and a water cooling solution just to get close to a reference 1080 with a blower type cooler. unbelievable, right?
I haven’t seen anything from
I haven’t seen anything from AMD to indicate that they’d be using a different GPU for RX Vega cards. Different memory, software and power delivery choices on the reference cards, though- sure.
omg!
well,amd really make
omg!
well,amd really make useless earth crushed erhh…’thing’
its still crystal clear that even gtx 1070 is nuch better than ANY version of amd vega gpu’s.
i wonder why Pcper not taking OC’s and its 11gb higher mem version from test.
also example bcoz and vega was LIQUID cooling oc’d verion gtx 1080 version shloud be example ZOTAC GeForce® GTX 1080 AMP Extreme+ (11Gbps GDDR5X), and its clear, its beating amd vega liquid cooling vega.
and we cant took only 3dmark scores,sure we MUST check effiency,and that is amd vega lausiest for many years,same way as amd fury x.
if 165w gtx 1070 loose only little amd vega liquied monster its tell all amd vega old lausy techs.
its crystal clear that with thouse numbers and specs amd vega, any of its variant cant and not shoud get any good review score,they are so lausy.
score is average,not even close ‘ecomended’, or ‘good buy’
2,5-3 star
amd is maded lausy gpu,but also very expensive..
i wonder alot what a heck amd thinking when its made and also even release that kind bad effiency old technics ,and i must say slow (for its power eat/fps) gpu??!
yea,its about 1990 years tdp!
its clear its value go down quickly and its well…re-seling value even quicker…if some one eally buy it.
i dont take that earth eater my pc even free.
shame amd,why you offer ppl this kind…’thing’!!??
> yea,its about 1990 years
> yea,its about 1990 years tdp!
um, no, not even close. TDPs were never this high in 1990 because the CPUs in use then weren’t nearly as powerful.
You’re complaining about its cost? This isn’t the gaming card. Pro cards are expensive. AMD’s recent demonstration in Budapest indicates they’re going for a lower price point than nVidia (but performance might not be as good.)
Seeing as I typically run games on medium-high settings at 1080 (or 720), a card that performs close to a 1070 but is cheaper would be great for me. I concur the power consumption seems really high, though.
… that and GPUs didn’t
… that and GPUs didn’t exist in 1990. Vector processors, yes. 2D graphics cards? Yes. GPUs? … absolutely not
The number of fanboys
The number of fanboys attempting to give AMD a free pass on Vega’s performance is laughable. When Nvidia pulled the same crap with “Titan” and tried justifying charging $1000 for a GPU because it was a “pro” card, those same fanboys saw right through it. Call this chip what it is and stop sugar coating it: it’s AMD’s lame attempt at at Titan… charging a massive early adopter tax and hiding behind the guise of “pro” branding. The fact that its not branded as an RX card means absolutely nothing. If anything, AMD should be ashamed that they are releasing a $1500 gpu with such lame drivers.
Drivers aren’t going to make up for the fact that this card consumes 2x as much power as a 1080, even if they do eventually close some of the gap. The only way RX Vega would perform substantially better than FE Vega would be to add more shaders, otherwise we’re talking <10% improvements from drivers in all likelihood. At the end of the day this card is too hot and too slow to compete with cards Nvidia has had out for well over a year.
I'm sick of paying Nvidia's bullshit prices, but if this is AMD's best shot I really have no choice.
Well that was crap for gamers
Well that was crap for gamers but look where Nvidia is seeing the greatest revenue growth. And some folks used that Titan X semi-pro SKU(And saved thousands over the Quadro prices) for its extra compute, same as will be using the Radeon Pro FE for its extra compute for non gaming workloads. Nvidia has the extra data center market revenues, as well as gaming market revenues, to afford to have a gaming only focused line of GPUs with the ROP/TMU counts to really fling out the FPS at the cost of any unnecessary compute for gaming only workloads.
If I were AMD I would not worry about gaming as much and would instead focus on the Vega/Full professional data center focused GPU/AI focused SKUs to go along with the Epyc data center focused CPU SKUs. That data center market is where both AMD and Nvidia will see the greatest revenue growh potential for their GPUs and CPUs(AMD Only). And Business in the PC and gaming markets is a relatively mature market where there is not so much growth potential and it’s just AMD and Nvidia competing for a share of a relatively fixed sized/stagnent market that also suffers wild demend swings. Gaming does not have enough revenue/revenue growth to support both AMD’s and Nvidia’s recenue growth needs and they both have to look towards the data center/AI/automotive/semi-custom console markets for any revenue growth.
Gamers are going to have to give up their on their illlogical sense of entitlement because the gaming only GPU market is not enough for both AMD and Nvidia to survive on as businesses.
The DRIVERS are fairly
The DRIVERS are fairly up-to-date, so any optimizations that can be done apply to NEWER game titles. The only thing that could affect performance ACROSS THE BOARD is if there is some specific hardware change that is messing things up with the current state of drivers.
But… this isn’t like the RYZEN CPU issues where code-jumping to CCX or other issues can affect performance. VEGA is a slightly tuned (AFAIK) version of the prior GPU so not sure what we can expect.
Plus, if there was some “game changing” update to be had with how code is manipulated it should affect non-gaming applications too so it seems unlikely AMD would launch VEGA-FE with some crippling bug in the drivers.
*So, I think sitting just below the GTX1080 on AVERAGE is what we can expect, with the cards remaining HOT and having throttling issues in many instances which may cause more STUTTER on average than the NVidia cards.
With the cost of HBM2 memory AMD’s in a tough spot and frankly will probably resort to cherry-picked benchmarks and “magic” promises like the High Bandwidth Memory Controller etc.
I was rooting for AMD, but unfortunately they seem to have severe engineering difficulties getting the HEAT LOW and the FREQUENCY HIGH (I’m aware that frequency vs pipeline is a separate issue but the fact remains the chips put out too much heat and thus have cooling issues).
**Raja claimed that the RX-480 GPU was at lower frequencies because the GPU was initially meant for mobile, and that was why scaling up the frequency was problematic. Okay. Fine. So I had HIGH HOPES that they would get the heat/frequency issue sorted out when working with the fabrication engineers. But 350W to get similar results to a GTX1080? Almost 2x the power? What happened?
Raja Koduri said in Reddit
Raja Koduri said in Reddit AMA that his software team “wishes [it] were true” that Vega was a revision of Polaris. He said it’s a new GPU architecture and the first able to utilize Infinity Fabric. I don’t know all of the ways it’s different, though. I’ve always taken more of an interest in CPUs than GPUs.
Blue LEDs(and bluish lights
Blue LEDs(and bluish lights in general) cause rhodopsin mediated photoreversal, which physically damages your eyes. This effect is wavelength and spectral power distribution dependent, NOT intensity dependent.
I did not know that,
I did not know that, interesting info.