AMD RX 570 / 580 vs. RX Vega 56 / 64

[alexjibcam]

Hi, so I'm running currently 2 X R9 270X cards for fcpx which have been working great but I'm thinking of upgrading to 1 X RX 570 8GB.

I'm now using Mojave but wondering if its worth the hassel of upgrading?

Many thanks,

Alex

 

[rna23]

Hi, so I'm running currently 2 X R9 270X cards for fcpx which have been working great but I'm thinking of upgrading to 1 X RX 570 8GB.

I'm now using Mojave but wondering if its worth the hassel of upgrading?

Many thanks,

Alex

Hi, I was running two R9 280X and they were far more powerful than a RX580. I also spent some time with a 290X, which was great in terms of performance, but I had many random crashes, so went to the RX580 and I was very dissapointed, because the performance was a bit lower than of the 290X. So, in terms of performance it goes like this from what I have testd - from high to low (where I have LuxMark LuxBall benchmark results, I put them in parenthesis):

1) Radeon VEGA 64 (27.776 - 31.408 - depending on the configuration used)
2) 2x Radeon R9 280x (I didn't write it down unfortunatelly, but I remember it was above 20.000 - I would expect 24.000, based on the results of the 7970)
3) Radeon R9 290x (14.326)
4) Radeon RX 580 NITRO+ (13.479 - 13.729 - depending on the configuration used)
5) Radeon HD 7970 (12.888) - This should be similar to a single R9 280x.

So going for the RX 570 will definitely not be an performance upgrade ...

 

[zipb]

My MSI AMD480X does 14.657 in the luxball test. Not bad for a 200 eu card that is dead silent and doesn't use too much power. It never crashes either.
Vega 64 is quite a bit more expensive and not scaling with the price, but worth it if you do lots of video I guess...

 

[pastrychef]

Hi, I was running two R9 280X and they were far more powerful than a RX580. I also spent some time with a 290X, which was great in terms of performance, but I had many random crashes, so went to the RX580 and I was very dissapointed, because the performance was a bit lower than of the 290X. So, in terms of performance it goes like this from what I have testd - from high to low (where I have LuxMark LuxBall benchmark results, I put them in parenthesis):

1) Radeon VEGA 64 (27.776 - 31.408 - depending on the configuration used)
2) 2x Radeon R9 280x (I didn't write it down unfortunatelly, but I remember it was above 20.000 - I would expect 24.000, based on the results of the 7970)
3) Radeon R9 290x (14.326)
4) Radeon RX 580 NITRO+ (13.479 - 13.729 - depending on the configuration used)
5) Radeon HD 7970 (12.888) - This should be similar to a single R9 280x.

So going for the RX 570 will definitely not be an performance upgrade ...

Here's a tweaked Vega 56.

 

[rna23]

Here's a tweaked Vega 56.

View attachment 376387

Actually VEGA 56 and 64 and performance wise very close to each other, so if You overclock the 56, it should be no problem getting the same results. I can't tell if there are any other advantages of the 64 ... but I bought it second hand for a really good price, so I don't regret it

By the way, would it be a good idea trying to overclock the VEGA64 with the basic cooler?

 

[pastrychef]

Actually VEGA 56 and 64 and performance wise very close to each other, so if You overclock the 56, it should be no problem getting the same results. I can't tell if there are any other advantages of the 64 ... but I bought it second hand for a really good price, so I don't regret it

By the way, would it be a good idea trying to overclock the VEGA64 with the basic cooler?

I have a reference style cooler too. I undervolted and overclocked. I'm running at 1590MHz core @ 1010mV and 920MHz HBM. Temps stay below 80C under stress testing.

 

[alexjibcam]

Hi, I was running two R9 280X and they were far more powerful than a RX580. I also spent some time with a 290X, which was great in terms of performance, but I had many random crashes, so went to the RX580 and I was very dissapointed, because the performance was a bit lower than of the 290X. So, in terms of performance it goes like this from what I have testd - from high to low (where I have LuxMark LuxBall benchmark results, I put them in parenthesis):

1) Radeon VEGA 64 (27.776 - 31.408 - depending on the configuration used)
2) 2x Radeon R9 280x (I didn't write it down unfortunatelly, but I remember it was above 20.000 - I would expect 24.000, based on the results of the 7970)
3) Radeon R9 290x (14.326)
4) Radeon RX 580 NITRO+ (13.479 - 13.729 - depending on the configuration used)
5) Radeon HD 7970 (12.888) - This should be similar to a single R9 280x.

So going for the RX 570 will definitely not be an performance upgrade ...

Thanks for this very interesting......just saw this post and had already bit the bullet on the RX580

So i was getting 30Sec (Bruce X) on my 2 x 270X. Just installed the RX580 Pulse and am getting 22sec which is a small improvement i guess! Maybe not worth the £200 though. Not sure wether to send back....

Do you think 2 x RX580's would be another jump? Can't seem to find any posts to support this.

 

[rna23]

Thanks for this very interesting......just saw this post and had already bit the bullet on the RX580

So i was getting 30Sec (Bruce X) on my 2 x 270X. Just installed the RX580 Pulse and am getting 22sec which is a small improvement i guess! Maybe not worth the £200 though. Not sure wether to send back....

Do you think 2 x RX580's would be another jump? Can't seem to find any posts to support this.

I thing getting 22sec in BruceX is a great result and as You see, it is a big improvement over the 2x270x, which is a surprise to me. Maybe the 270x is not as good as the 280x.

Performance wise - it really depends what You need. The RX580 is not bad - I just wanted to show that 2x 280X gave much better performance. If You really need the best performance for FCPX, than VEGA is the best choice. 2x RX580 will give You a similar performance to the VEGA64. The question is what is more economical. In terms of power consumption, the RX580 is the best choice. It really depends on what You need ...

 

[alexjibcam]

I thing getting 22sec in BruceX is a great result and as You see, it is a big improvement over the 2x270x, which is a surprise to me. Maybe the 270x is not as good as the 280x.

Performance wise - it really depends what You need. The RX580 is not bad - I just wanted to show that 2x 280X gave much better performance. If You really need the best performance for FCPX, than VEGA is the best choice. 2x RX580 will give You a similar performance to the VEGA64. The question is what is more economical. In terms of power consumption, the RX580 is the best choice. It really depends on what You need ...

Thanks bud. Think I'm going to send back and go for the VEGA56. From reading doesn't seem to be huge gains for the 64 version? Want the best performance I can (reasonably) get. £100 more to swap my RX580 for the VEGA56 seems worth it at this stage.