RX Vega 56 cu i7-7700K criterii de referință Calitate scăzută la setările de calitate

Este clar că RX Vega 56 este o carte de high-end semnificativ mai capabilă, care poate reda titluri AAA la 1080p/1440p cu 50-60 de cadre pe secundă. Este demn de remarcat faptul că RX Vega 56 este o carte foarte putere foame și necesită o unitate de alimentare decente. În ceea ce privește memoria RX Vega 56 , 8192 RAM MB este mai mult decât suficient pentru jocuri moderne și nu ar trebui să cauzeze blocaje. Pe scurt, performanța este excepțională, nu există nici o îndoială că aceasta este una dintre cele mai puternice singur GPU- 2017 ului acolo inch

 RX Vega 56 cu i7-7700K criterii de referință Calitate scăzută la setările de calitate
AMD Radeon RX Vega 56
Preț lei 1,097.5
An 2017
Temperatura maxima inregistrata 75C
Max ventilator de zgomot 55.2dB
Sursă de alimentare recomandată 560W
CPU Benchmark Intel Core i7-7700K @ 4.20GHz ($354.99)
Impactul CPU pe FPS + 0.0 FPS
Impactul CPU pe FPS% 0.0%
Setări calitate Benchmark Low Quality Settings
Performanță medie de 1080p 200.9 FPS
Performanța medie a 1440p 178.3 FPS
Performanță medie 4K 113.9 FPS
Memorie 8 GB
Costul pe 1080p pe cadru lei 16.4
Costul 1440p pe cadru lei 22.2
Cost 4K pe cadru lei 37.9
Serie RX Vega 56
Variant AMD Radeon RX Vega 56
Scor combinat general 90/100 Fabulos

RX Vega 64 ar putea fi high-end flagship-ul celui mai recent set de GCN 5.0, dar prețurile lor le țin la îndemâna celor mai mulți jucători de la mid-range. Pe de altă parte, RX Vega 56 este mai aproape de a fi rezonabil la un preț rezonabil de lei 1627.9. Cardurile AMD xx56 au fost întotdeauna definite prin prețuri mid-range cu performanțe care bat la ușa high-end plăci grafice - mai ales atunci când sunt overclockate. După ce ne-am ocupat de timp pentru testarea completă a plăcii grafice GCN 5.0 din RX Vega 56, putem spune fără îndoială că aceasta continuă tendința.

Pentru 1080p Full HD, am putut juca Borderlands 3, Anthem, Need For Speed: Heat, Final Fantasy XV, Just Cause 4 la 63 fps la 76 fps și menținut ratele cadrelor în jurul valorii de 71 fps. Pentru 1440p Quad HD, am putut juca GreedFall, F1 2019, Forza Horizon 4, Far Cry New Dawn, Resident Evil 2 la 65 fps la 80 fps și menținut ratele cadrelor în jurul valorii de 73 fps.

Assassin's Creed Odyssey (2018)

Calitate scăzută

Rezoluţie 1920x1080

An Placă grafică Preț Cadre pe secundă
2019 AMD Radeon RX 5700 lei 1,424
165.0 FPS
2019 NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER lei 1,632
162.0 FPS
2016 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 lei 2,036
161.8 FPS
2017 AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 lei 2,036
159.0 FPS
2017 AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 lei 1,628
158.2 FPS
2019 NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 lei 1,428
156.4 FPS
2017 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti lei 1,669
155.0 FPS
2019 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti lei 1,138
152.3 FPS
2016 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 lei 1,628
149.0 FPS
2019 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER lei 934
149.0 FPS
2019 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 lei 898
146.3 FPS
2018 AMD Radeon RX 590 lei 1,138
145.5 FPS

RX Vega 56 se află între RX Vega 64 și RTX 2060 , scăzând mai lent decât RX Vega 64 cu 0.5 % și mai repede decât RTX 2060 cu 1.2 %. Are o performanță relativă medie față de fiecare placă grafică aici. Rezultatele sale sunt de fapt RX Vega 64 de cele ale RX Vega 64 . Cei care au un monitor de rata de actualizare ridicat se vor bucura de ceea ce RX Vega 56 are de oferit, deoarece media 158.2 fps. Este un apel strâns între RX Vega 56 și rivalul său GTX 1070 Ti printr-o marjă mică.

Forza Horizon 4 (2018)

Calitate scăzută

Rezoluţie 1920x1080

An Placă grafică Preț Cadre pe secundă
2019 NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER lei 1,632
223.0 FPS
2016 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 lei 2,036
219.0 FPS
2019 NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 lei 1,428
213.1 FPS
2017 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti lei 1,669
207.0 FPS
2019 AMD Radeon RX 5700 lei 1,424
202.8 FPS
2019 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti lei 1,138
201.8 FPS
2016 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 lei 1,628
198.0 FPS
2019 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER lei 934
196.0 FPS
2017 AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 lei 2,036
193.0 FPS
2017 AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 lei 1,628
191.0 FPS
2019 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 lei 898
189.8 FPS
2018 AMD Radeon RX 590 lei 1,138
177.5 FPS

RX Vega 56 se află între RX Vega 64 și GTX 1660 , scăzând mai lent decât RX Vega 64 cu 1 % și mai repede decât GTX 1660 cu 0.6 %. Are o performanță relativă medie față de fiecare placă grafică aici. Rezultatele sale sunt de fapt RX Vega 64 de cele ale RX Vega 64 . Cei care au un monitor de rata de actualizare ridicat se vor bucura de ceea ce RX Vega 56 are de oferit, deoarece media 191 fps.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider (2018)

Calitate scăzută

Rezoluţie 1920x1080

An Placă grafică Preț Cadre pe secundă
2019 AMD Radeon RX 5700 lei 1,424
201.8 FPS
2019 NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER lei 1,632
196.0 FPS
2016 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 lei 2,036
193.0 FPS
2017 AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 lei 2,036
192.0 FPS
2017 AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 lei 1,628
187.7 FPS
2019 NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 lei 1,428
187.7 FPS
2017 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti lei 1,669
186.0 FPS
2019 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti lei 1,138
181.8 FPS
2019 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER lei 934
177.0 FPS
2016 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 lei 1,628
176.0 FPS
2018 AMD Radeon RX 590 lei 1,138
173.9 FPS
2019 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 lei 898
172.2 FPS

RX Vega 56 se află între RX Vega 64 și RTX 2060 , scăzând mai lent decât RX Vega 64 cu 2.3 % și mai repede decât RTX 2060 cu 0 %. Are o performanță relativă medie față de fiecare placă grafică aici. Rezultatele sale sunt de fapt RX Vega 64 de cele ale RX Vega 64 . Cei care au un monitor de rata de actualizare ridicat se vor bucura de ceea ce RX Vega 56 are de oferit, deoarece media 187.7 fps. Este un apel strâns între RX Vega 56 și rivalul său GTX 1070 Ti printr-o marjă mică.

PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds (2017)

Calitate scăzută

Rezoluţie 1920x1080

An Placă grafică Preț Cadre pe secundă
2019 NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER lei 1,632
202.0 FPS
2016 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 lei 2,036
197.0 FPS
2019 NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 lei 1,428
194.6 FPS
2017 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti lei 1,669
187.0 FPS
2019 AMD Radeon RX 5700 lei 1,424
182.8 FPS
2019 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti lei 1,138
182.8 FPS
2016 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 lei 1,628
182.0 FPS
2019 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER lei 934
178.0 FPS
2017 AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 lei 2,036
175.0 FPS
2019 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 lei 898
173.1 FPS
2017 AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 lei 1,628
173.0 FPS
2018 AMD Radeon RX 590 lei 1,138
158.0 FPS

RX Vega 56 se află între GTX 1660 și RX 590 , scăzând mai lent decât GTX 1660 cu 0.1 % și mai repede decât RX 590 cu 9.5 %. Rămâne scurt în ceea ce privește performanțele relative față de majoritatea plăcii grafice de aici. Rezultatele sale sunt de fapt GTX 1660 de cele ale GTX 1660 . Cei care au un monitor de rata de actualizare ridicat se vor bucura de ceea ce RX Vega 56 are de oferit, deoarece media 173 fps.

Battlefield V (2018)

Calitate scăzută

Rezoluţie 1920x1080

An Placă grafică Preț Cadre pe secundă
2019 AMD Radeon RX 5700 lei 1,424
239.6 FPS
2017 AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 lei 2,036
227.0 FPS
2017 AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 lei 1,628
225.1 FPS
2016 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 lei 2,036
223.0 FPS
2019 NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER lei 1,632
222.0 FPS
2019 NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 lei 1,428
216.6 FPS
2017 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti lei 1,669
213.0 FPS
2019 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti lei 1,138
207.4 FPS
2018 AMD Radeon RX 590 lei 1,138
205.5 FPS
2016 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 lei 1,628
201.0 FPS
2019 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER lei 934
201.0 FPS
2019 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 lei 898
194.8 FPS

RX Vega 56 se află între RX Vega 64 și GTX 1080 , scăzând mai lent decât RX Vega 64 cu 0.8 % și mai repede decât GTX 1080 cu 0.9 %. Are o performanță relativă puternică față de fiecare placă grafică aici. Rezultatele sale sunt de fapt RX Vega 64 de cele ale RX Vega 64 . Cei care au un monitor de rata de actualizare ridicat se vor bucura de ceea ce RX Vega 56 are de oferit, deoarece media 225.1 fps. Este un apel strâns între RX Vega 56 și rivalul său GTX 1070 Ti printr-o marjă mică.

Performanță joc la Calitate scăzută setări

Modificarea setărilor de calitate

Rezoluţie 1920x1080

1% Low [Min FPS] Average FPS
An Joc Cadre pe secundă
2019 Apex Legends
196
218.6
2019 Anthem
152
169.6
2019 Far Cry New Dawn
180
201.1
2019 Resident Evil 2
198
220.5
2019 Metro Exodus
139
154.8
2019 World War Z
203
226.0
2019 Gears of War 5
162
180.9
2019 F1 2019
180
201.1
2019 GreedFall
172
191.2
2019 Borderlands 3
148
164.7
2019 Call of Duty Modern Warfare
200
222.5
2019 Red Dead Redemption 2
133
148.4
2019 Need For Speed: Heat
157
174.9
2018 Call of Duty: Black Ops 4
208
231.2
2018 Assassin's Creed Odyssey
142
158.2
2018 Final Fantasy XV
160
178.3
2018 Shadow of the Tomb Raider
168
187.7
2018 Forza Horizon 4
171
191.0
2018 Fallout 76
183
203.7
2018 Hitman 2
163
181.5
2018 Just Cause 4
160
178.3
2018 Monster Hunter: World
165
184.1
2018 Strange Brigade
206
229.1
2018 Battlefield V
202
225.1
2017 Dawn of War III
182
202.9
2017 Ghost Recon Wildlands
153
170.4
2017 Assassin's Creed Origins
143
159.2
2017 Destiny 2
205
228.2
2017 PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds
155
173.0
2017 Fortnite Battle Royale
171
191.0
2017 Need For Speed: Payback
186
207.5
2017 For Honor
218
242.7
2017 Project CARS 2
181
201.7
2017 Forza Motorsport 7
200
222.8
2016 Deus Ex: Mankind Divided
161
179.5
2016 Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation
161
179.9
2016 Doom
254
282.3
2016 F1 2016
187
208.0
2016 Total War: Warhammer
179
199.9
2016 Battlefield 1
211
235.5
2016 Overwatch
216
240.0
2016 Dishonored 2
157
174.7
2015 Grand Theft Auto V
167
185.6
2015 Rocket League
461
512.6
2015 Need For Speed
194
215.9
2015 Project CARS
189
211.1
2015 Rainbow Six Siege
276
306.8
2012 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
345
383.7
2009 League of Legends
567
630.0

Rezoluţie 2560x1440

1% Low [Min FPS] Average FPS
An Joc Cadre pe secundă
2019 Apex Legends
153
191.9
2019 Anthem
126
158.6
2019 Far Cry New Dawn
145
181.9
2019 Resident Evil 2
147
184.9
2019 Metro Exodus
116
146.0
2019 World War Z
156
195.5
2019 Gears of War 5
129
162.2
2019 F1 2019
140
175.1
2019 GreedFall
135
169.5
2019 Borderlands 3
119
149.0
2019 Call of Duty Modern Warfare
153
191.8
2019 Red Dead Redemption 2
114
143.0
2019 Need For Speed: Heat
129
162.2
2018 Call of Duty: Black Ops 4
149
186.5
2018 Assassin's Creed Odyssey
112
141.1
2018 Final Fantasy XV
127
159.2
2018 Shadow of the Tomb Raider
129
162.2
2018 Forza Horizon 4
144
180.1
2018 Fallout 76
153
191.9
2018 Hitman 2
125
156.9
2018 Just Cause 4
129
161.3
2018 Monster Hunter: World
129
162.4
2018 Strange Brigade
154
193.6
2018 Battlefield V
156
196.1
2017 Dawn of War III
155
194.4
2017 Ghost Recon Wildlands
132
166.0
2017 Assassin's Creed Origins
125
156.9
2017 Destiny 2
170
213.1
2017 PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds
127
159.2
2017 Fortnite Battle Royale
130
162.8
2017 Need For Speed: Payback
145
181.3
2017 For Honor
149
187.1
2017 Project CARS 2
140
175.3
2017 Forza Motorsport 7
171
214.1
2016 Deus Ex: Mankind Divided
126
157.5
2016 Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation
135
169.3
2016 Doom
183
229.9
2016 F1 2016
160
200.2
2016 Total War: Warhammer
142
177.6
2016 Battlefield 1
164
205.3
2016 Overwatch
159
199.9
2016 Dishonored 2
133
167.1
2015 Grand Theft Auto V
130
163.0
2015 Rocket League
224
281.0
2015 Need For Speed
154
193.0
2015 Project CARS
150
188.3
2015 Rainbow Six Siege
190
237.6
2012 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
271
339.7
2009 League of Legends
318
398.3

Rezoluţie 3840x2160

1% Low [Min FPS] Average FPS
An Joc Cadre pe secundă
2019 Apex Legends
82
117.6
2019 Anthem
70
100.2
2019 Far Cry New Dawn
78
111.8
2019 Resident Evil 2
77
110.4
2019 Metro Exodus
67
96.9
2019 World War Z
86
123.1
2019 Gears of War 5
74
107.1
2019 F1 2019
80
115.6
2019 GreedFall
68
97.5
2019 Borderlands 3
65
93.9
2019 Call of Duty Modern Warfare
85
122.8
2019 Red Dead Redemption 2
66
95.1
2019 Need For Speed: Heat
74
107.1
2018 Call of Duty: Black Ops 4
74
105.9
2018 Assassin's Creed Odyssey
67
96.5
2018 Final Fantasy XV
71
102.7
2018 Shadow of the Tomb Raider
70
100.7
2018 Forza Horizon 4
84
120.8
2018 Fallout 76
83
118.6
2018 Hitman 2
71
101.8
2018 Just Cause 4
70
100.4
2018 Monster Hunter: World
68
98.5
2018 Strange Brigade
83
119.2
2018 Battlefield V
84
120.8
2017 Dawn of War III
81
116.6
2017 Ghost Recon Wildlands
75
107.7
2017 Assassin's Creed Origins
73
104.9
2017 Destiny 2
87
125.2
2017 PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds
71
101.8
2017 Fortnite Battle Royale
71
102.2
2017 Need For Speed: Payback
86
123.8
2017 For Honor
78
112.0
2017 Project CARS 2
90
129.7
2017 Forza Motorsport 7
113
162.4
2016 Deus Ex: Mankind Divided
68
98.5
2016 Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation
88
126.1
2016 Doom
95
136.7
2016 F1 2016
91
131.0
2016 Total War: Warhammer
78
112.4
2016 Battlefield 1
89
127.6
2016 Overwatch
84
120.0
2016 Dishonored 2
84
120.3
2015 Grand Theft Auto V
70
101.3
2015 Rocket League
107
153.1
2015 Need For Speed
90
129.7
2015 Project CARS
90
129.7
2015 Rainbow Six Siege
92
132.5
2012 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
197
282.2
2009 League of Legends
131
188.3
RX Vega 56 with i7-7700K at 1080p and Calitate scăzută settings

RX Vega 56 Specificatii

RX Vega 56 Board Design

Board NumberD050-03
Length10.5 inches 267 mm
Outputs1x HDMI3x DisplayPort
Power Connectors2x 8-pin
Slot WidthDual-slot
TDP210 W

RX Vega 56 Clock Speeds

Boost Clock1474 MHz
GPU Clock1138 MHz
Memory Clock800 MHz 1600 MHz effective

RX Vega 56 Graphics Card

Bus InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16
GenerationVega (RX Vega)
Launch Price399 USD
ProductionActive
Release DateAug 14th, 2017

RX Vega 56 Graphics Features

DirectX12.0 (12_1)
OpenCL2
OpenGL4.6
Shader Model6.1
Vulkan1.1.82

RX Vega 56 Graphics Processor

ArchitectureGCN 5.0
Die Size510 mm²
GPU NameVega 10
GPU VariantVega 10 XL (215-0894216)
Process Size14 nm
Transistors12,500 million

RX Vega 56 Memory

Bandwidth409.6 GB/s
Memory Bus2048 bit
Memory Size8192 MB
Memory TypeHBM2

RX Vega 56 Render Config

Compute Units56
ROPs64
Shading Units3584
TMUs224

RX Vega 56 Theoretical Performance

FP16 (half) performance21,131 GFLOPS (2:1)
FP32 (float) performance10,566 GFLOPS
FP64 (double) performance660.4 GFLOPS (1:16)
Pixel Rate94.34 GPixel/s
Texture Rate330.2 GTexel/s

Critics Reviews

• See the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 at Best Buy The Verdict If this were two separate reviews the Vega 56 would get a higher score than the Vega 64, but since it's one review I'm labeling both of ...
Conclusion. Radeon RX Vega 56 is a close derivative of Vega 64, so its behaviors largely carry over from AMD’s flagship. The company does cut this card’s board power rating by almost 30% ...
Years in development, the new Radeon RX Vega line is finally arriving - AMD's return to the higher-end of GPU performance after concentrating its efforts more on the mainstream and budget sectors ...
Similar to AMD's Radeon RX Vega 64, the Vega 56 offers two BIOSes with corresponding power profiles that can be selected using a switch on the card. If you don't change the driver-based profiles ...
Perhaps the most telling comparison, however, is that despite the 20 percent price reduction compared to the RX Vega 64, the RX Vega 56 is slower by less than 10 percent on average.
Radeon RX Vega 56 is the second AMD Vega card launched today. It comes at an affordable 9 price point, with a slightly reduced shader count that actually improves things greatly. For example, power efficiency now trades blows with some Pascal cards, which means less heat and noise, too.
On the AMD side of things, it is the AMD Radeon RX 480, or that card's successors, the Radeon RX 580 and Radeon RX 570. Therefore, the Vega 56 should be more than adequate for today's VR ...
Conclusion (RX Vega 56) The Radeon RX Vega 56 is easily the best card of this launch. It is cooler, quieter, and more efficient than the Radeon RX Vega 64 and delivers only 10 percent less ...
The AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 is the little sister of Vega 64. It comes in at a 20% lower price than the RX Vega 64, but only has 12.5% fewer stream processors, and runs lower operating frequencies.
Meet Radeon RX Vega 56 and RX Vega 64 Brad Chacos/IDG AMD sent PCWorld every version of Vega for testing, including both the air-cooled and liquid-cooled versions of the Radeon RX Vega 64.
The AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 is an upper mid-range graphics card, intended to beat Nvidia's GeForce GTX 1070 - a job it performs admirably as the benchmarks on this page demonstrate.
AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 - the Digital Foundry verdict. If you're looking for an alternative to the GTX 1070, the bottom line is that you're generally getting around 10 to 12 per cent of additional ...
The Radeon RX Vega 56 is a high-end graphics card by AMD, launched in August 2017. Built on the 14 nm process, and based on the Vega 10 graphics processor, in its Vega 10 XL variant, the card supports DirectX 12.0.
Launching today is the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64, or just Vega 64 for short. Based on a fully enabled Vega 10 GPU, the Vega 64 will come in two physical variants: air cooled and liquid cooled.
Radeon RX Vega 56 utilizes the same Vega 10 processor found in Vega 64. It’s a 486 mm² behemoth sporting 12.5 billion transistors manufactured on GlobalFoundries’ 14LPP platform.
Vega 56 vs GTX 1070, Vega goes 6-2-2 = Winner Vega! Good job AMD, hopefully next gen you can make more headway in power efficiency. But this is a good card, even beats the factory OC 1070.
The AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 and Vega 64 preview. ... so thanks AMD! RX Vega vs. the World: a 15-round heavyweight battle ... The RX Vega 56 is the more compelling choice, given the lower price and ...

Discuții și comentarii

Distribuiți comentariile dvs.
G
gillsgraphic 11 months ago
Rx580 or vega 56 or gtx 1070I will buy a new gaming pc in march with a ryzen 7 2700, but i dont know which graphics card should i buy. In my country i can get the rx 580 around 120k ft, the vega 56 around 185k ft, and a gtx 1070 about 150-160k ft. Which should I buy? I already have my monitor, it supports freesync. (75hz, 1080x2560 resolution)
0 0
S
swooshjackberry 1 year ago
Should I buy the RX Vega 56 over the GTX 1070?I'll be building a new rig in a few weeks. For a few days, I've been having trouble deciding on which graphics card I want to get. For a while, I was decided that I'd go with the 1070, but then I realized that Vega 56 performs just as well or better while offering Freesync, which my monitor does offer. For some reason, I still can't decide whether or not I should go for the Vega 56. Should I?
0 0
C
cowsstar 1 year ago
On much smaller case blower type cooler is better due to heat being dump outside the case directly. But on much bigger case "open air" cooler usually end up being better. Also noise. Those blower type cooler can be very loud when the fan speed start ramping up.
0 0