cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

General Discussions

AMD fires back at 'Super' NVIDIA with Radeon RX 5700 price cuts

MD unveiled its new Radeon RX 5700 line of graphics cards with 7nm chips at E3 last month, and with just days to go before they launch on July 7th, the company has announced new pricing. In the "spirit" of competition that it says is "heating up" in the graphics market -- specifically NVIDIA's "Super" new RTX cards -- all three versions of the graphics card will be cheaper than we thought.

The standard Radeon RX 5700 with 36 compute units and speeds of up to 1.7GHz was originally announced at $379, but will instead hit shelves at $349 -- the same price as NVIDIA's RTX 2060. The 5700 XT card that brings 40 compute units and up to 1.9GHz speed will be $50 cheaper than expected, launching at $399. The same goes for the 50th Anniversary with a slightly higher boost speed and stylish gold trim that will cost $449 instead of $499.

That's enough to keep them both cheaper than the $499 RTX 2070 Super -- we'll have to wait for the performance reviews to find out if it's enough to make sure they're still relevant.

AMD fires back at 'Super' NVIDIA with Radeon RX 5700 price cuts 

1,953 Replies

Let me guess. Bad Drivers? PC Hang / Freeze? /BSODs?/ Sounds like a jet engine?/ Hot and loud? 
I will take a look.

Thanks.

0 Likes

Wow I must be psychic - correct.

Yet they are made by the same AIB...Goes back to the argument that AMD needs to raise their standards.

I have no doubt that some AIB partners are making sub standard product do to AMD basically having no oversight and validation like the green team.

That being said the big issue on an RX 580 is that frankly the bios isn't adequate for the majority of cards released with standard vanilla bios but overclocked components. The parts just don't have enough power ceiling. Also I don't care what AMD says those chips throttle like crazy at well bellow 95 the max for the chip, and the fan curves are not aggressive enough. AMD was far more worried about how the card looked on a spec sheet than selling it with the settings that would allow it to work at defaults out of the box.  Issues with VEGA  and now Navi are much worse. 

The worst part is that with the right settings the 580 was a pretty good card. Since the middle of 2019 the drivers just kept getting worse and 2020 drivers are frankly not usable at all. 

Then compounding the issue is pairing it with your Ryzen mother board and Polaris audio doesn't even work. Though this was fixed in the now rolling out bios revisions. 

0 Likes

I took a look at the performance of Gigabyte RX590 REV2.0 (Ripoff version w/o backplate, RGB, DVI-D port).

The performance numbers are posted in AMD Red Team 3DMark Scoreboard here:

AMD Red Team 3DMark Scoreboard 

Repeated here for convenience. 

colesdav-Ryzen7 2700X-RX 590 -12 876-Firestrike
AMD Radeon RX 590 video card benchmark result - AMD Ryzen 7 2700X,ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ROG CROSSHAI... 

colesdav-Ryzen7 2700X-RX 590 -6 684-Firestrike Extreme
AMD Radeon RX 590 video card benchmark result - AMD Ryzen 7 2700X,ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ROG CROSSHAI... 

colesdav-Ryzen7 2700X-RX 590 -3 683-Firestrike Ultra
AMD Radeon RX 590 video card benchmark result - AMD Ryzen 7 2700X,ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ROG CROSSHAI... 

colesdav-Ryzen7 2700X-RX 590 -5 266-TimeSpy

AMD Radeon RX 590 video card benchmark result - AMD Ryzen 7 2700X,ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ROG CROSSHAI... 

colesdav-Ryzen7 2700X-RX 590 -2 268-TimeSpy Extreme
AMD Radeon RX 590 video card benchmark result - AMD Ryzen 7 2700X,ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ROG CROSSHAI... 

The GPU Power is reported as 150W in the Radeon Performance Overlay at times during 3DMark, during FurMark and other benchmarks.

PCIe connector takes another 75W making total power consumption of 225W.

A Palit  RTX2080 OC takes 220W maximum.

The RX590 has not crashed the PC yet, after 2 days of testing which is a novel experience.
I am running Adrenalin 2019 19.12.1 GUI/UI + Adrenalin 2020 20.4.2 Driver.

The construction of the Gigabyte RX590 Rev 2.0 cooler shroud is flimsy.
It looks like there are 2 RGB headers on the PCB but they are not connected to any RGB strips.
The Gigabyte Logo and Fan Stop Logo are missing - you can see 3 screwholes where they were removed.
Gigabyte are so mean they even removed their own logo.
The GPU has no metal backplate - the rear of the PCB gets quite hot.
I think a cosmetic backplate with RGB lighting would hurt the GPU performance, as it would likely trap heat.
I could make a metal backplate for the GPU myself, but I do not have the time.

the backplate does conduct heat but the effectiveness needs a IR camera to show it

0 Likes

I am about to find out if it does on the REV 1.0 version.

0 Likes

0 Likes

I have 2 single fan cards from the green team. That cooler on that Power Color is obviously not enough. Both of my single fan cards take three slots and have much more robust coolers than this. 

0 Likes

My old Sapphire Fury Nano had a higher TDP of 175w vs the 5600XT's 160w yet never reached temperatures anywhere near that even with a fan speed of around 2000, which was near inaudible, so unless the cooler and fan are so poorly designed that spinning it faster results in a jet engine, there's no reason it should spin that slowly, unless they took the stock BIOS from a regular 5600XT and didn't modify it, which is a distinct possibility...

Still makes you wonder how these AIBs which put out flawless, high quality green cards can put out so flawed and low quality red cards...

0 Likes

Sapphire Nitro cards are well made and I have not had problems with them lasting

EVGA cards are close to the same quality as well

0 Likes

I really like the EVGA ICX technology - they added lots of sensors and MCU to monitor GPU Temps.

0 Likes

colesdav wrote:

I really like the EVGA ICX technology - they added lots of sensors and MCU to monitor GPU Temps.

Sapphire and EVGA both have lots of sensors to alert the user before the card croaks.

EVGA accepts that a customer can apply new TIM and if that heals a card, it saves more than some klutz who cannot even do that right. EVGA will even send somebody thermal pads for the VRAM etc.

0 Likes

Your R9 Nano, didn't smell of burning? Scented Candle wax perhaps? :-) .

0 Likes

Seems like RX5700XT threads about stability issues are getting locked as soon as possible now.
I think it is pointless trying to work out what is happening on Navi RDNA any more.
On comedy side of things, gpuopen.org big announcement today on Radeon Rays 4.0 - did you see it? 
https://gpuopen.com/radeon-rays/ 

It is no longer open source...

Well they have obviously been taking plays from the competitors playbook recently. So now the company that long backed open standards is going proprietary should not be a shock. Guess the old saying of "can't beat them join them" applies.

0 Likes

Aye, I saw it when I looked at the Phoronix news this morning,

Something which is interesting in their forum discussion on the topic was this post

I'm not a programmer, so could one of you explain why this may be the case, or was he just talking out of his rear, he does only have 2 posts...

0 Likes

RDNA2 is "on the way" according to this and other sites:
AMD RDNA2 Graphics cards set for release in September 2020 

RX5700XT Raise The Game Deal has been extended until the end of May 2020:
https://www.amd.com/en/gaming/raise-the-game

0 Likes

Aye, and apparently AMD is going to have concurrent RDNA and RDNA2 cards, essentially doing what nVidia did by having a GTX and RTX line. Possibly it's going to mean that AMD is going to return to realistic prices, the RX 5700XT's replacement at $200, but you're going to lack ray tracing and other such features...

https://community.amd.com/thread/253273 

0 Likes

The RX 5000 cards at present are mid range cards so the RDNA2 cards will likely fill in at the higher end of the market before replacing the mass market cards. AMD is lacking in the extreme video card segment.

0 Likes

I have a PowerColor RX5700XT Red Dragon incoming in for a PC Build next week.
I will not be taking the hit on the build if it has to be RMAed, agreed up front.
I will be able to test it first hand. This should be interesting as I will be able to directly compare 40mm dual slot versions of each GPU,

RTX2080 OC
vs
RX Vega 64 Liquid

vs
RX5700XT

On the same machine.

0 Likes

3 disparate cards like that are a wast of power and resources

use the rx 2080 which is more than both radeon cards

0 Likes

I am not intending to put all three on the same PC.
I intending to test them all on the same PC and see how they compare.
Multiple GPU on a single machine for Blender is not a waste of power and resources.

colesdav wrote:

I am not intending to put all three on the same PC.
I intending to test them all on the same PC and see how they compare.
Multiple GPU on a single machine for Blender is not a waste of power and resources.

All I have is the RX 480 and the steam version of Blender does not seem to be able to leverage it as well I was hoping. Same story with my GTX 1060. Not sure if it is drivers, the encoder or what.

This is why I installed 32GB of memory and use the big Wraith Stealth CPU cooler so when I have to use my CPU I am not worried about it overheating.

0 Likes

What version of Blender is that Steam Version?
You should run at least Blender version 2.79c for AMD GPUs.
I am currently sticking with Blender 2.80 because that is what I started a project on.
The PowerColor RX5700XT Red Dragon is installed and testing now.

I am running with Adrenalin 2019 19.12.1
No crashes at all so far.
I ran it along with an RX Vega 64 Liquid, PowerColor RX Vega 56 Red Dragon, Gigabyte RX 590 REV 1.0 8GB. to make 4 MGPU render.
It runs fine. The render completed in ~ 40 minutes rather than ~ 147 minutes on single RX Vega 64 Liquid.


I also tested the card running BFV at 4K Ultra using Adrenalin 19.12.1 driver at 4K Ultra. I tested Radeon Chill. So far so good, no crashing.
However, despite all of the hype about Navi, it is slower than an RX Vega 64 Liquid at 4K and very definitely much slower than a Palit RTX 2080 OC at 4K. 

That is with the RX5700XT fans maxed out at 100%, the Power Target set to + 50% and the GPU Power reported as 220 Watts.
The
GPU runs at a toasty 75'C, similar to R9 Nano.
The card is ~ as loud as the RTX2080 with the fans maxed out.

The Game Clock is higher than I expected based on the specification but that may be down to the increased power limit.

Steam says it is version 2 .83

All I know is that both my RX 480 and GTX 1060 are underperforming

0 Likes

Click on the Blender Symbol on top LHS of the window and select splash screen.
It will show you what you are running.

pastedImage_1.png

pastedImage_2.png

0 Likes

Mine looks a little different

The blender icon also looks a little different too

0 Likes

Ther Blender version is on the top RHS of the splash Screen.

0 Likes

I can confirm this PowerColor Red Dragon RX5700XT very definitely causes BSODs and blackscreens by its very presence on the PC. 
I am running Adrenalin 19.12.1.
Five blue screens in one evening and a Black screen shutdown this morning whilst working after boot using 19.12.1 drivers on clean Windows 10 19.09 build.
Here are the Blue Screens...

pastedImage_1.png

I am updating the Drivers to see if I can get rid of this.

No game crashes in BFV at 4K Ultra yet.

0 Likes

Here is the the default Wattman Curve for the card.

The GPU Specs are here:
https://www.powercolor.com/product?id=1565953800#spe 

Base Clock:  1650MHz
Game Clock: 1795MHz
Boost Clock: 1905MHz(Boost)

The numbers in the Wattman Graph do not relate to any of the above specifications.

RedDragonWattmanDefaultGraph.png

0 Likes

Updated to Adrenalin 20.5.1 drivers.

The 3 points on the Wattman Graph change

From:

800 MHz, 686 mV.

1422 MHz, 798 mV.

2040 MHz, 1135 mV

To :

800 MHz, 686 mV.

1445 MHz, 807 mV.
2090 MHz, 1200 mV.

I am not sure what that tells me, other than the card running at higher frequency.

System Information reports:
Core Clock
1795 MHz
Memory Clock
1750 MHz

0 Likes

I was looking at the whole details over the Power Color card,

it seems to be rather light weight compared to the Saphire Nitro+ cooler

0 Likes

The PowerColor Red Dragon RX5700XT It is a 2 slot 40mm GPU.

RE: it seems to be rather light weight compared to the Saphire Nitro+ cooler

Yes it is a smaller GPU because it is for a small form factor buid and the Nitro + is too big.

That just means you run the fans at higher speed for the same temperature.

Based on reviews, the Navi cards all perform simuilary, provided teh cooler and thermal pads and mounting torqur for the cooler is not completely broken.

The Sapphire RX5700XT Nitro+ and SE versions are:

2.5 slot, ATX


Dimension: 306x 135 x 49 (mm)


The PowerColor Red Dragon RX5700XT is:

Dimension: 240 x 132 x 41 (mm)

Updating the drivers to 20.5.1 has significantly improved BFV performance on the PowerColor RX5700XT Red Dragon versus runinng on 19.12.1.

I am still running the Adrenalin 19.12.1 GUI/UI but with 20.5.1. drivers.
The PowerColor RX5700XT Red Dragon is now running with better performance than to RX Vega 64 Liquid in Turbo mode. 
The performance is similar to undervolted and HBM overclocked RX Vega 64 Liquid now.

It is still not as good as RTX2080.

0 Likes

All I know is the with digital coins going back up it seems that I may have to make do with this RX 480 longer than expected.

Prices for RX 5700 XT when you can find them are higher than launch

0 Likes

Tweaktown just posted up a nice article, TweakTown: How does the Fury-X perform in 2020 (Hint: Not Well)‌ comparing the Fury X to Polaris, Vega, and Navi cards. As expected, it falters behind the RX 590 and well behind the RX 5500XT. Makes you have to wonder if we were misled about aspects of the Fury X from the start, as the Fury X supposedly has 44% more computational power than the 5500XT, yet is thrashed by it.

Hi, thanks for that article. If you look at the 4K performance in 3DMark Firestrike Ultra you may well see why I believe HBM overclocking was "disabled" on the R9 Fury X GPU's just before the Vega 56 and 64 were launched.

Regarding this "Conclusion"

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Thoughts

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(1).  So there you have it -- another look at AMD's Radeon R9 Fury X that launched 5 years ago now. How does it perform? It is alright, nothing surprising -- it hasn't aged well in a world of mid-range cards that not only keep up performance wise, but also offer that important increase in frame buffer with 8GB of VRAM.


Nonsense.

There are very few instances I have seen over the years where that 8GB GDDR5 versus 4GB HBM matters and kills the R9 Fury X performance.
Clearly the Author does not understand the importance of Memory Bandwidth versus "VRAM Capacity".

(2). RE: But even that fan-dangled HBM technology isn't enough when even at 1080p the Fury X gets smashed by mid-range cards like the Radeon RX 590 and GeForce GTX 1070.

HBM technology increasingly shows it's advantage at 2K and 4K, not 1080p. 

I think AMD dropped their high end R9 Fury X / Fury / Nano users like a brick w.r.t. gaming optimization for those GPUs.

Polaris GPU Architecture is the basis for console GPUs, and it is likely that effort made to optimise perfomance on console games was transferred over into PC titles.

In addition, Polaris received lots of optimisation versus GTX 1060 6GB and has the most market share of all AMD GPUs.

That may well be why Polaris does well in comparison.

0 Likes

(3). RE: Hell, the new Radeon RX 5500 XT is superior in virtually every single test. That goes to show how far AMD has come architecturally from Fiji to Navi.


Since when have the drivers for the RX5500XT been stable though?
Are they even stable today in comparison to R9 FuryX / Fury / Nano?

I have not seen or used the RX 5500 XT and I have only just started to look at this RX5700XT for PC Build I am doing.

I tried to avoid the use of Navi GPU for this PC build.
I still think they are too risky.
The price of 370, even including that game deal "worth" 100 still looks too high to me.
I am not the one going to take the hit if it needs to be RMAed or replaced though.
 
I can tell you this.

I have never seen so many BSODs and Black Screens on any AMD GPU in such a short time.
I had 6 BSODs and one black screen in one evening of testing the PowerColor RX5700XT Red Dragon with Adrenalin 2019 19.12.1 Drivers.
That was not even running games.
Just changing Adrenalin settings was enough to crash the PC.

I have not and will not be testing all intervening drivers up to Adrenalin 20.5.1.

So far with Adrenalin 19.12.1 GUI/UI and Adrenalin 20.5.1. drivers I have had just one black screen crash after playing video in Mozilla Firefox.
I am certain that if I used full Adrenalin 2020 20.5.1 install with that awful GUI/UI the card would be crashing much more often. 

0 Likes

(4). RE: ----, the new Radeon RX 5500 XT is superior in virtually every single test. That goes to show how far AMD has come architecturally from Fiji to Navi. No - Not a fair comparison at all.

Compute Performance totally ignored from these tests.
R9 Fury X ~ 8.6 TFlops  of Compute performance.
The Navi GPUs are not functional on AMD much touted ROCm as far as I know.

(5). RE: ----, the new Radeon RX 5500 XT is superior in virtually every single test. That goes to show how far AMD has come architecturally from Fiji to Navi.

The Radeon RX 5500 XT launched at $199 with 8GB of RAM and it beats the Radeon R9 Fury X which launched at $649 with 4GB of RAM. AMD has come a very long way when it comes to giving gamers some kick --- value for money, and the Radeon RX 5500 XT shows just how far the company has come.

    2015 -- Fiji GPU + 4GB HBM2 = $649
    2020 -- Navi GPU + 8GB GDDR6 = $199

These launch price comparisons are a bit "misleading".
The Author completely ignores the intervening drop in price for new R9 Fury X cards, and then the fact that second hand good condition versions could be purchased for 250 for a Fury X and ~ 200 for a Nano. 
Meantime, does anyone remember the pricing for RX480/580 and above during the Mining boom?

(6). The Radeon RX 5500 XT shows just how far the company has come.

The R9 Fury X/Fury/Nano suffered from very poor driver support since before Vega launched.
I think HBM Overclocking was deliberately disabled to make Vega 56 look better and gaming optimization effort dropped.

Drivers were also unstable early on.
You should expect architectural advances with Navi versus Vega versus Fiji.

It looks like the Radeon Software Team let the RX5700XT down terribly, since 20.5.1 seems to be the first ~ stable driver on RX5700XT 10 months after launch, based on what I have seen on this Forum, and started to test on this RX5700XT before it leaves my hands.

0 Likes

Sorry for the multiple posts - but the AMD Filter kept rejecting the text from the Authors conclusions and I had to trawl through and find what was the problem.

0 Likes