Review: AMD Radeon RX 5700 and 5700 XT

Come up with a better argument.

"Good Enough" is status quo nonsense.

I'm sure nobody is enjoying ACO on Radeons because of their "Good Enough" Dx11.

You should have 100% gpu utilisation in this game, instead you're capped out at around 90% compared to the equivalent Geforce which is 99-100%

 

That's not the question nor your presumption.
Pascal is not obsolete and worthless. Neither it will be next year just due to DX-R. So Navi is in same place of not having fast (or any) DX-R.
1/2 of DX-R capable GPUs with HW level optimizations are not even good enough to play those games at decent fps. And you did not claim them being dead by Console either.

DX-R is overrated. It was overrated moment 2080Ti shown how insufficient it is. Prime time of DX-R will come only after there are mainstream GPUs capable to deliver 5~10 times as much raytracing as 2080Ti. That's far away unless nVidia nuked their user base with Turing while having something much, much better almost ready. Or unless AMD does over-deliver with Big Navi.

I have certain expectations, but they fall into category: Just OK performance, nice IQ improvement.

 

Fanboys will never accept that AMD failed with DX11 since day 1. They implemented it first to their hardware for consumers, they've lost tessellation battle and they even losing it in 2019. They never achieved to dust off the api overhead and the inability for multithreaded usage. They never cared. It was only a market trick to force people buy HD 5000 ten years ago. Hell, I cannot believe with so many transistors, they still need a strong CPU and AMD optimized profiles for such an old api. Engineers must never felt proud for their GPU. Confidence is still not found for red team, it is kinda sad.

 

No actually, they had a working Command List implementation with the Civilization 5 driver,

They later on disabled it again even on that

AMD could be cheaper and competitive, is the point. not just cheaper.
Cheaper because you wouldn't need to spend so much on a CPU to try and get within 5% of the same segment Geforce part.

Nearly all the games still used in benchmarks today are DX11 titles.

 

Going through this thread makes me feel like I'm reading wccftech comments instead. Spend one minute reading comments, lose one IQ point. Spend three minutes, lose three points. Spend 10 minutes and you will need to meet a psychiatrist. Guru3D wasn't like this in the past. I guess I'll need to stop bashing Intel leadership if I unwittingly contributed to this slow death of Guru3D.

 

OK. Navi supports soft tables like Vega did, and here are the results by using them on watercooled 5700XT.



And we are still on Day 4, with MSI AB having no proper Navi support yet, nor bugfix drivers.

 

Yeah I wonder what's going on there, with Assassin's Creed Odyssey and Origins and other titles the last three years their decision to ignore 11.1 Driver Command Lists and other important parts while D3D11 is still going to be around together with D3D12 and also Vulkan seems very short-sighted. (Up to 11.4 now along with WDDM 2.6 as of the current Win10 version and then there's the DXGI part as well at 1.5 or 1.6 I think it was?)

I like AMD but when I started looking this up the way the drivers work and it's limitations the answers from 2015 - 2016 having AMD reps calling it something like a limited use feature and relegating it as optional doesn't seem to apply anymore plus with D3D12 it's a mandatory feature so they really could do with a year long D3D11 overhaul for some 20.12.1 driver release or something of that nature since they're losing a good 15 - 20% performance against NVIDIA in heavily multi-threaded titles and these will continue plus we're right at the edge of a new console generation but it's not like D3D12 or Vulkan will suddenly just become the standard API from that alone.

Origins and Odyssey is a good example although not the best one either since from memory they go via NVIDIA and NvAPI for command lists and creating an additional 8 threads though it's still a good example although many games will not be using quite so many threads or using it via NVAPI.
(Other side is that on slower CPU's and/or CPU's with less than eight cores this can also lead to CPU bottlenecking and very different CPU load results compared to AMD GPU systems although overall performance can really benefit but these two games create 8 deferred context threads and nothing else without scaling to actual CPU core count.)

Hardware wise RDNA is a good change from GCN although probably not a complete overhaul at least not with Navi10 here just yet but the software also need to follow and the drivers do have their limitations and that is a important factor though I myself only have scattered replies and questions and answers from various sources so I have much to learn still though the performance skew from a lack of this feature is clearly there and it is going to be important in the future if not improved which so far it doesn't look like this is going to happen.

EDIT: Sources, sources.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/5szgnl/can_someone_explain_amds_dx11_driver_overhead_to/

That's one, also pointing to GPU Caps Viewer for feature support including 11.1 and DCL which yeah AMD should still be lacking support here.

And then there was this.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4ed7f6/will_amd_ever_fix_their_dx11_driver_overhead/

Finally DCL and one of the AMD representatives posting about these from 2016
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/commen..._happening_here_on/d0m6m5v/?context=8&depth=9


I find it useful to know but I suppose it's not entirely the subject of a hardware topic and review of the initial two Navi 10 cards here though it's a thing and one I hope AMD can eventually revisit and improve from the way the driver is currently doing it.


EDIT: Oh and from what I'm thinking if AMD adds support for this it's unlikely to help with any of the existing games using non-D3D11.1 or higher API standardized methods for multi-threaded rendering or handling command lists, driver wise the command list function could help if they have a profile set up but the multi-threading for AC Origins and AC Odyssey to use them again through NVAPI is probably not something that can change short of a patch.

Could still see some gains though, I have more to learn so could and can definitively be wrong on some of how this works.

 

I'm actually all <3 the changes i n RDNA, and what is yet to come, but damn the drivers are taking away from what would be much more competitive hardware in benchmarks all around if they just gave their DX11 some love.

If you want nvidia to be fair with prices, the competition has to be comparitive on all fronts.

nvidia took what they learned when implementing command lists and DirectX12 and then did performance analysis on all aspects of their Direct3D capabilities, its not just 11 that benefits through this (dx9 does too on some cases), but what they did end up with is the ability to apply such optimizations to games even when they don't use command lists or D3D11MT, hence why their 3Dmark results on the ST test aren't far behind their MT tests.

with the same love, the 5700XT could be actually on competitive grounds with the 2070 Super give or take single digit fps, since the video benches i have been seeing, the results are often cpu bound.

 

Yeah, the 2080/2080S hardly seems worth it from the perspective of a 1080 Ti owner. Two years later, you can buy a GPU for a similar price that performs about 15% faster - big whoop. The 5700 XT seems to perform similar to a 1080 Ti while being $300 cheaper so looks like a much better deal - why @Astyanax is denigrating it is beyond me.

 

Because it doesn't where it counts. Real Gameplay on real budget systems.

This review on a 9900k shows both parts maxing out, sure, looks good to those of us who upgrade every year to the highest end possible.



Lets put things in perspective, the people who are buying Radeons to save money are the same ones buying lower end or cpu's several generations behind (and notably slower), these are the people who will have actually benefitted from an nvidia gpu more because nvidia gpu's can get more out of weaker cpu's.

The perception of buying the cheaper vendors card because the numbers look the same in reviews is thoroughly misleading.

if AMD wasn't falling behind DXMT enabled titles in real world game play on realworld builds, they wouldn't be selling them so cheap.

What i keep seeing, is AMD Fx 8x00 and 6x00 users (and low end ryzen parts) pairing Radeon 5xx, 4xx, and even vega's, and questioning why their card doesn't perform any better than the one they replaced.

 

What counts for most people is price and performance, and the 5700 XT does very well in that measure, solidly beating out the similarly priced 2060 Super. It provides similar performance to my 1080 Ti for almost half the cost, which is what we should expect after two years (not 15% more performance at the same price, as with Nvidia).

 

Those same people end up on forums like this asking why their game don't run any faster, or actually is slower than the lower end Geforce they replaced.

And again, its not the card I'm throwing my hate behind, its the Drivers that gimp it.

 

I have no idea what you're talking about (what people?). The benchmarks, from Guru3D as well as others, show definitively that the 5700 XT is better than their Nvidia counterparts and provide far more performance per dollar. Even though I'm an Nvidia customer, I wouldn't criticize anyone for buying the 5700 or 5700 XT as they are both solid cards.

 

people with 9900k benchmark rigs aren't the ones buying radeon graphics cards to save money, it seems that fact is eluding you.

 

Damn sharpening is looking amazing!

https://i.**********/15MZbybF/Untitled.png

 

Undying, you've copied a spam link into your post somehow.

 

And you seem to be completely obvious that these cards aren't meant to compete with the 2080 Ti and Titans - like I said before, their competition is the 2060 and 2060 Super, in the $349 - $399 price range (not the $999 - $1200 range).

"I'm going to buy the 5700 XT for $399"
"Enjoy your inferior gaming experience - should have bought the 2080 Ti for $999 instead"

 

Then you pair the 2060 super with a i3 6x00 or 7x00 and it beats the pants off the cheaper 5700XT because of better drivers while being worse actual hardware.

This is the kind of blind following im talking about, AMD won't ever be able to compete in mainstream pc's until they get their crap sorted at the basic driver code.

 

Again, the benchmarks prove you wrong. You keep talking about some driver nonsense and imaginary scenarios while numerous benchmarks from various sites prove that the 5700 XT is the superior product - what, were the testers using some magically superior drivers? Sorry, but you have no leg to stand on here.

 

Astyanax not sure what all the above hate is about, especially from someone who appears to not use, gives no examples or links and spends the whole time using language to insult or belittle people that hold different opinions. Hard core troll behaviour.
I have had both AMD and Nvidia cards over years and ended up going AMD for both price and resilience. Being on lower end hardware has never negatively impacted my performances with equivalent card between both companies.
Why don't your arguments contain any actual evidence supporting what you say is beyond me, especially if they are historical arguments or problems? I do reckon it may well be because your rhetoric is not fact (can't find even now something conclusive to support your opinion surprise surprise). I do wonder if you are someone instead who invested in Nvidia (and maybe intel shares?) watching their investment go down the toilet? In which case then this is another reason to not listen to your trolling.