KitGuru KitGuru.net – Tech News | Hardware News | Hardware Reviews | IOS | Mobile | Gaming | Graphics Cards
Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon Wildlands is an open world tactical shooter video game developed by Ubisoft Paris. It is the tenth instalment in the Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon franchise and is the first Ghost Recon game to feature an open world environment.
We run the built-in benchmark using the Very High quality preset at 1080P, 1440P, and 4K.
At 1080p the game suggests around 2.9GB of VRAM usage. At 1440p that number increases to around 3.1GB. At 4K the video memory usage is quoted as around 3.8GB.
Ghost Recon Wildlands sits the RX Vega64 back between GTX 1070 FE and GTX 1080 OC partner card performance. In most cases, the performance of AMD's air-cooled card is closer to that of the GTX 1070 FE.
The performance lead over Vega64 for the GTX 1080 G1 Gaming is 15% at 1080P, 14% at 1440P, and 12% at 4K. Compared to GTX 1070 FE, RX Vega64 is around 7% faster at 1080P, 9% faster at 1440P, and 14% faster at 4K.
GTX 1080 Ti is the only card offering anywhere near playable 4K performance using Very High quality settings. The same £700 GPU is the only card capable of offering high-refresh rate 1440P gaming. However, AMD's RX Vega64 again finds itself sat in an appealing performance range for 1440P gamers with FreeSync monitors. Average performance at 1440P is over 60 FPS while the minimums in the short benchmark run are above 50 FPS.
Has anyone found a store actually selling these in the UK yet? Release date is today, but can’t find anything at overclockers.co.uk, amazon.co.uk, etc.
What a shocking bad cooler. Will wait on some partner cards before making a decision. Power consumption looks dire too. 🙁
Scan and overclockers got some stock
1900 MHz? How much power will then need to be delivered to it 😀
kinda disapointed because to me, this VEGA won’t make my fury X obsolete, delivery 95 FPS 1080p on Deus ex, the fury delivery 85 fps on 1080p, to me at least isn’t a great evolution :/
The prices on Overclockers for the Vega 64 is £548.99 for the cheapest and £599 for the special edition..though not in stock…The cheapest GTX 1080 reference on Overclockers is £449.99 and in stock.. a £100 price difference.. It’s got get to the price of the GTX…please!
A factory overclocked GTX 1080 G1 gaming by Gigabyte is only 519USD on Amazon.
I’m sure you could find cards costing 499 by other vendors
Vega 64 even in 499 isn’t worth it when you consider the price to performance to TDP.
GTX 1080 is a better buy if you care only for gaming performance and TDP….unless you want mining in which Vega 64 might be better.
I get what you’re saying, but it’s not meant to be a 1080p-optimised card
It’s hitting 1440p very well, but is still lagging in 4K. It’s an upgrade compared to Fury X, and probably noticeably in games, but it probably won’t blow you away like a 1080TI would. It’s cheaper than the TI, but still disappointing that AMD isn’t going after high end anymore.
I will wait till board partners and custom bioses so I can OC this beast. A Vega 64 LC board with a EK waterblock in my loop and 2 bioses would be just awesome. I just hope the drivers arrive and enable primitive shaders, Rapid packed math and fix the HBCC. I won’t treat these benchmarks as final and would take them with a grain of salt. Besides, you are NOT playing the games, you are using the in-game benchmarks which are INACCURATE, so ALL the KitGuru benchmarking are UNRELIABLE!!!!
No one in their right mind should buy a Vega 64 at 1080 prices when you consider its gaming performance and TDP.
Lol you are obsessed with TDP. No gamer should care. Can you give it enough power? Can you keep it cool?
Your arguing a point that means little since this cards power delivery was build almost perfectly.
You should not be as you don`t know what the card will do once its optimized for the game. Once more Dirt 4 changed 1 AA setting and it went from neck and neck with 1070 to smashing it by 24%. Also when I look at the games it struggles in they are mainly past there prime, like GTA 5 and if someone tweak cache settings this Vega will take off like a rocket.
The one thing HBM simply cannot be argued about is how insanely powerful it is calling massive textures as well as limiting the low frame dips.
I notice micro stutters and frame dips 100x more than a 10 FPS difference past 60 TBH.
And I am really going for that. Hopefully it blows the doors off the current lows.
Power doesnt matter as much on here because normally we equate tons of power with heat. But this VRM is at the realistic limit almost at 91.5%
Pls link it. I have been looking for a long time twice daily, and because Nvidia slacked when miners first appeared they have been wiped out.
Also why should gamers care about TDP at all? Its the miners who should. Gamers in general have much higher PSUs than normal as well as spend tons on parts they cant even use all the way “Hello 1080”.
If anyone is using the 1080 for 1080P at any level the 1080 is a massive waste. And this is where the 56 Vega is so great, it blurs the 1070/1080 line.
Hell the best bang for buck card that is worth it as much as a 1070 is the 1050TI for its price.
It has always been said the 970/1070 lines are the high sweet spot while 960/1060 was low sweet spot.
TDP only matters if the VRM is iffy. Vega has the best VRM made in a while and so even with huge power input it doesn’t get limited by thermals, its limited by power, which once more better for gamers.
I am going to either get a 1070 or Vega to replace my 970. Basically the reason im leaning hard Vega now is Free Sync. Running 100 FPS is a odd but very nice spot in games and Gsyncs are just insanely priced.
yeah, I only sad that’s VEGA isn’t make Fury X obsolet, worth it more get a second fury x than a new VEGA…