Go Back   Computer Forums > General Computing > Hardware
Click Here to Login
Join Computer forums Today


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-26-2018, 03:19 PM   #1
In Runtime
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 119
Default Radeon RX Vega 56

Howdy,

So I've just recently got the titled card and was wondering which of my other components would likely bottleneck it the most? I realise the card is certainly better than everything else.

MSI Gaming 970 motherboard (PCIe 2.0 x 16).... would PCIe 3.0 make THAT much of a difference?

AMD 8350 FX Black Edition - I have a feeling this is likely the biggest bottleneck?

Cheers in advance.
__________________

__________________
datkins91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2018, 07:55 AM   #2
Fully Optimized
 
AMD_man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Argentina
Posts: 1,646
Default Re: Radeon RX Vega 56

As far as I know there is no way to tell if PCIe will bottleneck your graphics card, since directly comparing PCIe bandwidth and GPU bandwidth will always be in favour of the GPU. For example, the theoretical bandwidth of the Vega 56 is about 400GB/s, for PCIe x16 is 8GB/s and for PCIe 3.0 x16 is 16GB/s, both being significantly lower than the GPU's bandwidth, which would mean both would bottleneck your GPU, which is not true. In short, I don't know, there are more factors to consider. Testing it would be the most reliable way to find out.

However, the 8350 may be a bit of a bottleneck, especially when it comes to games that can't use all 8 cores. A GTX 1060 is about as much as the 8350 can handle. The easiest way to know would be finding benchmarks between systems using this processor and other processors with the same GPU. My guess is that the 8350 is definitely going to be bottlenecking the card, but it's hard to tell how much.
__________________

__________________
"I so enjoy watching history warp as words pass
from the lips of one to the ears of another.
Imperfectly formed, half understood, poorly remembered."
AMD_man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2018, 11:28 AM   #3
In Runtime
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 119
Default Re: Radeon RX Vega 56

Thanks AMD.

Running 'Peformance Test' I seem to be only getting a 3D Graphics score of about 8.5k... when on the GPU benchmark/Performance Test website it appears the average is around 11.3k or so. Would you assume this would be largely to do with the CPU?

Might there be any other factors? (Definitely not PSU, have 1000W plat rated).

Cheers in advance.

Edit: Additionally, what CPU would be a solid upgrade from the 8350FX to easily support the Vega 56?
__________________
datkins91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2018, 12:08 PM   #4
In Runtime
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 119
Default Re: Radeon RX Vega 56

Actually - I think this answers my question perfectly when you look at the drop downs for the other CPUs with the same card..

https://www.3dmark.com/vrpor/150729
__________________
datkins91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2018, 06:42 PM   #5
Fully Optimized
 
AMD_man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Argentina
Posts: 1,646
Default Re: Radeon RX Vega 56

Quote:
Originally Posted by datkins91 View Post
Running 'Peformance Test' I seem to be only getting a 3D Graphics score of about 8.5k... when on the GPU benchmark/Performance Test website it appears the average is around 11.3k or so. Would you assume this would be largely to do with the CPU?
I'm not sure what tests you are referring to, but if the processor is the only thing that changes, then yes. Memory technology, speed or latency shouldn't matter that much. However, you have to consider that changing processor architecture usually means changing chipsets and with that changing motherboards, which could mean a newer PCIe specification, so you can't discard that.
Quote:
Might there be any other factors? (Definitely not PSU, have 1000W plat rated).
As I said, you can't discard PCIe spec.
Quote:
Edit: Additionally, what CPU would be a solid upgrade from the 8350FX to easily support the Vega 56?
Anything newer. Ryzen 5 and above or Intel I5 6xxx and above should work fine with this card.
Quote:
Originally Posted by datkins91 View Post
Actually - I think this answers my question perfectly when you look at the drop downs for the other CPUs with the same card..
https://www.3dmark.com/vrpor/150729
It's not certain, but this does tell you that you need to update the rest of your computer if you want to take advantage of the card. Regardless of who's at fault, upgrading your processor will mean upgrading motherboard and memory, and this is what you should do. I would recommend you look into the Ryzen 5 or 7 series and the Intel I5 and I7 7xxx or 8xxx series. You can't go wrong with those.
__________________
"I so enjoy watching history warp as words pass
from the lips of one to the ears of another.
Imperfectly formed, half understood, poorly remembered."
AMD_man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2018, 03:13 AM   #6
In Runtime
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 119
Default Re: Radeon RX Vega 56

Many thanks for the details reply.

I was prepared for buying a new motherboard, memory, etc. I was looking at the i5 6800k..it appears to be an excellent CPU for gaming!
__________________
datkins91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2018, 04:26 AM   #7
Fully Optimized
 
Smart_Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Saudi Arabia
Posts: 4,115
Default Re: Radeon RX Vega 56

Hey there.


Since you already have the parts, find out practically. Open a program like MSI Afterburner in the back ground and activate the GPU and the CPU cores graphs. Play normally long enough then check the graphs after you turnoff the game. I think they record for 10 minutes or something for the graph's length.


In your case the CPU is the possible suspect.



Also keep in mind that bottleneck does not necessarily mean low performance. It only means holding back full performance. If the GPU is like 10% bottlenecked, I highly recommend skipping the upgrade. You may also be lucky and have your favorite games GPU intensive. This minimized bottleneck possibility.


Also consider overclocking the CPU to get the best out of it.
__________________
My main rig (click here).
Smart_Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2018, 06:32 AM   #8
In Runtime
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 119
Default Re: Radeon RX Vega 56

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smart_Guy View Post
Hey there.


Since you already have the parts, find out practically. Open a program like MSI Afterburner in the back ground and activate the GPU and the CPU cores graphs. Play normally long enough then check the graphs after you turnoff the game. I think they record for 10 minutes or something for the graph's length.


In your case the CPU is the possible suspect.



Also keep in mind that bottleneck does not necessarily mean low performance. It only means holding back full performance. If the GPU is like 10% bottlenecked, I highly recommend skipping the upgrade. You may also be lucky and have your favorite games GPU intensive. This minimized bottleneck possibility.


Also consider overclocking the CPU to get the best out of it.
What's the best indication of bottleneck? Would it simply be that the CPU is running at full utilisation?
__________________
datkins91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2018, 11:01 AM   #9
Fully Optimized
 
Smart_Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Saudi Arabia
Posts: 4,115
Default Re: Radeon RX Vega 56

CPU bottlenecking GPU is the possible bottleneck here and since it's gaming (as presumed by mentioning the Vega card), this is most likely it. CPU bottlenecking GPU is when the CPU runs at 100% and the GPU does not, yes. The game won't be able to run in more frames per second so the GPU is held back once it processes all there is in image quality.


The monitoring app like the one I suggested will clear that up. Keep in mind it could be an issue in the game due to bad optimization.


Other fields have other related bottleneck types. Talking about video cards, it is gaming and graphics matter.


A test is the best thing to do now before opening a can of worms.
__________________
My main rig (click here).
Smart_Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2018, 11:04 AM   #10
Fully Optimized
 
AMD_man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Argentina
Posts: 1,646
Default Re: Radeon RX Vega 56

Quote:
Originally Posted by datkins91 View Post
What's the best indication of bottleneck? Would it simply be that the CPU is running at full utilisation?
Definitely not. I mean, if it is at 100%, and the card isn't, then yes, but that's not the only way, since it may happen that the game can't use 100% of the processor.

I don't think there is a good way to know, really. You could increase graphic settings and check loads, but that still won't tell you much, since there are some settings that impact the processor more than they do the card (for example, field of view). I mean, there is definitely a bottleneck here, may not be in every game, but it's there. Finding out the cause could be problematic, unless you are at 100% processor load and 70% card load, in which case the bottleneck is obvious.

It'll come a time where the bottleneck becomes more obvious, when games get more demanding, and, in my opinion, you'll have to upgrade the rest of the computer sooner or later.
__________________
"I so enjoy watching history warp as words pass
from the lips of one to the ears of another.
Imperfectly formed, half understood, poorly remembered."
AMD_man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2018, 12:35 PM   #11
In Runtime
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 119
Default Re: Radeon RX Vega 56

Hi guys,

So after using MSI Afterburner and running Heaven Benchmark 4.0 the results are thus:

GPU operating more or less at 99% of the time

CPU: Core 1 average about 50% usage... the rest of the other cores are more or less 10% or so.


What do you reckon this says?
__________________
datkins91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2018, 02:30 PM   #12
Fully Optimized
 
Smart_Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Saudi Arabia
Posts: 4,115
Default Re: Radeon RX Vega 56

GPU is definitely not bottlenecked and most likely will work at its full potential except in special cases you shouldn't bother with right now. You're okay in the GPU field and getting what you paid for.


Your CPU is acting up, tho. Mine works with all cores the same in Heaven. Could be an optimization thing with Heaven. Try with actual games. But either way, if the GPU still works at ~99% there too, you need not worry about it. Consider that only if it causes a bottleneck or if the same abnormality hinders CPU operations like compression or decoding.
__________________
My main rig (click here).
Smart_Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2018, 02:36 PM   #13
In Runtime
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 119
Default Re: Radeon RX Vega 56

So why is it my performances on the majority of tests are very noticeably lower than averages? A dud GPU? Or perhaps my CPU is just on its arse, not able to communicate well with the GPU? There must be something. Maybe even something as small as just being DDR3 ram, which I know shouldn't have that much of an impact.

Edit: Cheers, will give it a whirl with actual games and see what happens.
__________________
datkins91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2018, 02:48 PM   #14
Fully Optimized
 
AMD_man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Argentina
Posts: 1,646
Default Re: Radeon RX Vega 56

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smart_Guy View Post
GPU is definitely not bottlenecked and most likely will work at its full potential
Why do you think that?
__________________
"I so enjoy watching history warp as words pass
from the lips of one to the ears of another.
Imperfectly formed, half understood, poorly remembered."
AMD_man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2018, 03:40 PM   #15
Fully Optimized
 
Smart_Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Saudi Arabia
Posts: 4,115
Default Re: Radeon RX Vega 56

Quote:
Originally Posted by datkins91 View Post
So why is it my performances on the majority of tests are very noticeably lower than averages? A dud GPU? Or perhaps my CPU is just on its arse, not able to communicate well with the GPU? There must be something. Maybe even something as small as just being DDR3 ram, which I know shouldn't have that much of an impact.

Edit: Cheers, will give it a whirl with actual games and see what happens.
99% GPU is not a poor performance video card wise. If the performance it gives, software/game wise, is low, then the video card is just weak, and Vega 56 is not a weak video card. 99% GPU utilization is a typical full non-bottlenecked utilization.

As for the DDR3, I have those at 1600Mhz and they work very well. Heavy games like Destiny 2 don't have problems with it playing at 60fps and more. My computer is a 2012 spec. comp. all around even video cards (I'm on SLI GTX 680 4GB). My case should be similar to yours... unless your 8-core CPU is much weaker than my 4-core CPU?

What majority of tests do you mean? You can run the same test with them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AMD_man View Post
Why do you think that?
Because it's managing to run at 99% utilization. That's what it means to not have a bottlenecked GPU. I thought you knew that!
__________________
My main rig (click here).
Smart_Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2018, 05:04 PM   #16
Fully Optimized
 
AMD_man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Argentina
Posts: 1,646
Default Re: Radeon RX Vega 56

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smart_Guy View Post
Because it's managing to run at 99% utilization. That's what it means to not have a bottlenecked GPU. I thought you knew that!
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMD_man
I mean, if it is at 100%, and the card isn't, then yes, but that's not the only way, since it may happen that the game can't use 100% of the processor.
Benchmarks stress components individually to get accurate information about their performance. Of course you are gonna get 99% load, how else would the benchmark test your components?

The only way to know for sure is by testing multiple games.

Also, did you see this?
__________________
"I so enjoy watching history warp as words pass
from the lips of one to the ears of another.
Imperfectly formed, half understood, poorly remembered."
AMD_man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2018, 10:50 PM   #17
Fully Optimized
 
Smart_Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Saudi Arabia
Posts: 4,115
Default Re: Radeon RX Vega 56

We're using Unigine Heaven that simulates gaming benchmarking. That's a combination of everything used for games, including GPU, CPU, VRAM and RAM. And GPU can never really be tested without having CPU involved.


Different games have different GPU and CPU utilization, of course. I suggested testing in general and not Heaven specifically. The test with Heaven shows that there is no bottleneck harming the GPU in Heaven. 99% GPU utilization means it's not facing a bottleneck in Heaven. That's something known in GPU benchmarking communities.


No bottleneck indications and targets in gaming:
1- GPU gets to ~99%.
2- CPU and everything else is used in lowest possible percentage. Yet still if they reach 100% without holding back the GPU from reaching 99% they are not a bother.



Bottleneck is having a component(s) holding back the main component. In game graphics main component is GPU. In file compression main component is CPU. In internal file transfer main component is storage. In network file transfer network controller is the main component. Any component holding those back in their department from reaching ~100 % is a bottleneck.


The topic is about bottlenecking the GPU, right?


Quote:
Originally Posted by AMD_man View Post
Benchmarks stress components individually to get accurate information about their performance. Of course you are gonna get 99% load, how else would the benchmark test your components?

This is a stress/performance test to know the capability of the component, not a bottleneck test. It could be used to discover bottlenecks, but if it does not reach ~99% in the target component, it is not a good stress/performance test. Again, becnhmarking is not our goal here. It is finding bottlenecks thru them. We're trying to find a bottleneck here, not stress/performance test.



Quote:
Originally Posted by AMD_man View Post
The only way to know for sure is by testing multiple games.

Also, did you see this?

You means it's a powerful GPU? Yes, I'm aware of that. Is it related to bottlenecks?
__________________
My main rig (click here).
Smart_Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2018, 11:28 PM   #18
Fully Optimized
 
AMD_man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Argentina
Posts: 1,646
Default Re: Radeon RX Vega 56

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smart_Guy View Post
Different games have different GPU and CPU utilization, of course. I suggested testing in general and not Heaven specifically. The test with Heaven shows that there is no bottleneck harming the GPU in Heaven. 99% GPU utilization means it's not facing a bottleneck in Heaven. That's something known in GPU benchmarking communities.
No, it doesn't. It just means the benchmark can use 100% of the GPU. And this is a GPU stress test. Of course it's reaching 100%, what did you expect? All of the tasks are designed to use a high percentage of the card and not the other stuff, because the other stuff doesn't matter. That's why the processor load was so low.
Quote:
No bottleneck indications and targets in gaming:
1- GPU gets to ~99%.
2- CPU and everything else is used in lowest possible percentage. Yet still if they reach 100% without holding back the GPU from reaching 99% they are not a bother.
I agree with number 1, in gaming.
I don't understand what you meant in number 2. Why does it have to be the lowest possible percentage?
Quote:
This is a stress/performance test to know the capability of the component, not a bottleneck test. It could be used to discover bottlenecks, but if it does not reach ~99% in the target component, it is not a good stress/performance test. Again, becnhmarking is not our goal here. It is finding bottlenecks thru them. We're trying to find a bottleneck here, not stress/performance test.
Exactly, the card is supposed to reach 100%. This only proves the benchmark is doing its job.
Quote:
You means it's a powerful GPU? Yes, I'm aware of that. Is it related to bottlenecks?
Yes, as the OP said in his post, there are other benchmarks of systems using the same card and a different processor, and the results are higher.
__________________
"I so enjoy watching history warp as words pass
from the lips of one to the ears of another.
Imperfectly formed, half understood, poorly remembered."
AMD_man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2018, 01:47 AM   #19
Fully Optimized
 
Smart_Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Saudi Arabia
Posts: 4,115
Default Re: Radeon RX Vega 56

Quote:
Originally Posted by AMD_man View Post
No, it doesn't. It just means the benchmark can use 100% of the GPU. And this is a GPU stress test. Of course it's reaching 100%, what did you expect? All of the tasks are designed to use a high percentage of the card and not the other stuff, because the other stuff doesn't matter. That's why the processor load was so low.

I repeat: the topic is about bottlenecks, not stress tests. Whither the benchmark reaches 100% or 1% GPU utilization has nothing to do with bottlenecks in a stress test in the first place. CPU utilization should be monitored too. But still, all it does it finding what a build with that GPU is capable of GPU wise. Reaching 100% is not an of course thing here. Try a single core Pentium 4 or even a Core 2 Duo with RTX 2080 Ti and no stress test will ever get the GPU to ~99%. Everyone concerned with bottlenecks know that. Look it up on Youtube. Many testers did it with games on unlocked FPS and very high settings, which is a stress test too.


A stress test does not necessarily mean reaching 100% GPU. Just Google Unigine Heaven Bottleneck and you will see. Many will show held-back GPU usage. Heaven is GPU intensive alright, but no matter what, games still use CPU and need some power from it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AMD_man View Post
I agree with number 1, in gaming.
I don't understand what you meant in number 2. Why does it have to be the lowest possible percentage?

To be clear, I meant "the 'No-bottleneck' indications and targets in gaming are."


The thread is about RX Vega 56, a GPU. So I believe the whole thing is about gaming. But let's see the OP. Not sure if he had a different initial thought at hand when this thread was started.


In no. 2 it doesn't have to be the lowest possible usage. It just has to be low enough to not bottleneck the GPU. I mean that those concerned with bottlenecks prefer lower usage in them and the lowest the better because this mean the CPU will have more life in it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AMD_man View Post
Exactly, the card is supposed to reach 100%. This only proves the benchmark is doing its job.

The benchmark is not what decides a build can reach 100% in GPU. The specifications of the build are what do. Only if the build is capable of 100% GPU on a benchmark, that benchmark can reach it. I referred to this above.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AMD_man View Post

Yes, as the OP said in his post, there are other benchmarks of systems using the same card and a different processor, and the results are higher.

This only means that in this specific setup; i.e.. the VRMARK and its settings, a bottleneck is causing those two different results. Only percentage monitoring here confirms that, and there's non. So this is not a good bottleneck test even tho is does find a bottleneck. It could be an optimization issue if no records of CPU and GPU percentage usage is there. This is a VR test. It's known for being demanding.



Now, if heaven is tested with the CPU that makes the GPU give better performance in the above linked test, the performance will be the same as what the OP got since he already reached 99% (full performance actually, but GPU's don't like to go over 99%). No CPU can make a GPU go more than what it can on it's fixed clock speeds.


My recommendation for the OP is to not bother with bottlenecks right of the bat, but to play normally and monitor the practical frames-per-second count (or performance in general) for any frame drops at the preferred game settings. Only if bothering drops were noticed, one should look for bottlenecks if they want to clear that performance drop.
__________________
My main rig (click here).
Smart_Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2018, 02:43 AM   #20
In Runtime
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 119
Default Re: Radeon RX Vega 56

Would it be at least fair to say that the pictured test results provide at least a strong indication, maybe not guaranteed, that the CPU is holding things back? Is it possible that even the GPU running at 99% is just not being met sufficiently with the 8350s speed/architecture, etc. regardless of its utilisation? The 8350 is a bit of a grandpa now in respect of the vega 56 in all fairness!
__________________

__________________
datkins91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0
×