OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v1.0
Graphics cards Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v1.0: technical specifications plus authentic consumer ratings, with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v1.0

AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Review | 118 Data compared

Avg. price:~ÂŁ110VRAM:8 GBMemory bus width:2048 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):295 W

AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Review: Compare 118 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

AMD Radeon RX Vega 64
5.7/10

Overall score

Score
5.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the graphics card's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best graphics cards on the market.
Score distribution
▌
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▌ Worse than 78% of models
Score components

90%

5.5

Technical score

10%

7.2

User score

â–ŒWorse than 78% of graphics cards
7.0

Value for money

Value for money
7.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▌
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▌ Worse than 62% of models
Score components

70%

5.7

Overall score

30%

9.9

Price

â–ŒWorse than 62%
5.5

Technical score

Technical score
5.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Graphics cards category across these key areas: Performance, Memory, Platform & Features, Connectivity & Media, Power & Cooling, Design.
When it matters
When you want to compare graphics cards based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
▌
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▌ Worse than 78% of models
Score components

44%

4.4

Performance

24%

5.2

Memory

12%

6.2

Power & Cooling

11%

7.5

Platform & Features

5%

9.0

Design

4%

8.3

Connectivity & Media

â–ŒWorse than 78%
7.2

User score

User score
7.2/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
Score distribution
▌
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▌ Worse than 95% of models
Score components

70%

8.0

User ratings

30%

5.4

Number of reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
â–ŒWorse than 95%
  • amd-radeon-rx-vega-64
  • amd-radeon-rx-vega-64
  • amd-radeon-rx-vega-64
  • amd-radeon-rx-vega-64
amd-radeon-rx-vega-64
amd-radeon-rx-vega-64
amd-radeon-rx-vega-64
amd-radeon-rx-vega-64
Best prices
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card AMD Radeon RX Vega 64

Technical score
Technical score
5.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Graphics cards category across these key areas: Performance, Memory, Platform & Features, Connectivity & Media, Power & Cooling, Design.
When it matters
When you want to compare graphics cards based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
▌
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▌ Worse than 78% of models
Score components:

44%

4.4

Performance

24%

5.2

Memory

12%

6.2

Power & Cooling

11%

7.5

Platform & Features

5%

9.0

Design

4%

8.3

Connectivity & Media

5.5
User score
User score
7.2/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
Score distribution
▌
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▌ Worse than 95% of models
Score components

70%

8.0

User ratings

30%

5.4

Number of reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
7.2
Popularity
Popularity
5.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you prefer a graphics card that has already been chosen and reviewed by many other users.
Score distribution
▌
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–Č Better than 55% of models
Popularity:
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 has a popularity score of 5.4 points, which is higher than that of 55.4% of products in this category.
5.4
Value for money
Value for money
7.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▌
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▌ Worse than 62% of models
Score components:

70%

5.7

Overall score

30%

9.9

Price

7.0
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
7,270 points
Market range: <4k points – >34k points
This graphics card scores 7,270 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 80% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
Market range: <0 points – >25k points
This graphics card scores 0 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 83.2% of graphics cards and equal to 16.8% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
13,928 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 13,928 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 76.7% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
6,221 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 6,221 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 78.6% of graphics cards.
Floating-point performance
12.66 TFLOPS
Market range: <4.38 TFLOPS – >57.42 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 12.66 TFLOPS floating-point performance, which is lower than that of 71.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
8 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >24 GB
This graphics card has 8 GB of VRAM, which is less than 57.5% of graphics cards and equal to 25.1% of graphics cards.
Memory type
HBM2
GDDR version
HBM2
This graphics card uses HBM2 memory, which is newer than on 56.3% of graphics cards and equal to 0.4% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
2048 bit
Market range: <64 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 2048 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 99.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.2% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
483.8 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 483.8 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is higher than that of 52.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
3
This graphics card supports PCIe 3, which is older than on 77.7% of graphics cards and equal to 20.3% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 23.4% of graphics cards and equal to 76.6% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12.1
This graphics card supports DirectX 12.1, which is older than on 77.4% of graphics cards and equal to 4.4% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.3
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.3, which is older than on 79.4% of graphics cards and equal to 15.7% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 1.9% of graphics cards and equal to 98.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 8.3% of graphics cards and equal to 88.9% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 91% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
3
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 3 DisplayPort outputs, which is more than 21% of graphics cards and equal to 76.8% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.4
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.4, which is older than on 80.6% of graphics cards and equal to 13.3% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
8.1 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 8.1 Gbps, which is slower than on 65% of graphics cards and equal to 22.7% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
295 W
Market range: <60 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 295 W, which is higher than that of 71.1% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.3% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
295 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card draws 295 W under peak load, which is higher than 69.5% of graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
750 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 750 W PSU, which is higher than that of 64.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 17.1% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
295 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 295 W, which is higher than that of 67.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
295 W
Show more
Size
280x 111x 40 mm
Length
280 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >350 mm
This graphics card is 280 mm long, which is shorter than 52.5% of graphics cards and equal in length to 1.3% of graphics cards.
Height
111 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 111 mm tall, which is shorter than 83.5% of graphics cards and equal in height to 5.1% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2 slot/s, which is slimmer than 53.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 42.5% of graphics cards.
Weight
1,040 g
Market range: <500 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 1,040 g, which is heavier than 50.7% of graphics cards and equal in weight to 0.4% of graphics cards.
Show more

AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryPlatform & FeaturesConnectivity & MediaPower & CoolingDesign
  • 1,792 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (2048 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
    2,048 bit vs 256 bit
  • 24 more compute units
    This graphics card has more compute units than the average graphics card (64 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    64 vs 40
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 72 more TMUs
    This graphics card has more TMUs than the average graphics card (256 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    256 vs 184
  • 14 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111 mm vs 125 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 2 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    2 vs 0
  • 4.82x cheaper
    AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 is cheaper than the average graphics card (ÂŁ110 vs ÂŁ530).
    ÂŁ110 vs ÂŁ530
  • 4.82x cheaper
    AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 is cheaper than the average graphics card (ÂŁ110 vs ÂŁ530).
    ÂŁ110 vs ÂŁ530
  • 24 more compute units
    This graphics card has more compute units than the average graphics card (64 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    64 vs 40
  • 72 more TMUs
    This graphics card has more TMUs than the average graphics card (256 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    256 vs 184
  • Better FP64 ratio
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:16 vs 1:64).
    1:16 vs 1:64
  • 2.92x higher INT8 performance
    This graphics card has a higher INT8 performance than the average graphics card (706 TOPS vs 242 TOPS). The average graphics card has INT8 performance of 242 TOPS.
    706 TOPS vs 242 TOPS
  • 1,792 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (2048 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
    2,048 bit vs 256 bit
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 8% higher memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (483.8 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    483.8 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 2 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    2 vs 0
  • Supports multi-GPU linking
    This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.
  • 14 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111 mm vs 125 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 38.3% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1546 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    1,546 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • 2.8x larger process node
    This graphics card has a higher process node than the average graphics card (14 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a process node of 5 nm.
    14 nm vs 5 nm
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 35.1% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1247 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,247 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 90.1% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (1890 MHz vs 19000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19000 MHz.
    1,890 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 10.8% lower user score
    User score
    7.2/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
    When it matters
    When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
    Score distribution
    ▌▌
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    AMD Radeon RX Vega 64
    the average graphics card
    AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 has a lower user score than the average graphics card (7.22 vs 8.000).
    7.22 vs 8
  • 38.3% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1546 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    1,546 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 35.1% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1247 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,247 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 144 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    0 vs 144
  • 39.4% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (98.9 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 163.2 GPixel/s.
    98.94 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s
  • 43.9% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (12.7 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.57 TFLOPS.
    12.66 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS
  • 38.5% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (13928 points vs 22653 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22653 points.
    13,928 points vs 22,653 points
  • 50.5% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (7270 points vs 14678.5 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14678.5 points.
    7,270 points vs 14,678.5 points
  • 48.5% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (6221 points vs 12074 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12074 points.
    6,221 points vs 12,074 points
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 90.1% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (1890 MHz vs 19000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19000 MHz.
    1,890 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 46% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (945 MHz vs 1750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1750 MHz.
    945 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 83.3% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (4 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    4 MB vs 24 MB
  • 87.5% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (16 vs 128). The average graphics card has 128 L1 cache.
    16 vs 128
  • 2.8x larger process node
    This graphics card has a higher process node than the average graphics card (14 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a process node of 5 nm.
    14 nm vs 5 nm
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No ray tracing
    This graphics card does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (3 vs 4).
    3.0 vs 4.0
  • 6 older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2017 vs 2023).
    August 2017
    2,017 vs 2,023
  • No mesh shaders
    This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, the average graphics card does.
  • No DirectStorage support
    This graphics card does not support DirectStorage, the average graphics card does.
  • Worse SAM support
    This graphics card offers worse SAM support than the average graphics card (no vs yes).
  • Older encoder generation
    This graphics card uses an older encoder generation than the average graphics card (4 vs 8). The average graphics card uses encoder generation 8.
    4.0 vs 8
  • Older Vulkan version
    This graphics card supports an older Vulkan version than the average graphics card (1.3 vs 1.4).
    1.3 vs 1.4
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12.1 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12.1 vs 12 Ultimate
  • Older OpenCL version
    This graphics card supports an older OpenCL version than the average graphics card (2.1 vs 3).
    2.1 vs 3.0
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.4 vs 6.8).
    6.4 vs 6.8
  • No sampler feedback
    This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
    No vs yes
  • 64.7% larger GPU die
    This graphics card has a higher GPU die size than the average graphics card (486 mmÂČ vs 295 mmÂČ). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 295 mmÂČ.
    486 mmÂČ vs 295 mmÂČ
  • 45.4% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (12500 million vs 22900 million). The average graphics card has 22900 million transistors.
    12,500 million vs 22,900 million
  • Older FSR version
    This graphics card supports an older FSR version than the average graphics card (3 vs 3.1).
    3.0 vs 3.1
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
    No vs yes
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
    No vs yes
  • No DSC support
    This graphics card does not support DSC, the average graphics card does.
    No vs yes
  • Narrower encode codec support
    This graphics card supports narrower hardware encode codec support than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Older DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.4 vs 1.4a).
    1.4 vs 1.4a
  • Narrower decode codec support
    This graphics card supports narrower hardware decode codec support than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265/VP9/MPEG-2 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1).
    H.264/H.265/VP9/MPEG-2 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.0b vs 2.1).
    2.0b vs 2.1
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (2.2 vs 2.3).
    2.2 vs 2.3
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
  • 37.2% higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (295 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    295 W vs 215 W
  • 15.4% higher PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a higher PSU requirement than the average graphics card (750 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    750 W vs 650 W
  • 31.1% higher board power limit
    This graphics card has a higher board power limit than the average graphics card (295 W vs 225 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 225 W.
    295 W vs 225 W
  • 18 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (85 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    85 °C vs 67 °C
  • 9.6 dB noisier under load
    This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (45 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    45 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 32 dB noisier at idle
    This graphics card has a higher idle noise level than the average graphics card (32 dB vs 0 dB). The average graphics card has an idle noise level of 0 dB.
    32 dB vs 0 dB
  • 5 °C lower thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a lower thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (100 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    100 °C vs 95 °C
  • 58.3% higher idle power draw
    This graphics card has a higher idle power draw than the average graphics card (19 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    19 W vs 12 W

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

D
digitalfoundry.net
05/12/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 review | Digital Foundry
H
hardwarecanucks.com
28/09/2017
Summary of the review
AMD RX Vega 64 & Vega 56 Performance Review
T
techadvisor.com
16/09/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Review - Tech Advisor
G
gamespot.com
16/08/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Review - GameSpot
U
uk.pcmag.com
15/08/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 - Review 2017
H
hothardware.com
14/08/2017
Summary of the review
Radeon RX Vega 64 And RX Vega 56 Review: AMD Back In High-End Graphics
B
bit-tech.net
14/08/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 and RX Vega 56 Review
T
techradar.com
14/08/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 review
T
techpowerup.com
14/08/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 8 GB Review
M
mmorpg.com
07/01/2018
Summary of the review
AMD Vega 64 Reference Edition - Was the Hype Worth the Wait?
T
tomshardware.com
25/01/2018
Summary of the review
Gigabyte Radeon RX Vega 64 Gaming OC 8G Review
P
pcgamer.com
18/08/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 review - PC Gamer
P
pcmag.com
15/08/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Review - PCMag
T
techspot.com
31/08/2022
Summary of the review
AMD Radeon Vega 64 Revisited One Last Time: Did It Age Better Than Pascal? Would you like me to find reviews for custom partner cards (like ASUS Strix...
R
rockpapershotgun.com
31/01/2018
Summary of the review
AMD RX Vega 64 review: A GTX 1080 killer?
T
techspot.com
25/08/2017
Summary of the review
The Radeon RX Vega 64 Liquid, Vega 64 & Vega 56 Test
P
pcper.com
14/08/2017
Summary of the review
The AMD Radeon RX Vega Review
B
bit-tech.net
14/08/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 and RX Vega 56 Review
T
tomshardware.fr
05/03/2018
Summary of the review
Test : Asus Radeon RX Vega 64 STRIX OC
(Translated)Show original
H
hardwarecooking.fr
01/09/2017
Summary of the review
Radeon RX Vega 64 : de l’annonce Ă  la pĂ©nurie
(Translated)Show original

Third-party reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
Reviews last updated: June 2026 · How we calculate this

What we like about AMD Radeon RX Vega 64

  • Competitive performance with the Nvidia GTX 1080, particularly at 4K resolution
  • Strong performance in DirectX 12 and Vulkan-based games
  • High memory bandwidth (483 GB/s) thanks to 8GB of HBM2 memory
  • Support for FreeSync, which offers a more affordable variable refresh rate ecosystem than G-Sync
  • Forward-looking features like the High Bandwidth Cache Controller (HBCC)
  • Includes a dual BIOS feature with a dedicated 'Power Save' profile

What we don't like about AMD Radeon RX Vega 64

  • Extremely high power consumption, requiring at least a 750W power supply
  • Reference air-cooled models run very hot and are excessively loud under load
  • Performance often falls behind the GTX 1080 in older DirectX 11 titles
  • Late market release compared to the competition (over a year after the GTX 1080)
  • Significant thermal throttling on reference designs without manual fan curve adjustments
  • Does not compete with the higher-tier GTX 1080 Ti despite high power draw

Verdict

The AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 is a high-end graphics card built on the 14nm FinFET process, featuring 4,096 stream processors, 64 compute units, and 8GB of advanced HBM2 memory on a massive 2048-bit bus that delivers 484 GB/s of bandwidth. With a base clock of 1247 MHz and a boost up to 1546 MHz, the card provides exceptional performance in DirectX 12 and Vulkan titles, making it ideal for enthusiast-level 1440p gaming and compute-heavy tasks like OpenCL rendering. Its main pros include massive memory bandwidth, strong legacy driver maturation, and smooth FreeSync compatibility. However, its significant cons include an excessively high 295W TDP that requires a robust power supply, high operating temperatures, and loud cooling fans on reference blower models.

Compare AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found