OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£90VRAM:4 GBMemory bus width:64 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):15 W

AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 4 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

4.6/10

Overall score

Score
4.6/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Score components

40%

3.7

Technical score

25%

3.7

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

3.7

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 99% of graphics cards
6.2

Value for money

Value for money
6.2/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 93% of models
Score components

70%

4.6

Overall score

30%

10

Price

â–¼Worse than 93%
3.7

Technical score

Technical score
3.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 97% of models
Score components

44%

1.4

Performance

24%

2.9

Memory

12%

7.3

Power

11%

7.4

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

6.4

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 97%
3.7

Reviews score

Reviews score
3.7/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 97% of models

3.7

Mark 7.9 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.9

Average grade

20%

8.0

Popularity

Grades by review (4)
1 review, with a printed score. 3 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 97%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £90
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the AMD Radeon RX Vega 8

Based on 1 · 3

Reviewers are evenly split on gaming performance, with as many finding it adequate as finding it lacking.
Mixed views
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card AMD Radeon RX Vega 8

Technical score
Technical score
3.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 97% of models
Score components:

44%

1.4

Performance

24%

2.9

Memory

12%

7.3

Power

11%

7.4

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

6.4

Connectivity

3.7
Reviews score
3.7
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.2/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 93% of models
Score components:

70%

4.6

Overall score

30%

10

Price

6.2
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
1,400 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 1,400 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 96.8% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 0 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 83.1% of graphics cards and equal to 16.9% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
1,540 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 1,540 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 98.2% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
780 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 780 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 97.8% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
1.13 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 1.13 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 96.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
VRAM
4 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 4 GB of VRAM, which is less than 87.7% of graphics cards and equal to 6% of graphics cards.
Memory type
DDR4
This graphics card uses DDR4 memory, which is older than on 98.8% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
64 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 64 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 96.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 3.3% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
51.2 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 97.9% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
?
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
?
PCIe lanes
?
DirectX version
12.1
This graphics card supports DirectX 12.1, which is older than on 77.2% of graphics cards and equal to 4.5% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.8% of graphics cards and equal to 79.2% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
3
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 3 displays, which is fewer than 91% of graphics cards and equal to 6.6% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
4096x2160
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 4096x2160, which is lower than that of 92.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4.6% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
?
DisplayPort version
1.2
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.2, which is older than on 93.9% of graphics cards and equal to 5.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
5.4 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 5.4 Gbps, which is slower than on 87.9% of graphics cards and equal to 6% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
15 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 15 W, which is lower than that of 99.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.3% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
?
Recommended PSU wattage
?
Board power limit
?
PCIe power spec
?
Show more
Size
?
Length
?
Height
?
Slot width
?
Weight
?
Show more

AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 93% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (15 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    15 W vs 215 W
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 5.78x cheaper
    AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 is cheaper than the average graphics card (£90 vs £520).
    £90 vs £520
  • More FP64 throughput
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:16 vs 1:64).
    1:16 vs 1:64
  • 7 °C lower idle temperature
    This graphics card has a lower idle temperature than the average graphics card (30 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    30 °C vs 37 °C
  • 5.78x cheaper
    AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 is cheaper than the average graphics card (£90 vs £520).
    £90 vs £520
  • More FP64 throughput
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:16 vs 1:64).
    1:16 vs 1:64
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 93% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (15 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    15 W vs 215 W
  • 7 °C lower idle temperature
    This graphics card has a lower idle temperature than the average graphics card (30 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    30 °C vs 37 °C
  • 50.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,250 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,250 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 48.6% lower review score
    Reviews score
    3.7/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 97% of models

    3.7

    Mark 7.9 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.9

    Average grade

    20%

    8.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (4)
    1 review, with a printed score. 3 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    3.7 vs 7.2
  • 8 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (4 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    4 GB vs 12 GB
  • 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
  • 32 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (8 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    8 vs 40
  • 3 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (0 vs 3).
    0 vs 3
  • 84.4% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (300 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    300 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 48.6% lower review score
    Reviews score
    3.7/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 97% of models

    3.7

    Mark 7.9 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.9

    Average grade

    20%

    8.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (4)
    1 review, with a printed score. 3 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    3.7 vs 7.2
  • 52.6% lower sentiment score
    3.7 vs 7.8
  • 18.9% worse value for money
    AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.24 vs 7.4).
    6.24 vs 7.41
  • 50.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,250 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,250 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
  • 32 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (8 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    8 vs 40
  • 84.4% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (300 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    300 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 152 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (32 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    32 vs 184
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 90.7% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (35.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    35.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 94.5% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (8.8 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    8.8 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 56 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (8 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    8 vs 64
  • 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
  • 95% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (1.1 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    1.13 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 93.2% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (1,540 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    1,540 points vs 22,638 points
  • 6 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2017 vs 2023).
    October 2017
    2017 vs 2023
  • 90.5% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (1,400 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    1,400 points vs 14,779 points
  • 93.5% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (780 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    780 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 85.4% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0.1 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.07 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 91.3% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (2.6 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    2.56 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 3,840 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (512 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    512 vs 4,352
  • 8 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (4 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    4 GB vs 12 GB
  • 88.6% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (51.2 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    51.2 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 128 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (64 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    64 bit vs 192 bit
  • 91.7% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (2 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    2 MB vs 24 MB
  • 62.5% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (48 KB vs 128 KB). The average graphics card has 128 KB L1 cache.
    48 KB vs 128 KB
  • Older GDDR version
    This graphics card uses an older GDDR version than the average graphics card (DDR4 vs GDDR6).
    DDR4 vs GDDR6
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 2.8x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (14 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process 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.
  • No XeSS support
    This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No mesh shaders
    This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, the average graphics card does.
  • No Resizable BAR
    This graphics card does not support Resizable BAR, while the average graphics card does. 76.4% of Graphics cards support it.
  • Lower VRS tier
    This graphics card supports a lower VRS tier than the average graphics card (Tier 1 vs Tier 2).
    Tier 1 vs Tier 2
  • 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 vs 3).
    2 vs 3
  • No sampler feedback
    This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
  • 78.4% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (4,940 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    4,940 million vs 22,900 million
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.7 vs 6.8).
    6.7 vs 6.8
  • Older FSR version
    This graphics card supports an older FSR version than the average graphics card (1 vs 3.1).
    1 vs 3.1
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (1.4a vs 2.1a).
    1.4a vs 2.1a
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • 1 fewer displays supported
    This graphics card supports fewer displays than the average graphics card (3 vs 4). The average graphics card supports 4 displays.
    3 vs 4
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No DSC support
    This graphics card does not support DSC, the average graphics card does.
  • Older DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4a).
    1.2 vs 1.4a
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265/VP9 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265/VP9 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Lower display resolution
    This graphics card supports a lower maximum digital resolution than the average graphics card (4096x2160 vs 7680x4320). The average graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320.
    4096x2160 vs 7680x4320
  • Not VR ready
    This graphics card is not VR ready, while the average graphics card is.
  • 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
  • No 3D output
    This graphics card does not support 3D output, the average graphics card does.
  • 75% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (5.4 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 21.6 Gbps.
    5.4 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps
  • 3 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (0 vs 3).
    0 vs 3
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
  • 15 °C lower thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a lower thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (110 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    110 °C vs 95 °C
  • 13 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (80 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    80 °C vs 67 °C
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

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

7.0
Edgy
≈ estimated
10/12/2024
Hands-on review · 19 games and synthetic benchmarks
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 is fine for everyday tasks and light gaming, but not for demanding games in 2024.
7.0
zWORMz Gaming
≈ estimated
13/07/2024
Hands-on test · many games on a Vega 8 mini PC
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 is playable at low settings and a decent deal for budget builds, but not for demanding AAA games.
Not graded
Hands-on video, no verdict
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

9.0
geeknetic.es
✓ explicit
15/02/2018
Lab test · Integrated graphics
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 inside the Ryzen 3 2200G runs League of Legends and Dota 2 well at 1080p, but demanding games need a separate graphics card.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Radeon RX Vega 8

  • Excellent value for money as a budget-friendly integrated solution
  • Smooth performance in popular e-sports titles like League of Legends, CS:GO, and Dota 2
  • High power efficiency, making it ideal for slim and lightweight laptops
  • Substantial performance leap over older integrated graphics generations
  • Consistent performance across varying real-world conditions

What customers don't like about AMD Radeon RX Vega 8

  • Heavily reliant on system RAM speed and dual-channel configurations for peak performance
  • Struggles with modern AAA titles, often requiring resolution drops to 720p and low settings
  • Lacks advanced features found in dedicated cards, such as hardware-accelerated ray tracing
  • Performance is highly dependent on the laptop's thermal and power design (TDP)
  • Limited memory buffer can prevent some demanding games from even launching

Verdict

The AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 is an integrated graphics solution based on the 5th generation GCN (Vega) architecture, typically built on 14nm or 7nm process nodes depending on the Ryzen processor generation. It features 8 compute units with 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs, operating with boost clock speeds reaching up to 2100 MHz in newer mobile variants. Its main strengths include high power efficiency with a low 15W–25W TDP, support for modern APIs like DirectX 12.1 and Vulkan, and compatibility with performance-boosting technologies such as Radeon FreeSync and FidelityFX Super Resolution (FSR). However, its performance is heavily restricted by the lack of dedicated VRAM, making it highly dependent on system RAM speeds and limiting it to entry-level gaming at 720p or low 1080p settings; it also lacks hardware support for ray tracing.

Compare AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 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 8 and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found