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 VII review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£650VRAM:16 GBMemory bus width:4096 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):300 W

AMD Radeon VII Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 32 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

AMD Radeon VII
6.9/10

Overall score

Score
6.9/ 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 68% of models
Score components

40%

6.5

Technical score

25%

6.5

Reviews score

25%

?

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

10%

8.4

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 68% 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 75% of models
Score components

70%

6.9

Overall score

30%

7.1

Price

â–¼Worse than 75%
6.5

Technical score

Technical score
6.5/ 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 61% of models
Score components

44%

4.6

Performance

24%

8.0

Memory

12%

7.6

Power

11%

8.0

Features

5%

8.1

Design

4%

8.4

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 61%
6.5

Reviews score

Reviews score
6.5/ 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 77% of models

6.5

Mark 7.7 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.3

Average grade

20%

9.3

Popularity

Grades by review (32)
30 reviews: 16 with a printed score, 14 estimated from the review. 2 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 77%
?

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
  • amd-radeon-vii
amd-radeon-vii
Where to buy
    N/A~ £650
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 VII

Based on 29 · 2

Reviewers like the huge, fast memory and solid gaming performance, but complain about power hunger, fan noise and no ray tracing.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the AMD Radeon VII

Based on 172 owners sharing their experience in online comments

79%positive6%mixed15%negative

Owners praise its gaming and creative performance, ample memory, and tuning headroom, while criticizing heat, noise, and driver instability.

What owners dislike

  • Early drivers caused crashes and poor clock control, and owners say AMD slowed driver updates after launch, though later releases improved performance.12
  • Junction temperatures often hit 110 to 115°C under load on the stock cooler, and owners suggest repasting or replacing the thermal pad to lower heat.12
  • The stock fans get loud under load, often compared to a jet engine, and owners fit an AIO or water block to quiet it.11
  • Owners report random black screens, system lockups and game crashes, and in DaVinci Resolve the card sometimes crashes with kernel errors.8
  • At stock the card can't hold high clocks, so owners say a water block or manual overclock and voltage tuning is needed.6
  • At stock settings the card falls behind an RTX 2080 in gaming, and it only matches the rival once overclocked.6
  • Power use is high for the speed, with overclocked cards reaching around 400 watts, and owners say splitting power cables avoids rail overload.4
  • Owners say newer cards like Navi beat it for the price, so it lost value quickly and some regret buying it.4
  • Wattman sometimes freezes when clocks, voltage or fan settings change, and a later driver update reportedly locked overclock limits.3
  • Some cards died within weeks or arrived bent, and owners report the HBM2 memory failing under load.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card AMD Radeon VII

Technical score
Technical score
6.5/ 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 61% of models
Score components:

44%

4.6

Performance

24%

8.0

Memory

12%

7.6

Power

11%

8.0

Features

5%

8.1

Design

4%

8.4

Connectivity

6.5
Reviews score
6.5
List score
?
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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 75% of models
Score components:

70%

6.9

Overall score

30%

7.1

Price

7.0
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
8,700 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 8,700 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 75.9% 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
16,308 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 16,308 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 72.6% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
6,761 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 6,761 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 76% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
13.8 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 13.8 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 65.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
VRAM
16 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 16 GB of VRAM, which is more than 62% of graphics cards and equal to 28.1% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR6
This graphics card uses GDDR6 memory, which is newer than on 16.4% of graphics cards and equal to 40.3% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
4,096 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 4,096 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 99.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
1,024 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 1,024 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is higher than that of 97.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
4,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 4,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 97.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.4% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
PCI Express (PCIe) version
4
This graphics card supports PCIe 4, which is newer than on 22.5% of graphics cards and equal to 50.5% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 24.1% of graphics cards and equal to 75.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12
This graphics card supports DirectX 12, which is older than on 81.8% of graphics cards and equal to 17% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.3
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.3, which is older than on 79.2% of graphics cards and equal to 15.6% 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
What reviewers say
Max displays supported
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 9% of graphics cards and equal to 88.2% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 90.9% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
3
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 3 DisplayPort outputs, which is more than 21.7% of graphics cards and equal to 76% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.4a
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.4a, which is more advanced than on 19.3% of graphics cards and equal to 46.3% 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 65.3% of graphics cards and equal to 22.5% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
300 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 300 W, which is higher than that of 72.1% of graphics cards and equal to that of 6.4% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
330 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 330 W under peak load, which is higher than 82.2% of graphics cards and equal to 0.5% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
650 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 650 W PSU, which is lower than that of 39.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 13.9% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
360 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 360 W, which is higher than that of 84.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 3.3% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
30 W
Show more
What reviewers say
Size
267x 121x 40 mm
Length
280 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 280 mm long, which is shorter than 51.9% of graphics cards and equal in length to 1.4% of graphics cards.
Height
125 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 125 mm tall, which is shorter than 48.8% of graphics cards and equal in height to 2.9% 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 52.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 43.4% of graphics cards.
Weight
1,280 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 1,280 g, which is heavier than 64.9% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of Graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say

AMD Radeon VII vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 2.29x higher memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (1,024 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    1,024 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 3,904 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (4,096 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    4,096 bit vs 192 bit
  • 4 GB more VRAM
    This graphics card has more VRAM than the average graphics card (16 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    16 GB vs 12 GB
  • 20 more compute units
    This graphics card has more compute units than the average graphics card (60 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    60 vs 40
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 56 more TMUs
    This graphics card has more TMUs than the average graphics card (240 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    240 vs 184
  • 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
  • More FP64 throughput
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:4 vs 1:64).
    1:4 vs 1:64
  • 20 more compute units
    This graphics card has more compute units than the average graphics card (60 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    60 vs 40
  • 56 more TMUs
    This graphics card has more TMUs than the average graphics card (240 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    240 vs 184
  • More FP64 throughput
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:4 vs 1:64).
    1:4 vs 1:64
  • 7x higher FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP64 performance than the average graphics card (3.4 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    3.36 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 2.29x higher memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (1,024 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    1,024 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 3,904 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (4,096 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    4,096 bit vs 192 bit
  • 4 GB more VRAM
    This graphics card has more VRAM than the average graphics card (16 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    16 GB vs 12 GB
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 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
  • 30.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,750 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,750 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
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 78.9% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (4,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    4,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 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.
  • 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
  • 9.7% lower review score
    Reviews score
    6.5/ 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 77% of models

    6.5

    Mark 7.7 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.3

    Average grade

    20%

    9.3

    Popularity

    Grades by review (32)
    30 reviews: 16 with a printed score, 14 estimated from the review. 2 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.
    6.5 vs 7.2
  • 6.1% worse value for money
    AMD Radeon VII has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.99 vs 7.4).
    6.99 vs 7.41
  • 25% more expensive
    AMD Radeon VII is more expensive than the average graphics card (£650 vs £520).
    £650 vs £520
  • 30.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,750 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,750 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.
  • 27.1% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,400 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,400 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
  • 30.6% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (112 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    112 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 4 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2019 vs 2023).
    February 2019
    2019 vs 2023
  • 38.9% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (13.8 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    13.8 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 41.1% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (8,700 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    8,700 points vs 14,779 points
  • 28% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (16,308 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    16,308 points vs 22,638 points
  • 44% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (6,761 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    6,761 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 78.9% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (4,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    4,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 42.9% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,000 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,000 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 KB vs 128 KB). The average graphics card has 128 KB L1 cache.
    16 KB vs 128 KB
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 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.
  • 40% larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (7 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    7 nm vs 5 nm
  • 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.
  • No Resizable BAR
    This graphics card does not support Resizable BAR, while the average graphics card does. 76.4% of Graphics cards support it.
  • 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 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12 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.
  • 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
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.0b vs 2.1a).
    2.0b vs 2.1a
  • 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.
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats 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 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
  • 62.5% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (8.1 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 21.6 Gbps.
    8.1 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps
  • 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.
  • 39.5% higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (300 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    300 W vs 215 W
  • 63.6% higher board power limit
    This graphics card has a higher board power limit than the average graphics card (360 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    360 W vs 220 W
  • 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
  • 13.8 dB noisier under load
    This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (49.2 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    49.2 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
  • 6 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (73 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    73 °C vs 67 °C
  • 50% higher peak power draw
    This graphics card has a higher peak power draw than the average graphics card (330 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    330 W vs 220 W
  • 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

9.0
Digital Trends
≈ estimated
07/02/2019
Hands-on review · benchmarks in three games
Verdict
AMD Radeon VII is a strong flagship that beats the RTX 2080 for most players, though it lacks ray tracing.
Not graded
Overview video

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.0
techpowerup.com
✓ explicit
07/02/2019
Launch review · Architecture and cooling
Verdict
The AMD Radeon VII is the world's first 7nm graphics card, pairing 16 GB of memory with a triple-fan cooler but lacking ray tracing hardware.
8.0
pcworld.com
✓ explicit
07/02/2019
Lab test · 4K gaming performance
Verdict
The AMD Radeon VII is a fast 4K card with 16 GB of memory, performing close to the RTX 2080 but without ray tracing.
6.5
techspot.com
✓ explicit
07/02/2019
Day-one review · Gaming benchmarks
Verdict
The AMD Radeon VII is about 4% slower than the RTX 2080 across tested games and very loud, so it suits buyers who need the 16 GB.
7.0
pcmag.com
✓ explicit
07/02/2019
Lab test · High-end 4K gaming
Verdict
The AMD Radeon VII is a fair 4K alternative to the RTX 2080 with 16 GB of memory, but the RTX 2080 is better at 1080p and 1440p.
8.0
hothardware.com
✓ explicit
07/02/2019
Benchmark review · 7nm Vega
Verdict
The AMD Radeon VII is a 7nm card with 16GB of memory and 1TB/s bandwidth, a big step up from Vega 64 for memory-hungry games and workloads.
9.0
techradar.com
✓ explicit
05/07/2019
Benchmark review · RTX 2080 rival
Verdict
The AMD Radeon VII is one of the best cards for gaming, with 16GB of memory that suits 4K and creative work, but it trails in DirectX 12 games.
6.0
arstechnica.com
≈ estimated
07/02/2019
Gaming test · RTX 2080 comparison
Verdict
The Radeon VII is a worthwhile step for AMD, but it trails the RTX 2080 by a few percent in many games and stutters more in Apex Legends.
6.0
techspot.com
≈ estimated
11/02/2019
Benchmark roundup · 33 games
Verdict
The Radeon VII is a fine card, but it's about 7% slower than the RTX 2080 and louder, so it's hard to recommend over Nvidia's card.
8.0
techgage.com
≈ estimated
07/02/2019
Workstation test · Rendering and compute
Verdict
The Radeon VII is a gaming card that also suits creative work, with strong double-precision math and 16GB of memory, rather than a dedicated workstation card.
8.0
notebookcheck.net
≈ estimated
04/03/2019
Benchmark review · Workstation tests
Verdict
The Radeon VII outpaces Vega 64 in several workstation tests, but trails the RTX 2080 badly in Maya tests.
7.0
engadget.com
≈ estimated
07/02/2019
Hands-on test · 4K gaming
Verdict
The AMD Radeon VII plays 4K games well, with Wolfenstein 2 near 90 fps, but lacks the ray tracing and DLSS features of NVIDIA's cards.
7.0
theverge.com
✓ explicit
11/02/2019
Review · Noise and heat testing
Verdict
The AMD Radeon VII is a decent 4K card with 16GB of memory, but it runs hot and loud, so it suits buyers who accept fan noise.
tweaktown.com
07/02/2019
Not graded yet
6.0
computerbase.de
≈ estimated
07/02/2019
Benchmark test · Memory and cooling
Verdict
The Radeon VII beats the RX Vega 64 thanks to 16 GB of memory, but trails the GeForce RTX 2080 and its cooler gets loud under load.
6.0
notebookcheck.com
≈ estimated
04/03/2019
Benchmark test · Creative software
Verdict
The Radeon VII is a 7 nm card that beats the RX Vega 64 in creative software like Creo, but trails Nvidia's Titan RTX.
9.2
gamestar.de
✓ explicit
08/02/2019
Benchmark test · RTX 2080 rival
Verdict
The Radeon VII is AMD's first 7nm card, built to take on Nvidia's RTX 2080 at 4K, with 16GB of memory and a three-fan cooler.
8.2
computerbild.de
✓ explicit
18/03/2019
Gaming test · 4K performance
Verdict
The Radeon VII is fast at 4K, close to the RTX 2080, though it draws a lot of power and its fans get loud during play.
6.0
computerbase.de
≈ estimated
11/02/2019
Benchmark test · Games and compute
Verdict
The AMD Radeon VII beats the GeForce RTX 2080 in three 4K games, but trails it in most others and in compute tasks.
8.0
lesnumeriques.com
✓ explicit
07/02/2019
Lab test · Noise and power draw
Verdict
The AMD Radeon VII is a 7nm card that plays 1440p games well, though its fans are very loud and it runs hot while gaming.
5.0
tomshardware.fr
✓ explicit
07/02/2019
Lab test · Noise and gaming
Verdict
The AMD Radeon VII suits content creators with its 16 GB of memory, but loud fans and high power draw make it hard to recommend for gaming.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Radeon VII

  • Massive 16GB HBM2 VRAM for high-end textures and future-proofing
  • Exceptional 1TB/s memory bandwidth, ideal for 4K gaming and heavy content creation
  • Strong performance in professional compute workloads and productivity tasks
  • Significant generation-over-generation improvement from Vega 64
  • Sleek aluminum triple-fan reference design

What customers don't like about AMD Radeon VII

  • High noise levels under load, often compared to a vacuum cleaner
  • High power consumption and operating temperatures
  • Lacks hardware support for real-time ray tracing and DLSS
  • Inconsistent gaming performance at lower resolutions (1080p/1440p) vs competitors
  • Initial driver instability and limited availability of custom partner cards

Verdict

The AMD Radeon VII is the world's first consumer graphics card manufactured on a 7nm process, featuring 60 compute units, 3,840 stream processors, and a boost clock speed up to 1,750 MHz. Its most defining characteristic is the massive 16 GB of HBM2 memory on a 4,096-bit interface, delivering an industry-leading 1 TB/s of memory bandwidth. Main pros include exceptional 4K gaming and professional content creation performance, particularly in memory-intensive tasks like 3D rendering and video editing. However, the card is frequently cited for cons such as high power consumption (295W TDP), loud fan noise under load, and a lack of hardware-accelerated ray tracing.

Compare AMD Radeon VII 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 VII and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found