Real World Speed
Performance profile from 102,123 user samples
38,485 User Benchmarks
Best Bench: 107% Sapphire(1DA2 E37F) ≥ 4GB
Worst Bench: 87% AMD(1002 6B76)
Poor: 87% Great: 107%
SPEED RANK: 22nd / 635
63,638 User Benchmarks
Best Bench: 112% PowerColor(148C 2398)
Worst Bench: 98% Sapphire(1DA2 E409)
Poor: 98% Great: 112%
SPEED RANK: 16th / 635
Effective 3D Speed
Effective 3D Gaming GPU Speed
96.8 % 106 % Slightly faster effective speed.
+9%
Lighting
Avg. Locally-deformable PRT (Bat)
319 fps 390 fps Better lighting effects.
+22%
MRender
Avg. Render target array GShader (Sphere)
188 fps 238 fps Faster multi rendering.
+27%
Gravity
Avg. NBody particle system (Galaxy)
377 fps 400 fps Slightly faster NBody calculation.
+6%
Lighting
Locally-deformable PRT (Bat)
369 fps 441 fps Better peak lighting effects.
+20%
MRender
Render target array GShader (Sphere)
196 fps 246 fps Faster peak multi rendering.
+26%
Gravity
NBody particle system (Galaxy)
428 fps +0% 427 fps
CSGO
Avg. Fps @ 1080p on Max
223 Fps 242 Fps Slightly Better CSGO Fps.
+9%
Fortnite
Avg. Fps @ 1080p on Max
121 Fps 167 Fps Much Better Fortnite Fps.
+37%
PUBG
Avg. Fps @ 1080p on Max
104 Fps Slightly Better PUBG Fps.
+11%
94 Fps
GTAV
Avg. Fps @ 1080p on Max
88 Fps 117 Fps Much Better GTAV Fps.
+34%
LoL
Avg. Fps @ 1080p on Max
194 Fps 225 Fps Better LoL Fps.
+16%
Overwatch
Avg. Fps @ 1080p on Max
127 Fps 135 Fps Slightly Better Overwatch Fps.
+6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
Avg. Fps @ 1080p on Max
88 Fps 115 Fps Much Better The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt Fps.
+31%
Minecraft
Avg. Fps @ 1080p on Max
202 Fps 215 Fps Slightly Better Minecraft Fps.
+7%
Market Share
Based on 23,838,232 GPUs tested.
Market Share
Market Share (trailing 30 days)
0.35 % 2.08 % Hugely higher market share.
+494%
Value
Value For Money
59.6 % 61.7 % +3%
User Rating
UBM User Rating
108 % 123 % Slightly more popular.
+14%
Price
Price (score)
$385 Slightly cheaper.
+5%
$407
Age
Newest
29 Months 6 Months Much more recent.
+79%
Reflection
High dynamic range lighting (Teapot)
245 fps 309 fps Better peak reflection handling.
+26%
Parallax
Parallax occlusion mapping (Stones)
624 fps 867 fps Much better peak texture detail.
+39%
Splatting
Force Splatted Flocking (Swarm)
310 fps 378 fps Faster peak complex splatting.
+22%
Reflection
Avg. High dynamic range lighting (Teapot)
231 fps 292 fps Better reflection handling.
+26%
Parallax
Avg. Parallax occlusion mapping (Stones)
550 fps 776 fps Much better texture detail.
+41%
Splatting
Avg. Force Splatted Flocking (Swarm)
297 fps 363 fps Faster complex splatting.
+22%
ADVERTISEMENT

The AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 is built on 14 nm silicon and contains next-generation compute units (nCUs). Each NCU houses 64 steam processors, of which the Vega 64 has 4096 compared to 3584 in the Vega 56. The architecture also employs 8GB of second generation high-bandwidth memory (HBM2). At launch (two years ago) AMD described this as the most significant leap in their GPU architecture for the last five years. We recently ran the Vega 56 through our EFps lab which showed that in today’s market the Vega series of cards “could” be tempting, at around the $200 mark. (Vega 56 results here)  [Nov '19 GPUPro]

MORE DETAILS

Out of the box the reference 5700 XT has high burst speeds but under load it overheats and therefore drops frames to the extent that it is more or less unusable for demanding games like PUBG. In order to settle the card it was under volted by 120 mV and the maximum clock was lowered to 1,980 MHz (the stock BIOS and 19.9.1 driver defaulted the card to 2,030 MHz). The fan curve also had to be turned up to around 50% power at 75 degrees (which is a lot noisier than stock). After making these changes the card delivered far more consistent performance albeit with a reduced top speed and unacceptable (hair dryer) levels of noise. There were also incompatibilities with GTAV: enabling reflection MSAA resulted in very poor, almost matt, reflection fidelity (the same bug appeared on several Navi and Vega cards). The reference 5700 XT is great for beating benchmarks, but it is not so great for playing games. Thousands of people purchased the reference card expecting flagship performance, instead they got a shopping trolley with a V6 engine. It appears that the same marketing tactics were employed for the reference Vega 56 and 64 series of graphics cards which we will purchase for our gaming lab and generate effective Fps gaming metrics as soon as possible (results here). AMD appear to have very short term marketing strategists at the helm, they seem more concerned with this years bonuses than the longevity of the brand. [Jul '19 GPUPro]

MORE DETAILS

Graphics Card Rankings (Price vs Performance) January 2020 GPU Rankings.

We calculate effective 3D speed which estimates gaming performance for the top 12 games. Effective speed is adjusted by current prices to yield value for money. Our figures are checked against thousands of individual user ratings. The customizable table below combines these factors to bring you the definitive list of top GPUs. [GPUPro]

ADVERTISEMENT

Group Test Results

  • Best user rated - User sentiment trumps benchmarks for this comparison.
  • Best value for money - Value for money is based on real world performance.
  • Fastest real world speed - Real World Speed measures performance for typical consumers.
How Fast Is Your GPU? (Bench your build) Size up your PC in less than a minute.

Welcome to our freeware PC speed test tool. UserBenchmark will test your PC and compare the results to other users with the same components. You can quickly size up your PC, identify hardware problems and explore the best upgrades.

UserBenchmark of the month

How it works

  • - Download and run UserBenchMark.
  • - CPU tests include: integer, floating and string.
  • - GPU tests include: six 3D game simulations.
  • - Drive tests include: read, write, sustained write and mixed IO.
  • - RAM tests include: single/multi core bandwidth and latency.
  • - Reports are generated and presented on userbenchmark.com.
  • - Identify the strongest components in your PC.
  • - See speed test results from other users.
  • - Compare your components to the current market leaders.
  • - Explore your best upgrade options with a virtual PC build.
  • - Compare your in-game FPS to other users with your hardware.
  • - Share your opinion by voting.

 Frequently Asked Questions

 Best User Rated

The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-9600K $218Nvidia GTX 1660S (Super) $240Crucial MX500 250GB $43
Intel Core i5-9400F $155Nvidia GTX 1650S (Super) $170Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $78
Intel Core i7-9700K $370Nvidia RTX 2060 $340Samsung 850 Pro 512GB $204
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $73SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $40Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $63SanDisk Extreme 32GB $46
Seagate Barracuda 3TB (2016) $85G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $643SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16
Today's hottest deals
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer Feedback