Radeon RX Vega 64 vs TITAN V

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared TITAN V and Radeon RX Vega 64, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

TITAN V
2017, $2,999
12 GB HBM2, 250 Watt
40.93
+23.8%

TITAN V outperforms RX Vega 64 by a significant 24% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking114180
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.1416.60
Power efficiency12.758.73
ArchitectureVolta (2017−2020)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameGV100Vega 10
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date7 December 2017 (8 years ago)7 August 2017 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,999 $499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

RX Vega 64 has 301% better value for money than TITAN V.

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores51204096
Core clock speed1200 MHz1247 MHz
Boost clock speed1455 MHz1546 MHz
Number of transistors21,100 million12,500 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt295 Watt
Texture fill rate465.6395.8
Floating-point processing power14.9 TFLOPS12.66 TFLOPS
ROPs9664
TMUs320256
Tensor Cores640no data
L1 Cache7.5 MB1 MB
L2 Cache4.5 MB4 MB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mm279 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin2x 8-pin

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeHBM2HBM2
Maximum RAM amount12 GB8 GB
Memory bus width3072 Bit2048 Bit
Memory clock speed848 MHz945 MHz
Memory bandwidth651.3 GB/s483.8 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
HDMI++

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan+1.1.125
CUDA7.0-
DLSS+-

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

TITAN V 40.93
+23.8%
RX Vega 64 33.06

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

TITAN V 17125
+23.8%
Samples: 152
RX Vega 64 13830
Samples: 3507

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD140−150
+20.7%
116
1440p152
+97.4%
77
4K82
+60.8%
51

Cost per frame, $

1080p21.424.30
+79.9%
1440p19.736.48
+67.2%
4K36.579.78
+73.2%
  • RX Vega 64 has 80% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RX Vega 64 has 67% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RX Vega 64 has 73% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 95−100 95−100
Counter-Strike 2 180−190 180−190
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80 75−80
Resident Evil 4 Remake 85−90 85−90

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 95−100 95−100
Battlefield 5 161 161
Counter-Strike 2 180−190 180−190
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80 75−80
Far Cry 5 110 110
Fortnite 150−160 150−160
Forza Horizon 4 167 167
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140 130−140
Valorant 315 315

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 95−100 95−100
Battlefield 5 146 146
Counter-Strike 2 180−190 180−190
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80 75−80
Dota 2 150 150
Far Cry 5 104 104
Fortnite 150−160 150−160
Forza Horizon 4 158 158
Grand Theft Auto V 110−120 110−120
Metro Exodus 73 73
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140 130−140
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 132 132
Valorant 293 293

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 139 139
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80 75−80
Dota 2 138 138
Far Cry 5 98 98
Forza Horizon 4 128 128
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140 130−140
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 77 77
Valorant 140 140

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 150−160 150−160

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 80−85 80−85
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 230−240 230−240
Grand Theft Auto V 65−70 65−70
Metro Exodus 46 46
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 263 263

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 85−90 85−90
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40 35−40
Far Cry 5 81 81
Forza Horizon 4 98 98
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60−65 60−65

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 85−90 85−90

4K
High

Atomic Heart 27−30 27−30
Counter-Strike 2 35−40 35−40
Grand Theft Auto V 70−75 70−75
Metro Exodus 46 46
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 48 48
Valorant 205 205

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 59 59
Counter-Strike 2 35−40 35−40
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18 16−18
Dota 2 96 96
Far Cry 5 44 44
Forza Horizon 4 66 66
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45 40−45

4K
Epic

Fortnite 40−45 40−45

This is how TITAN V and RX Vega 64 compete in popular games:

  • TITAN V is 21% faster in 1080p
  • TITAN V is 97% faster in 1440p
  • TITAN V is 61% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 40.93 33.06
Recency 7 December 2017 7 August 2017
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 295 Watt

TITAN V has a 24% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 months, a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 14% more advanced lithography process, and 15% lower power consumption.

The TITAN V is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 64 in performance tests.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


2 3356 votes

Rate TITAN V on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 892 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 64 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about TITAN V or Radeon RX Vega 64, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.