• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

The Radeon RX 5700 XT Owners Thread.

Associate
Joined
23 Aug 2005
Posts
1,273
Assuming you're running at 1080P Extreme and that's maximum fps? For reference mine is:

Superposition benchmark: clock @ 2005/1900: Min:31.49fps, Avg:39.18fps and Max:46.38fps

1440p high textures/shaders average fps 54.59 score is 7298.

Stable* @ 1900/920mv. *I was just getting an issue where video that went from window to full screen in potsplayer and K-Lite/MPC (but not VLC) had an access violation error, even in stock clock/volts. Shutdown and reboot fixed this.
 
Associate
Joined
18 Apr 2013
Posts
823
Location
Liverpool
Had a couple of crashes but it that was coming out of sleep mode whilst playing bannerlord so it might have been the game.
I never really mess with my gpus but i did enable the quiet bios.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
12,645
Hi Folks,

I've just made a new build - AMD 3900X, Gigabyte X570 Aorus Elite, 32GB of 3600Mhz RAM (16-16-16-36) and a Gigabyte 5700XT Aorus.

Cooling is the stock cooler, and its in a Lian Li Dynamic case, 3 120MM fans blowing up at it. the 3 on the side of the case blowing in, and then 3 exhausts on the top (on the 360MM AIO radiator).

I'm just wondering as this card seems to be quite sporting with its timing already, is there much point using the overclocking feature in the AMD Radeon drivers. I imagine it wont go much higher than the 2010Mhz Core Clock boost it already achieves.
 

LiE

LiE

Caporegime
Joined
2 Aug 2005
Posts
25,601
Location
Milton Keynes
Hi Folks,

I've just made a new build - AMD 3900X, Gigabyte X570 Aorus Elite, 32GB of 3600Mhz RAM (16-16-16-36) and a Gigabyte 5700XT Aorus.

Cooling is the stock cooler, and its in a Lian Li Dynamic case, 3 120MM fans blowing up at it. the 3 on the side of the case blowing in, and then 3 exhausts on the top (on the 360MM AIO radiator).

I'm just wondering as this card seems to be quite sporting with its timing already, is there much point using the overclocking feature in the AMD Radeon drivers. I imagine it wont go much higher than the 2010Mhz Core Clock boost it already achieves.

You should be able to undervolt from the stock 1200mV and get the same boost clock but at a lower temp and thus less fan speed. Is that 2010Mhz in game? I get 2000Mhz at 1070mV. It can run faster but I like my junction in the 70s.
 
Associate
Joined
23 Aug 2005
Posts
1,273
I'm liking their videos. The 5700 XT is a bargain compared to what nVidia offers no doubt. With nVidia you get better drivers (eg my Radeon Software overlay either crashes itself or crashes the game I'm playing, so I just don't use it), RTX not this gen yet, DLSS, slightly faster (but not really if you have to pay more).
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
12,645
You should be able to undervolt from the stock 1200mV and get the same boost clock but at a lower temp and thus less fan speed. Is that 2010Mhz in game? I get 2000Mhz at 1070mV. It can run faster but I like my junction in the 70s.

So it does it in games but it sort of wanders up and down there as needed... which I guess is expected behaviour?
 
Soldato
Joined
22 Apr 2008
Posts
3,867
Location
Bryn Celyn Wales
Right ok, I ran the following benchmarks twice just to see a little more in real terms what clocking of these cards gives, took the average and here is what we got:

Default 5700XT Clocks (1755mhz-gpu/1750mhz-mem, boost 1905mhz)
Superposition Benchmark 1080p Extreme: Score:4,736, Min:28.41fps, Avg:35.43fps, Max:42.20fps
3DMark TimeSpy Default: Score:7,039, Graphics Score:8,383, Test1:57.17fps, Test2:46.01fps
3DMark Fire Strike Extreme: Score:10,300, Graphics Score:12,068, Test1:60.36fps, Test2:46.41fps

Overclcoked 5700XT Clocks (2079mhz-gpu/1900mhz-mem, boost 2079mhz, 1176mv-voltage)
Superposition Benchmark 1080p Extreme: Score:5,246 Min:31.39fps, Avg:39.24fps, Max:46.72fps
3DMark TimeSpy Default: Score:7,647, Graphics Score:9,467, Test1:65.39fps, Test2:51.71fps
3DMark Fire Strike Extreme: Score:, Graphics Score:13,502, Test1:67.75fps, Test2:51.79fps

So, based on that lot we get the following % increase in fps based on those overclocks:

Superposition Benchmark: Avg fps = 9.7% Increase
3DMark TimeSpy Default: Test1 fps = 12.6% Increase, Test2 fps = 11.0% Increase
3DMark Fire Strike Extreme: Test1 fps = 10.9% Increase, Test2 fps = 10.4% Increase

So, basically, looking at this, going from stock to overclocked can give you circa 10-12% better fps. I assume it'll go for games as well. However, that sounds great, but lets be honest, let put that into real figures. OK, you're running 60fps at default, that means around 66-67.2fps at overclocked speeds... is that worth the hassle? I don't know, suppose it's what we all do to try and push our gear to get the most out of it, but all the hassle, more power, clocking, stability testing and everything all for that? hahahaha...
 
Soldato
Joined
24 Aug 2009
Posts
2,931
Right ok, I ran the following benchmarks twice just to see a little more in real terms what clocking of these cards gives, took the average and here is what we got:

Default 5700XT Clocks (1755mhz-gpu/1750mhz-mem, boost 1905mhz)
Superposition Benchmark 1080p Extreme: Score:4,736, Min:28.41fps, Avg:35.43fps, Max:42.20fps
3DMark TimeSpy Default: Score:7,039, Graphics Score:8,383, Test1:57.17fps, Test2:46.01fps
3DMark Fire Strike Extreme: Score:10,300, Graphics Score:12,068, Test1:60.36fps, Test2:46.41fps

Overclcoked 5700XT Clocks (2079mhz-gpu/1900mhz-mem, boost 2079mhz, 1176mv-voltage)
Superposition Benchmark 1080p Extreme: Score:5,246 Min:31.39fps, Avg:39.24fps, Max:46.72fps
3DMark TimeSpy Default: Score:7,647, Graphics Score:9,467, Test1:65.39fps, Test2:51.71fps
3DMark Fire Strike Extreme: Score:, Graphics Score:13,502, Test1:67.75fps, Test2:51.79fps

So, based on that lot we get the following % increase in fps based on those overclocks:

Superposition Benchmark: Avg fps = 9.7% Increase
3DMark TimeSpy Default: Test1 fps = 12.6% Increase, Test2 fps = 11.0% Increase
3DMark Fire Strike Extreme: Test1 fps = 10.9% Increase, Test2 fps = 10.4% Increase

So, basically, looking at this, going from stock to overclocked can give you circa 10-12% better fps. I assume it'll go for games as well. However, that sounds great, but lets be honest, let put that into real figures. OK, you're running 60fps at default, that means around 66-67.2fps at overclocked speeds... is that worth the hassle? I don't know, suppose it's what we all do to try and push our gear to get the most out of it, but all the hassle, more power, clocking, stability testing and everything all for that? hahahaha...
But if you set it at 2100mhz at 1100\1150mv, your getting better performance, lower temps, and more efficient card than leaving it at stock to do its thing. Plus, it's not much hassle with a simple 2 setting change?
 
Soldato
Joined
22 Apr 2008
Posts
3,867
Location
Bryn Celyn Wales
But if you set it at 2100mhz at 1100\1150mv, your getting better performance, lower temps, and more efficient card than leaving it at stock to do its thing. Plus, it's not much hassle with a simple 2 setting change?
Only if it works at that setting, not when it doesn't work at that setting, means you messing around to find your own limits, mine won't work at 2100mhz core for any voltage at all, might just be you get the better quality bits with more expensive cards hence for me to tweak and get the best performance, temp etc was a pain in the arse. If it was as easy as doing that we'd all be doing that and unfortnaley for me, those settings freeze within seconds of Warfare or any benchmarking software. Infact I can't go above 1900 on the core at

Anyway, that's by the by, what I was saying was, in the gran scheme of things, finding whatever your clock is, and then only getting around 10% improvement... a lot of hassle imho even though I did it, but hey, swings and roundabouts.
 
Soldato
Joined
24 Aug 2009
Posts
2,931
Only if it works at that setting, not when it doesn't work at that setting, means you messing around to find your own limits, mine won't work at 2100mhz core for any voltage at all, might just be you get the better quality bits with more expensive cards hence for me to tweak and get the best performance, temp etc was a pain in the arse. If it was as easy as doing that we'd all be doing that and unfortnaley for me, those settings freeze within seconds of Warfare or any benchmarking software. Infact I can't go above 1900 on the core at

Anyway, that's by the by, what I was saying was, in the gran scheme of things, finding whatever your clock is, and then only getting around 10% improvement... a lot of hassle imho even though I did it, but hey, swings and roundabouts.
It's wired that you can't go above 1900mhz on the core without crashing.

Which 5700xt did you get?
 
Soldato
Joined
22 Apr 2008
Posts
3,867
Location
Bryn Celyn Wales
It's wired that you can't go above 1900mhz on the core without crashing.

Which 5700xt did you get?
sorry weidly it deleted some of that sentrance. What I'd put was it won't let me go above 1900 on the core at 1125, I need 1150mv for some reason. I got the powercolor cheapest at £329 probably explain. Don't bother me as I've got over 2000 now, but I just need more voltage than others it seems.
 
Associate
Joined
19 Dec 2019
Posts
76
@Dying_Snail loving the white theme mate... tbh your rigs are making mine look crap... I'm thinking of some upgrades now while I'm stuck in the house hahaha... everytime I come on here I end up spending money lol

Thank you, i love it too but I wont be happy and it will look better when I get white cable extensions just to tidy it up a bit.
And I get that about coming on here lol.
 
Back
Top Bottom