Because we were able to access two different models of this same chip, comparisons are not expected, especially to see what action the developers should follow in relation to the so-called RAMCaché that modern engines make.
So, with the end of 2019 and full entry into 2020 it is more interesting to see and know the impact of VRAM and its size compared to each investment return. In addition, with the best-selling range of graphics cards, the best performance and the focus on the 1080p screen player, comparisons will be more interesting if possible.
That said, let's unite the two competitors and start working on VRAM and memory data.
Sapphire Pulse RX 5500 XT 4 GB vs PowerColor RX 5500 XT Red Dragon 8 GB
Both cards carry many similarities, such as the ITX PCB, parallel waves, dual furniture design, back cover and one 8-way connector. In addition, they are a guide to this series of GPUs, so the rivalry is very visible from a performance point of view.
We have reviewed the Sapphire card, so we know it well and its 4 GB behaves much better than the average size of the cases. But as we mentioned in its accompanying review, its performance is inconsistent, which has led us to consider different performance metrics that determine VRAM size according to the configuration that may be the cause of these variations in performance.
Test method
To ensure this, we will tackle two natural competitors in 5 different games, with different engines and under our standard test program, which is made up of:
- Intel Core i7-8700K (without confusion, stock, AS5)
- ASUS Maximus X Formula
- Corsair Revenge Pro RGB DDR4-3200 MHz Cas16 (Samsung B-Die, XMP ON)
- ASUS STRIX RTX 2060 O6G (Stock)
- Corsair AX1200i Platinum
- Corsair MP510 960 GB
- ASUS STRIX Helios
- EK Vardar EVO RGB (x 4)
- Tacklif HM02 (thermometer and hygrometer)
- Ckeyin DNM-51 (sound level meter)
- Windows 10 1909 64 pieces
Games checked Singing Ashes: Classic, Assassin & # 39; s Creed: Odyssey, Battlefield V, Ghost Recon Wildlands, Shadow of the Tomb Raider. We considered introducing other titles like Metro Exodus, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare or Breakpoint, but of these three the drivers didn't finish working, where we went from blue screens to PC reboots.
The drivers used are the latest available (Adrenalin 2020 19.12.2 of December 12 and WHQL) so all the conditions are very interesting in this comparison.
The information provided for the same game belongs to the same sample, so it is transmitted, for example it can be seen between the frame and the time, when this information is explicit.
Ready? Let's go there
The Ashes of Singing: A Classic
The theme is well done in DX12, subject to compulsory testing by any tester and will test each graphics card's performance. As we can see, the difference is very small between the two models, where the minimum, maximum and maximum are usually followed.
Here we have many details, because, although small, high and average data show some similarity, the agreement with what is seen in the graph is the opposite, something we will see next in the following graphs.
In any case, it seems that the 4 GB version is getting a bit more smooth in this game.
The equation is that even with the LOW percentages nailed, who will take the cat out of the water?
Here we can see something very interesting: the 8 GB version gets a little deviation from the FPS, but the 4 GB version gets a lot smoother, just as the fram showed. As we can see, the difference remains small, so, in Ashes of the Singularity: Classic version of 4 GB is set, though not in the right way of thinking to choose one model or the other.
Assassin's Faith: The Odyssey
Anvil image engine for this Odyssey is starting to make a difference even under the DX11. Even having the same chip and the same frequencies, the difference in performance is simply amazing: 11.7 FPS. In addition, the PowerColor version (8 GB) gets the best reduced and maximum, the graph is clear depending on the difference of this frame.
Fun time is surprisingly similar, and soft on both cards is very high. By keeping the tops of the functionality used to damage the FPS, it can be seen that the 11,7 FPS are not mocked in this category, because they are separated by 9 ms on average and very similar.
Percentages indicate that the performance of the 8 GB version is very high, with the first one being repeated and the second about 6 times faster.
Here we can totally see that FPS and Stuttering differences are much higher in the 4 GB version, but how does VRAM and the system behave when playing?
Battlefield V
Warfield V proves another similar situation, where manual uploads penalize 4 GB version performance. The difference in standard performance is 17.2 FPS, where the reduction in this case is due to allow for a larger version of VRAM.
The Dice engine is probably the best-performing AMD engine ever made. It totally looks like the softness is strong when played and at the same time, Sapphire has a lot of problems maintaining the genre, with some of the bad climbs we've already seen in the framerate.
These can only be considered as popular "jerks" in this game, luckily they are only two and they certainly correspond to times of heavy lifting.
Details of the percentages of 1% and 0,1% Low leave doubts, where the last one goes through a double performance, the main difference being a game that goes like a fish in water with AMD.
Given all of the above, the differences in FPS and Stuttering do not leave much to be noted. The 8 GB version is obviously high, but how closely does VRAM fit into these differences?
Surprisingly, the 8 GB version reaches a minimum of 4100 MB of elements in VRAM, while the system RAM reaches 8153 MB. The Sapphire card has almost encrypted details about the RAM part, where we have already seen a maximum load of up to 4031 MB.
This means that a larger volume has a larger effect when it comes to composing management, where it is possible that the same distribution is different for pure share in driver VRAM.
This means that, if we have, as it were, four VRAM chips available, in the PowerColor version these are 2 GB, so the driver can store that distance for each chip, shouldn't be separated, this gets better especially when working for bus and shadows with TMUs.
Photo by Tomb Raider
Tomb Raider's reputation though is a well-known title for NVIDIA, it turns out that it did very well in AMD's new RDNA design and under DX12. Here it is also shown that the 8 GB version makes a difference, because the standard FPS is 14.3 frames more than its sister with 4 GB of VRAM.
And not only that, but a little bit better and as shown in the graph, its performance is always the same.
The framework, though excellent in both cases, shows that the 8 GB version is more compatible when more is needed, something that shows a higher value for both cards, where the 4 GB version is shocked 42 ms at a time to save time
However, the LOW percentages are not as bad as one might expect, the Sapphire Pulse RX 5500 XT 4 GB protects itself quite well from its size.
Here we see how PowerColor is marking more land in front of its sister Sapphire. Given the dual functionality, let's know how important VRAM is in this case.
The Square Enix engine is quite different from this Shadow of the Tomb Raider, in that it seems to be trying not to compromise the Sapphire model's VRAM, giving it a massive + -700 MB distance, but instead requires the system to be a huge amount of RAM to work with RAMCaché.
Instead, PowerColor reaches 6831 MB in VRAM, which lowers the expectations of the RAM program to just 8 GB, which is undoubtedly the cause of the high performance of this against its competitors.
Article 2
Phase 2 is just one of those many topics configured for AMD, so we expect a few variations in performance. Shown is a frame, where as we can see the difference in FPS is very small between the two types.
The duration of the simulation is linear, it is difficult to scan additional data, where softness at play is counter-skeptical. There is nothing shocking and when it happens it's small, it's 3-4 ms more, the equilibrium still stands.
Nothing to highlight the percentage of LOW, the highest correlation between both versions.
Here we have the first difference worth mentioning, because FPS variations are best in the 8 GB version, where they are surprisingly unique when both cards have encrypted the difference in terms of Stuttering, something we haven't seen yet.
What does the difference in VRAM mean in this article?
Here we come to a point where it is completely transparent and in line with what has been shown about the importance of vehicle performance and drivers, because we have a situation already seen, where the game does not destroy VRAM for smaller models, but still does not cause system RAM.
The good thing is undoubtedly that performance is maintained regardless of how much VRAM the GPU is, something that as we've seen so many times is less respected.
It is also observed that the fact that carrying more VRAM forces the system to save more RAM for the system, so it is understood that large-scale transfers are always performed, something that could explain the emphasis placed on developers where this is handled most effectively.
Conclusion RX 5500 XT 4 GB vs 8 GB
Is VRAM Important? Is it deciding in 2019 and facing 2020? Is it worth investing in a model with more VRAM? The answer is a clear and powerful yes to three questions, at least for this minute RX 5500 XT. We live in an era where everything is loaded into system RAM, so something with familiar names suggests it will do a simple job.
It seems that developers are clarifying: you don't have enough VRAM on your GPU? No matter, the game engine will send the build to system RAM and even if you lose performance, you can play. Be prepared in case you need another time.
This attracts a market toward a complex process. We've seen how VRAM reduces having a large amount of RAM on our PC so that everything develops into potential problems, directly related to performance.
We are currently living in an era where RAM is "cheap", especially when compared to last year, but when this trend is restored (all pointing there) the player will have to make an important decision: a GPU with lots of VRAM and the relative cost of the model in question, or RAM more then you lose some functionality.
Generally, the cheapest and most obvious option is to choose a GPU model with more VRAM. The problem is that this can happen in the middle or lower grades, but in the middle and upper middle grades either AMD or NVIDIA does not offer any kind of models with more memory.
It is true that they have a larger bus and operate at higher speeds due to their clean performance, but the PCIe bus still operates at the same speed and RAM will not be as different as the speed it is today. When we add to these high resolutions, multiple filters and high FPS, we have the sharpest combination in the market today.
Returning to this RX 5500 XT, the option is clear: we should choose models with 8 GB of VRAM without a doubt, as long as the package allows. The details do not support the discussion and the market trend of videogames is growing exponentially due to shorter development times and the impartial use of different RAMCaché techniques for videogames.
We should try to avoid by buying the RX 5500 XT model with a higher VRAM that the game has to go to PCIe, CPU and RAM for details and formatting, so, the costs incurred in this case will be justified, rather than justified. I mean.
Table of Contents
