The first widely surfaced independent benchmarks of AMD’s Radeon Vega Frontier Edition showed a split: gaming results were less compelling than some results in professional applications. They were an early snapshot, not a complete verdict. PC Perspective tested a card its reviewer bought from a reseller, but had only a 4.5-hour live benchmarking window; later coverage also underscored how much workload and driver choice could affect the picture.
What the first independent tests covered
PC Perspective published its air-cooled Radeon Vega Frontier Edition review on June 30, 2017. Reviewer Ryan Shrout said he purchased the card directly from a reseller rather than receiving an AMD review sample. He also described benchmarking live during a 4.5-hour window, limiting how broadly the review could test the card. PC Perspective’s review included games such as Dirt Rally, Fallout 4, Grand Theft Auto V, Hitman, Rise of the Tomb Raider, and The Witcher 3, alongside 3DMark, Unigine Heaven, SPECviewperf, LuxMark, and Cinebench.
That range matters: a game benchmark, a graphics test, and a professional-application benchmark do not measure the same kind of work. The collection is more useful for seeing how results varied by workload than any single score would be. But a short test window and a limited set of applications cannot establish how the card would perform across every game, professional program, or configuration.
How performance differed by workload
PC Perspective’s opening assessment was provisional. The review noted that the Frontier Edition was not aimed at gamers, and anticipated that its gaming results could disappoint some readers while professional-application performance might appeal to users prepared to work without certified drivers. That assessment points to a workload split; it does not mean every professional application was faster or that gaming performance was uniformly poor.
Recommended Free Tools
#1 Best Overall
- Graphics Card Only - Software and drivers available on AMD's website
- Dedicated Memory Size: 16 GB
- Dedicated Memory Type: HBM2
- Display outputs: 3x DisplayPort 1.4, 1x HDMI 2.0
- Dimensions: Full Height, Board Length 10.5" (267 mm), Board Width Double Slot
Tom’s Hardware’s review, published August 2, 2017, described good performance in targeted professional applications when using Radeon Pro certified drivers, alongside gaming results that were weaker than hoped and high power consumption. Its testing covered multiple graphics APIs and also examined power, frequency, temperature, and noise. The results therefore add useful context, but they should be read alongside the particular applications, drivers, comparison cards, and test conditions used—not as a universal ranking.
What AMD’s launch claims did—and did not—show
AMD’s June 27, 2017 launch announcement positioned the card for machine-learning development and advanced visualization. It claimed up to 172% faster rendering than a comparable competitor card and up to 33% faster performance in DeepBench, attributing the results to AMD Performance Labs tests conducted in May 2017. These are AMD’s vendor-reported comparisons, not independent review results. The “up to” figures also describe the cited comparisons, not a guaranteed advantage across software or workloads.
Rank #2
- 16GB 2048-Bit HBM2
- Radeon Vega Frontier Edition
- Core Clock Typical Engine Clock (MHz): 1382
- Peak Engine Clock (MHz): 1600
- 4096 Stream Processing Units
2017 card specifications and price
PC Perspective listed the tested air-cooled card with 16GB of HBM2 memory, a 300W rating, and a $999 then-current MSRP. Those figures describe the product and its listed price in the 2017 review; the MSRP is historical, not a current offer or buying recommendation. Power consumption is also relevant when comparing performance: a faster result in one workload does not by itself establish better efficiency, and Tom’s Hardware reported high power consumption in its review.
Quick Recap
Best Value
- Hdmi; 3 x DP
- Gpu: 1208 MHz engine Clock, 1512 MHz Boost Engine Clock
- Memory: 800 MHz, 1600 MHz Effective
- Directx 12
- Made in Taiwan
Rank #4
Rank #3
- 2 x HDMI; 2 x DP
- GPU: 1373 MHz Engine Clock, 1580 MHz Boost Engine Clock
- Memory: 945 MHz, 1900 MHz Effective
How to interpret the early benchmarks
- Match the workload. Compare games with games and professional applications with the same application and task; do not treat unlike tests as interchangeable.
- Check the driver context. The 2017 coverage distinguished gaming results from targeted workstation use with Radeon Pro certified drivers. A result under one driver setup does not automatically describe another.
- Read the test setup. Benchmark, graphics API, comparison hardware, platform, and test date all shape what a result can establish. The reviews covered different tests and comparison sets.
- Include operating characteristics. Power, frequency, temperature, and noise help qualify performance, especially when assessing a workstation or gaming workload.
- Keep the evidence types separate. Independent reviews and AMD’s own Performance Labs comparisons answer different questions and should not be combined into one score or treated as equivalent validation.
- Keep the time period in view. The figures and reviews describe the card in 2017. They do not establish its performance with today’s software, current driver support, resale value, or availability.
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
