how much better is Navi W5700x over Vega 64 . I currently own a imac pro with vega 64 which is able to run most games at 1440p 60fps on windows bootcamp, so I want a more powerful graphic chip which can run game at 4k 60fpsIf what you want is gaming perf, you don't want a Vega but a Navi. Vega is a great compute architecture, but it's geometry engine lacks behind meaning it'll have a lot of unitised shaders in most games. The Navi architecture fixes that.
Also, don't expect a Duo in an iMac Pro. You're also more likely to see a Navi anyway like a W5700X
how much better is Navi W5700x over Vega 64 . I currently own a imac pro with vega 64 which is able to run most games at 1440p 60fps on windows bootcamp, so I want a more powerful graphic chip which can run game at 4k 60fps
Nothing short of an NVIDEA RTX 2080 Ti is going to run demanding modern games at 60+ fps in 4K ultra settings. Maybe Navi 5800 if/when that comes out.
I've heard the 5700 is 15-20% faster at gaming than the Vega 64 (but slower than a Vega 56 at raw compute).
It is not a practical option. Until we can find an eGPU that utilizes two thunderbolt 3 ports (one for incoming signal and one for outgoing) there isn't enough bandwidth for the internal monitor to run on an eGPU.Is an external GPU even an option for Bootcamp gaming? Would it drive the internal display or require a separate display?
It is not a practical option. Until we can find an eGPU that utilizes two thunderbolt 3 ports (one for incoming signal and one for outgoing) there isn't enough bandwidth for the internal monitor to run on an eGPU.
Yup. Ultimately the iMac is an unupgradable machine - which sucks for the GPU as it should be one of the most upgradable components on a computer these days.Ideally, to match PCIe x16, you'd want four Thunderbolt connections, and even then that's just bandwidth. Latency would still be at a disadvantage.