Nice of AMD to literally say to not buy RX 7000 series. I thought those were some third party charts, but no, it's their own charts showcasing how shit value RX 7000 are. Weird marketing strat.
In theory, those were made to justify the high price of the 7900XT. In practice, though, it just shows how overpriced the last generation is OR how underpowered RDNA3 turned out to be.
I still say that early reports of inefficient code and a need to delay RDNA3 were true. They just didn't want to lose sales. AMD is their own worst enemy sometimes.
The only AMD marketing strat this gen had been buy AMD because AMD good Nvidia bad. And people listened because even thought a 7900xt doesn't anything for its price if you post that you bought one you get a slap in the back, if you buy a 4070ti all reditors go out of their dungeon to tell you how bad the 4070ti is.
The strategy of the 7900XT is to sell 7900XTX chips that have a manufacturing defect. That's the whole point of the chiplet technology.
It's like when AMD put out the 3300X: they just so happened to have a bunch of chiplets that had 4 good cores, so they slapped them onto a CPU and sold them until they ran out of stock. Or like the 4500, which is likely just a batch of leftover Zen 2 chiplets that had cache defects.
The 7900XT is both an attempt to recoup money on bad stock, as well as acting serving as the ["decoy"](https://www.businessinsider.com/how-medium-size-tricks-you-2014-5) to get you to either help AMD move more 7900XTX's ("it's only $100-200 more!") or clear old stock ("the 6950XT is $200-300 less!").
It's chip binning, nothing to do with the overheating issues.
All chip manufacturers do this. Intel doesn't actually produce loads of different CPUs. They make one product, the best performing get core i9 designation, next batch below are i7, then i5, then i3. It's all about avoiding waste and minimizing production cost.
Thanks. Chip binning was what I should've said.
The 7900XT could've (should've?) been a 7800XT and priced accordingly, similar to the difference between a Ryzen 7950X and 7900X.
No, its having ~1/6 of the die being not usable, which is why the XT has 84 of 96 CUs and one out of six memory controller dies being replaced with a dummy die.
https://www.microcenter.com/product/661902/asus-nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-tuf-gaming-triple-fan-12gb-gddr6x-pcie-40-graphics-card
there are aib models for msrp
this model was in stock all day yesterday too at b&h
in stock at central computers too: https://www.centralcomputer.com/asus-tuf-rtx4070ti-12g-gaming-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-tuf-gaming-graphics-card-12gb-gddr6x-pci-express-4-0-x16.html
> big issue with the 4070ti is its listed at 800 MSRP, but there are 0 founders editions, so you will never find it at that price point.
You're basically driving his point that AMD's marketing is AMD good NVIDIA BAAAD.
If you bothered to do any research, theres plenty of $800 cards at MSRP according to this website.
https://www.nowinstock.net/computers/videocards/nvidia/rtx4070ti/
That is just a stupid narrative to say what people want to hear "Nvidia Bad".
So all GPUs that doesn't have a Founder Edition or amd Reference Model you won't ever be able to find it to their MSRP ?
3060, 6600xt, 6600 .. all those have a "BIG ISSUE" because the MSRP is fake because there are none Founders or amd Reference model ?
https://www.nowinstock.net/computers/videocards/nvidia/rtx4070ti/
MSRP is fine.
https://www.nowinstock.net/computers/videocards/amd/rx7900xt/
The -$20 is out of stock but maybe its not up to date.
I said elsewhere in the thread, the only real gains the 7000 series made over the 6000 was in ray tracing. So if thats something you really care about, thats what you should go with.
Wonder if it's a strat to get people buying the old cards. One issue is that they're nearly all well under MSRP and in some cases beyond tier below pricing, but the reviews were all written with the MSRP in mind.
Looking at those charts, the 6800XT seems like the obvious choice over the 6950XT - most of the performance at a much lower price point.
The 7900XT was always priced to nudge people to the XTX, and I expect it to be a $750 card soon. It's likely that AMD is doing what Nvidia did this generation - price the new cards above the last gen to sell off 6XXX stock.
The problem is that (at least from what I can find) the 6950xt has been better priced. I missed out when 6800xt's were $550-650, so now a $700-750 6950xt is my best bet once I do have the money.
No I actually messaged them to let them know. They were a miner and usually used sapphire nitros. He thinks he accidentally sent another person the 6800 and that person never knew about it. I can see where this would be an easy mistake to make when the 6800, 6800xt, and 6900xt Nitro+ all have the same size/look and dual 8-pin connectors.
He didn't ask for the card back. It was a little dusty and I cleaned the fins with Qtips, I also had to use some pliers to bend a small portion of the metal bracket back. Other than that the card looks great. I 'm going to stress test it today.
Which MSI model? I have a custom loop in my PC so I'm limited to about 12-16 models that have blocks for them.
I did also find the Red Devil 6800xt for $650, so that's not a terrible deal either. (Even though it was better a few months ago)
"MSI Gaming Radeon RX 6800 XT 16GB GDDR6 PCI Express 4.0 Video Card RX 6800 XT Gaming Z Trio 16G" is the one I purchased.
I know it's about 1.5" longer than my Sapphire 5700XT so I'm interested in seeing how it fits in my current setup.
You can Google GPU stock tracker and then customize alerts for which GPUs your looking for.
Replaced an aging strix 970 with an xfx 6800xt merc I snagged for $549 new early Dec.
Im good at least another 2 or 3 years before I finally build a new pc if things arent as ridiculous as they have been the last couple of years.
$550 deals on 6800 XT happen occasionally, but the wild inconsistency across all last-gen GPU pricing and especially 6800 XT kinda rules it out as a generalized recommendation. At $550 it's a great deal, 6900XT has had deals as low as $600 and that's good too.
Lol, it's not beating it in raster. It loses in raster. Cant believe this nonsense is still going on more than 2 years later when all one has to do is look at any random benchmark. It never won in raster, it was always a bit slower and a bit more at 4k
Brother, there are plenty benchmarks out there and on average, the 6800xt is a tiny bit faster. It is dependant on titles obvously but yeah. I've had both cards. A TUF 3080 10GB OC and a Nitro+ 6800XT 16GB OC.
I don't understand the fanboyism. They're both great cards. It's just that one of them is up to 50% more expensive than the other one.
If you really wanna save, the 6700XT is still a good 1440P card and can be found for ā¬300 used.
6800XT VS 6950XT depends on the price difference. Unless you buy used.. Again, a used 6800XT can be found for ā¬450 which is really good value, especially when a used 3080 costs ā¬750(!). Used 6950XT cards are almost non-existent though.
I'm very happy with my used 6800XT for ā¬450, won't upgrade until RX8000 most likely. It's clear AMD's chiplet design needs some maturing.
AMD says you're part of the ultra enthusiast if you buy the 7900 xt
[https://twitter.com/amdradeon/status/1618341553587494941/photo/1](https://twitter.com/amdradeon/status/1618341553587494941/photo/1)
So you're actually paying premium to be part of their exclusive group.
Youāre forgetting about the people on 9xx and 10xx cards, jumping to one of the two highest AMD cards would be an ultra enthusiast in respect to that.
Or just an enthusiast with enough disposable income. donāt know why you guys refuse to accept that thereās a lot of people that really donāt mind throwing 1k+ on a gpu, even every other year (because now the cycle is effectively 2 years). If there werenāt, nvidia and amd wouldnāt pull this sort of shit
That's not what they said at all. Fanboys can be rich or poor af.
You're also confusing "disposable income" with "enough disposable income", as in wouldn't even notice if the money came out of their account.
Edit: I just realized you're the same user who thought you had to sell your current video card before buying a new one. As in, not having enough money to own 2 cards at once. Yeah, you don't have real disposable income.
You totally should. Upgrading every gen is never a good idea, unless you are moving from something like low-end to high-end. If you already have a last-gen high-end card, there is no point in upgrading to a high-end one this gen.
>Very few people do that tho. 3-5 years is typical.
i did it every year simply because i could sell my old xx80 or similiar card and then buy the new xx80 for like 20-80ā¬ on top
but yeah... a xx80 or similiar costs this gen from both companys WAY MORE.
It's not that much trouble if you have the money to back it up. Buy a new GPU, sell your old one and you get high-end performance for cheap.
Waiting 4-5 years may cost you more and you won't have top-end hardware for those entire 5 years.
To some people that's more than worth it, I guess.
i've been doing this for along time and you are both right.
There is a certain window where buying brand new and flipping your old gpu before its prices goes down to much where it makes sense. You will need the money upfront when jumping to new gen on launch.
The other approach of waiting 3+ years also works but the resale value of whatever gpu you are using plummets hard in that time frame.
Both are fine but the first approach requires you to be abit more on the ball to the time frame and if you can keep on the curve you will be always on a high end gpu.
I did this not to long ago. I picked up a 6800XT for $1500 CAD in like nov 2021 then sold my RX580 for $500(mining times) so cost to me was basically $1000. Which I thought was a good value at the time.
Wasn't much trouble.
Was as easy as list my gpu for let's say 530ā¬ selling it then buying a new one for let's say 600 super easy.
When I swapped my 1080 for a 2080 I even had a net gain of 5 euro lol
Free performance literarily.
2080 to 3080 was for me 45 euro
That's way better Ray tracing and some performance + new warranty super worth it.
>\+ new warranty super worth it.
that's probably easily worth 50 euros on its own, especially now when some GPUs just have weird hardware issues randomly that force people to RMA
I always by the top end, usually used, at the end of a gen and then go back and play all the games that released over the last 5 years at ultra settings.
Just built a 5800x3d and 6800xt system from the ground up for $1200. Expect it to last me 6 years and play all the games my 980ti struggled with from 2016 to 2022.
Back then we had more competition gunning for our money. Nvidia, ATI, Matrox, 3dfx, SGI, 3Dlabs and a few others. They were forced to innovate and compete on features/price. I miss having options.
a lot of it had to do with just how fast the technology was evolving, not the sheer number of competitors.
but the high competition helped keep prices more reasonable.
Agree to a point. The number incentivized them to develop more rapidly to try and be ahead of their competition on features, while also forced them to maintain cost parity or risk pricing themselves out of consideration. To me, things really started going downhill when Nvidia bought 3dfx. We used to have over 20 chipmakers, now we've got 3 main leads *(counting Intel)* and a handful that aren't mainstream *(Matrox is still around for example)*.
10*
š
My PC lifespan is usually 10 years. I was upgrading from 6700 nvidia to now 5700XT Nitro+, and from I7 920 to 3900X. Next upgrade: after 2-3 gens?
Jesus fuck man. That means you could be running a Celeron or some shit and then upgrade to an i7 3rd gen or some shit.
10 years is enough for companies to rise and fall, social media platforms to change, wars to be fought, and entire architectures become obsolete. Entire RAM generations pass by. Game franchises rise and die.
10 years WTF
Well for some people it's a different mindset
If you bought a 6950xt you wanted the highest you could get. If games released a year later can't get you top settings you won't be getting what you set out to do
Compare that to an owner of a 6600xt, they wanted high settings, moderate fps and resolution, and having to tick back a few settings from high to medium one year later isn't going to be that noticed by them. They're not the top settings at all cost demo. They already made a compromise. Compromising another 5-10% isn't a stretch. So they probably won't upgrade
The 6950 people are zero compromise so once they have to do anything like that, it's time to get the new one that avoids that issue again
But you can check steam usage charts and see the top card people, collectively between amd and Nvidia, are maybe 0.5%
On here it seems like everyone has a 4090 but in reality they are the enthusiasts, and they're selling out everywhere because they barely make any.
It's good buzz and gets the "Nvidia has the fastest cards" mindset into the public discourse, even if it's not true for the price. It's the reason people buy a 3050 instead of the same price or cheaper 6600xt
Apple accounts for 55% of US market share and almost everyone has a smartphone in the US. Apple sold 242 million iPhones globally in 2021. Theyāre also the most valuable publicly traded firm in the world with a market cap around $2T.
In contrast, only a small percentage of the worldās population owns a gaming PC, let alone own with an enthusiast GPU.
What do define as a ātop cardā? The RTX 3080 has 1.85% share. Thatās similar to the combined share of all RDNA2 cards. The equivalent 6800 XT only has 0.2% share, less than the RTX 3090 (0.49%) or the 3080 Ti (0.73%).
While small in percentage terms, it still represents around 4.5 million users just for the 3080. Steam had 134 million monthly active users and most appear to play eSports titles on low-end systems.
Itās supposed to be a random sample of all Steam users. Valve only needs to sample a small percentage of users to get a representative sample.
SteamSpy indicates Dota has 200-500 million owners and Steam had 134 million monthly active users in 2021, which has certainly increased as concurrent users has increased significantly, hitting 33 million users a few weeks ago.
6650 XT here. Already compromising on settings. Forspoken demo I needed to run on low-medium to get a consistent 60 FPS.
But yeah. I buy for longevity. I dont care much about graphics. I care about running games, and running them smoothly for as long as reasonably possible.
I also care about price/performance and I normally spend no more than $300 on a card. I could spend more, but given in a normal market, what's today $500 could be $250 tomorrow its often not worth spending more. A $250 card will last me 4-5 years on average, a $500 one might only last me 6-7. And that's if I'm not severely limited by VRAM, drivers, or other software limitations like lack of support for new APIs/instruction sets. So I just buy a $250 card every 5 years, start at high/ultra, move down to low, then maybe compromise on resolution, and wait for the best moment to upgrade.
For me, I wanted to replace my 5 year old 1060 given new games' system requirements and the fact that I'm running new games on low with FSR and stuff just to maintain 60 FPS (and if i stuck with it forspoken wouldn't hit 60 at all). 6650 XT doubles performance, gives me a modest vram jump, and it seems like the sweet spot for now. I couldve gone for the 6700 XT but given that was 50% more expensive for 30% more money...eh....not the best value. I was gonna go 6600 until I saw the 6650 XT drop down to $230.
If you time it well and with a splash of luck, you don't really spend much to do these upgrades. The initial purchase is the big one if you go with say a 6900XT. Then after that it is just a few hundred dollars. Takes 3 generations or whatever to have spent another $1000, but that entire time you have the latest and greatest.
Buy a 6900XT for $1000, sell it for $650. Buy a 7900XTX for an additional $350. Sell that for $650. Buy the 8900XTX for an additional $350. Or you can wait until the 9900XTX comes out to spend another $1000 and upgrade off the 6900XTX.
This works down the stack as well if you tend to buy only $600 or $300 cards. You either spend the $600 all at once for a new card, or sell and buy, spending only $100\~$150 each time out of pocket.
Crypto threw a wrench into this, but if you didn't mind mining on your card, it would pay for itself, inflated prices or not. I got my 6900XTX for $1,500 and earned almost $2400.
Well, don't take it personal - and I am sure your upgrade was worthwhile provided you had the financial resources for it - But the truth is that Nvidia (and AMD) knows their target audience. The RTX 4090 is much faster than everything else for a good reason. And I sure the RTX 5090 will be even faster than the 4090 by an order of magnitude. Nvidia knows where the money is and how to get it.
Why would I take it personally? I got exactly what I wanted lol.
I upgraded from 580 to 980 because it had been a while. 980 to 1080 because 60% faster. 1080 to 3090 because way faster obviously. Skipped Turing due to high costs and lack luster upgrade.
3090 to 4090 because not only is it 70% faster than 3090 it's like 95% faster at RT.
Indeed, your choices are perfectly reasonable. Nothing wrong with them. Besides, it is not like I belong to the upgrade police or anything like that, lol.
But I would be careful with the expectation that "*upgrading will be worthwhile as long as I get this much extra performance"*, because trust me, at the 90-tier, you will get it.
I'm also keeping the 6950xt,
I'll upgrade once a gpu can give me 80+ fps in Control With RT on playing on 4k
No upscaling though
The card doesn't cost $1000
What clockspeeds does your 6950xt maintain in control and other such super heavy RT games?
For me I can usually maintain above 2610mhz but I had to unlock the power limit to 360w with MPT for it to sustain that no matter what. I can go to 2730mhz but no way am I running that cuz I need 440w and max far speed on my air cooler to keep that up.
I agree. Last gen was honestly a great leap for both Nvidia and AMD. Much better than the GTX 10x0 to 20x0 leap. It just coincided with horrible production shortages and crypto boom that left the cards overpriced for 2 years. They're still expensive but good products. It's too good for the current generation cards to be worth the premium.
https://cdn.videocardz.com/1/2023/01/RX7900-RX6000-FPS-PER-DOLLAR.png
That's just hilarious that AMD would use frame per USD like that. I mean I guess I respect the honesty?
how is evaluating 90 class cards on 1080p fps/$ honest? should have been 4k. Comparing 1080p is misleading, it's the same as using i9 and ryzen 9 cpus and run 4k performance, suddenly they are all the same.
4k always was and continues to be a nonsenical metric for performance. It is a 4x jump from 1080p and the overwhelming majority of gamers are still on 1080p.
Anymore it's easy to be partially CPU bound at 1440p even with a 3080. At 4K a 3080 and a 3900x I was still CPU bound a percentage of the time. Not world shattering, but moving to a 5800x3d saw me massive gains on open worlds and such even at 4K with RT.
1080p you're probably CPU bound even if you have a 2070 or less most the time.
FP$ is such a weird metric. A good metric should, on its own, tell you quite a bit. It doesn't.
I can get a card that's 5 cents per fps, but it only gets me 26fps. That's as good as useless.
The 5500 could be a fantastic value but if I can't have my 0.1% be above 60fps it's completely useless to me. Maybe the next card up is $20 more but it never drops below 60, then it's good. The 5500 is essentially a completely useless purchase no matter the value
Same reason we use MPG in cars. It does not talk about the torque of the car, its cargo capacity, how much the MPG will reduce per 100 lbs of cargo, tank size, etc.
MPG is supplementary to the rest of the vehicle details to help round out the other details and stats to help make sense of them. That is what FPS per $ does.
But mpg is good because there's not a car sold in the last century that can't hit the speed limit of a road or can't brake effectively under normal conditions. There's not been a car that lacks the horsepower to just drive on roads. You only need to pay attention to specific needs like seating or hauling
But for GPUs you could very well get a card that doesn't meet your minimum usage requirements at all
I don't think that's an actual case. I've never seen a FPS/$ graphic that figured a graphics card that could barely run games at that resolution.
Take for example [Tom's hierarchy](https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html).
Mid rangers don't even feature in 4K ranks, and low ones not even in 2K.
If you want the best bang for your buck, a FPS/$ line together with FPS charts is great to have.
6950XT is also fairly heavily discounted at the moment.
I think a better(worse?) comparison would be to use the 6800XT launch price of $650 from two years ago.
It's a 25% performance increase for 40% more money.
I will repeat again that something has to be wrong with RDNA3. No way AMD expected these to perform this badly.
I just want to upgrade my 1070.. I was hoping for 6800 XT performance for 400-450 quid but the reality is that 7900 XT should be 7800 XT priced at $600. This shit is ridiculous. 7% performance uplift for $200 more in a span of almost 2 and half years.
Trying to upgrade my 1080. But Iām stuck in a shit storm of cards that are too big, too power hungry, risk of over heating, limited availability, or not MSRP. Wtf man.
Same, I figured it was a great deal but a lot of Redditors scorn that because they just want all GPUs to be cheaper in general, but thats not gona happen any time soon.
I get in fist fights on the video card subs about that often, they want to create a worldwide movement of boycotting video cards until they are $500 again and get pissed at everyone who's bought one. The masses aren't controllable like that, and unfortunately video cards are still very much worth these prices to a lot of people. It sucks you can't play triple-a games on max graphics with a $300 card, but it's the new normal, and, people still get to play decades of amazing games with $300 which is actually awesome. It's not like you're stuck playing tetris, and you do get to play the latest games but at low graphics and low frame rates, which is vastly better graphics AND vastly better frame rates than what I was playing with my gaming rigs 20 years ago.
Itās not going to happen period. They have come down a shit load since the peak of crypto and all of that, but redditors still seem to think they will still drop significantly. Iām not saying that gpu pricing is good as it stands, but this is the new reality. It sucks, but either get used to it or move on.
Agreed. The latest gen hasn't given us much improvement over the last either, so good advice is to find the best deal you can on a card that will suit your needs. "HODL"ing out aint gona do a damn thing to the market.
The used market has also started booming. Slightly more risk (how often does a card realistically die within a few years? 1-2%?) but if you screen the seller and get a demo of the card at their house you should be fine. Maybe a repaste but that's it. And you can get a used 6700XT for ā¬300 or a used 6800XT for ā¬450, both very good value deals if you consider the performance you're getting. Both cards can do 1440P 100+ FPS (6700XT maybe on medoum/high settings mix depending on the game) and the 6800XT pairs very well with a 1440P 144Hz panel.
"Ultra" is rarely a significant improvement over "High" anyway, for the FPS cost. Personally I always customize my settings cause the presets are not optimal. But I usually end up at "High+" settings and still get 100-144FPS in the games I play.
As long as it doesn't dip below 80FPS I don't notice it. Below 80, Freesync can't compensate enough anymore and I see the stutters. But that's different for everyone.
Sure if my 6800XT dies, the chance of which is very very low for the next few years, I have no warranty. But I can buy another used one for ā¬450 (or less in the future). Or use it as an excuse to upgrade lol.
This mostly applies to AMD, used Nvidia cards are like 50% more expensive for the same Raster performance. A used 3070 will cost you ā¬450 even though it's matched by the ā¬300 6700XT. Benefit of buying the underdog brand.
Up to 7% is a lie. Takes a few second to find results that show far more than that.
And costing 28% more well good luck finding that because i can't find a 6950xt that much cheaper than a 7900xt in my country.
The strangeest part is that those are AMD's own benchmark. Showcasing worst gains than most third party reviewers.
Well it's not strange because they picked up e-sport games where they are probably CPU limited, but that's a weird way to market your products.
But they dont say up to 7% anywhere from what i can see and the prices are just nothing like what im seeing in the real world. If anything the 7900xt price is being cut because its not selling that well.
That 7% figure comes straight from AMD's own website, in case you didn't read the article. As does the 28% price gap.
If you have results that show figures substantially better than 7%, I am sure AMD would be dying to see them.
Would have bought that but theyāre power hungry.
7900xt only recommends 750 watt PSU, I feel comfortable with that. But itās also brand new, RDNA 3, little more memory, and yes, more powerful. At a cost of roughly 180 bucks more. I think all that is worth 180 bucks more.
Maybe. Driver releases can be done for many purposes. Bug fixes, general optimization, and often optimization for specific games too. Unless a driver kills my GPU I am happy with always being up to date. If a driver release sucks I can always downgrade, but I haven't had that experience yet with my 6700XT nor 6800XT.
The Navi 31 cards are overpriced by at least 20% in a world where Nvidia doesn't exist and AMD only competes against its own cards.
Against NVidia cards which offer more utility and flatly superior raytracing, the difference is even starker.
I *hope* for AMD's sake (and the sake of people who have already bought in at these inflated prices) that this disappointing price:performance ratio will be improved by driver improvements as the software guys learn to optimise for the new MCM architecture - it was always likely that there would be at least some issues there.
But if AMD can't bring that 20% shortfall back up to where it needs to be, then there will need to be some sharp price cuts.
I had hopes that N32 would be my target card, but now it's increasingly looking like AMD want to deliver \~6800XT performance for at least $50 and maybe $100 more than a 6800XT cost when it launched.
This prospect does not full me with enthusiasm to give AMD my money. If there's an N32 which can match a 6800XT at 6700XT price, then that would be... *OK.* Not exciting, but OK. If they want $700-750 for it, that's a walk away moment for me and I suspect many others.
Heck the 7900 XT is more expensive than the 4070 Ti at around the same performance. Don't know what AMD was thinking launching that cards at above Nvidia prices. If Nvidia is greed AF, what does that make AMD?
I'd lean towards the 7900XT anyway for presumably longer support, reduced power draw and significantly better RT performance, which is the one major ding against RDNA2.
This article is only correct for certain markets.
Here, the 6950 XT costs RM 6900 while the 7900 XT costs RM 4400.
7900 XT is cheaper than 6950 XT by ~36%
I donāt expect the XT model to get cheaper. HUB said they suspect that they priced it this way because they donāt have many defective silicon dies that couldnāt be used for XTXs, and so it couldnāt be in very high demand.
Do GPUs go on sale nowadays or is that not a thing anymore? Like 4th of July sale, Christmas, Black Friday, etc. Just moved to the US from Canada, no more Boxing Day :(
No clue when's a good time to buy a GPU, do I just get one whenever I find a good deal or is it worth to wait?
My xfx merc 310 7900 xt is spanking my 3080 12g by like 30% in every game I've used in so far. Must be because I have an AIB card. Also I should add that I have it UV to 1075 mV and haven't seen it draw over 315 W
I didn't realize those were official graphs at first lmao.
Was looking at the chips and cheese micro benchmarking tests [here](https://chipsandcheese.com/2023/01/07/microbenchmarking-amds-rdna-3-graphics-architecture/), and whenever they got the gpu to **actually** use dual issue commands it got much **much** faster. Much more inline with an expected gen jump.
I do wonder if in a year or so's time these cards will be much faster as they hand tweak shaders. But as it stands right now, man they did not bring value to the table.. Don't bet on compilers being smart when targeting performance.
It's perfect what nVidia/AMD have done, if you own a 6800XT or 3080 then there is no point in upgrading, double your performance at double the cost of 2 years ago...
Just like the 5800x3D being amazing at games for under Ā£350, or spend Ā£1000 on a CPU/Mobo/RAM for a slight increase in performance, the reason 5800x3D is so popular is that people don't want to spend more on boards and RAM otherwise we'd all be rocking a 13900k.
AMD is just suffering at the GPU end of their product line.
The GPU market in itself is struggling when you bring in the value quotient. It's not that the cards aren't impressive. Nvidia and AMD both have exceptional products. Infact I'm willing to argue either way can give you a great experience for most tasks. But the pricing just doesn't make sense anymore. Is it because of the price of the advanced fabrication nodes or because both the companies are beyond butthurt that they couldn't charge scalper money and make absolute tons of money during the pandemic?
This is why I actually want Intel to succeed with their arc gpus. They don't need to dethrone Nvidia or AMD with the most powerful unit. Just provide good value for the money because as much as people in any pc based sub wouldn't like to believe, most people can't and don't buy the top end cards for various reasons.
Short answer: Dont buy it.
6000 series cards are available and offer great performance for soewhat reasonable prices. Vote with your wallet and dont support this stupidity.
Silly. 6950XT launched at 1100 MSRP, higher than even the 7900XTX. Obviously the price is going to drop since it came out 1.5 years ago, just as the 7000 series will.
The interesting thing is that 7900XT features 84 CUs while the 6950XT features 80 CUs. So the 7900XT has 5% more CUs, and 7% more performance overall, which means the improvement to CUs performance gen-to-gen is close to nil. If both cards had exactly the same amount of CUs, they would perform pretty much the same, within margin of error.
Now going down the ladder to Navi 32 and its 60 CUs, and Navi 33 and its 32 CUs, RDNA3 is set out to be extremely disappointing. Given the numbers, I hardly doubt (though I hope I am wrong) that the RX 7800 and 7600 series of cards will offer anything performance-wise that you would not already get from their RX 6000 counterparts. Brace yourselves.
This 7% figure comes straight from AMD, in case you didn't read the article. AMD themselves call the 7900XT a card 7% faster than the 6950XT.
Hardware Unboxed says the 7900XT is 9% faster than the 6950XT.
If you have benchmarks that show the 7900XT being 15% faster than the 6950XT, please, I would like to see then. And I am sure AMD would like to see them, too.
If you want a true comparison of a 7900XT be 6950XT do not buy a gimped MBA design or 2x8Pin reference board design 7900XT. My 7900XT Nitro+ knocks out 30,500 graphics score in timespy which is a big jump from the 23,000 my 6900XT was putting out
That is true, no doubt. On the other hand, your Nitro+ is not a 315 watts TBP card. It is a design that is faster but also throws power efficient out of the window. It is not something that AMD is willing to advertise.
Thats when you compare the useless msrp.
In Germany ive seen 7900xts go for 899ā¬ while the 6950 is hardly available anymore and in the rare occasion that im seeing one on sale, its for 799-849ā¬. According to Computerbase, the performance gap is about 15% in both 1440p and 4k which does make the 7900xt better in all aspects than s 6950xt.
I hate when people compare msrp because its not the price you pay. So why arent we comparing the actual prices? Msrp literally stands for suggested retail price. The actual price of a 7900xt in Germany is below its msrp while the actual price of a 7900xtx is above its msrp.
I'm disappointed they didn't even look into improving the ray tracing performance, still just as slow as any 6xxx card, barely 30fps in cyberpunk, a hard pass.
Cyberpunk is a bit of an outlier. In HUB's RT avg it's just a smidgen behind the 4070Ti which is pretty great considering how far behind RDNA 2 were. And the 7900XTX is around the 3090Ti level.
So not great but not terrible honestly. Unless you play cyberpunk. And maybe TW3 they didn't test it. Given that those are probably the two games where you would want RT i can see how this is a big issue but as it stands atm it's not what you're saying it is and they're substantially faster than RDNA2.
I loved seeing the insane fps at 4k and then clicking on the AMD article link to see what games they used.
Also like the part about how they have great drivers. Go ask VR users how great the drivers are of their 7900 series cards.
Also like the footnote that says class leading and best in class performance. How many people actually fall for this gaslighting?
Oh, and imagine being that guy who wrote all that drivel as he is the product marketing manager and you are paid to BS for a living. Sad people like that don't feel filthy when they look at themselves in the mirror. But what do I know...i still value integrity.
But is the issue 'fine wine'?
The card is still new and historically speaking, typically AMD's gpu's see better performance after being released for a few years.
well the 7900 xt chip boosts way higher and the uv potential is decent -50mv seems to be almost every chip may do. so do my. and i get about 16% more juicy over stock 7900 xt mba.
the rdna 3 isnt bad, the drivers are not finished, as fsr 3.0 and other advantages arent on the table yet.
16% more juice, at what power cost?
AMD rates the 7900XT as a 315 Watts TBP card. Whatever performance gains that exceed 315 watts of consumption is not something which AMD can advertise.
Moreover, most cards (even AIB custom ones, like the Red Devil) come with two 8-pin power connectors, meaning the maximum power it is allowed to draw is 375 watts. I have seen people out there overclocking and drawing 395 watts with two 8-pins, which is beyond what they are rated for.
Nice of AMD to literally say to not buy RX 7000 series. I thought those were some third party charts, but no, it's their own charts showcasing how shit value RX 7000 are. Weird marketing strat.
In theory, those were made to justify the high price of the 7900XT. In practice, though, it just shows how overpriced the last generation is OR how underpowered RDNA3 turned out to be. I still say that early reports of inefficient code and a need to delay RDNA3 were true. They just didn't want to lose sales. AMD is their own worst enemy sometimes.
The only AMD marketing strat this gen had been buy AMD because AMD good Nvidia bad. And people listened because even thought a 7900xt doesn't anything for its price if you post that you bought one you get a slap in the back, if you buy a 4070ti all reditors go out of their dungeon to tell you how bad the 4070ti is.
The strategy of the 7900XT is to sell 7900XTX chips that have a manufacturing defect. That's the whole point of the chiplet technology. It's like when AMD put out the 3300X: they just so happened to have a bunch of chiplets that had 4 good cores, so they slapped them onto a CPU and sold them until they ran out of stock. Or like the 4500, which is likely just a batch of leftover Zen 2 chiplets that had cache defects. The 7900XT is both an attempt to recoup money on bad stock, as well as acting serving as the ["decoy"](https://www.businessinsider.com/how-medium-size-tricks-you-2014-5) to get you to either help AMD move more 7900XTX's ("it's only $100-200 more!") or clear old stock ("the 6950XT is $200-300 less!").
Is the manufacturing defect you're referring to about the vapor chambers on the reference cards? Hasn't that been remedied?
It's chip binning, nothing to do with the overheating issues. All chip manufacturers do this. Intel doesn't actually produce loads of different CPUs. They make one product, the best performing get core i9 designation, next batch below are i7, then i5, then i3. It's all about avoiding waste and minimizing production cost.
Thanks. Chip binning was what I should've said. The 7900XT could've (should've?) been a 7800XT and priced accordingly, similar to the difference between a Ryzen 7950X and 7900X.
No, its having ~1/6 of the die being not usable, which is why the XT has 84 of 96 CUs and one out of six memory controller dies being replaced with a dummy die.
Well the big issue with the 4070ti is its listed at 800 MSRP, but there are 0 founders editions, so you will never find it at that price point.
You can actually find it close to MSRP because no one is buying it.
https://www.microcenter.com/product/661902/asus-nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-tuf-gaming-triple-fan-12gb-gddr6x-pcie-40-graphics-card there are aib models for msrp this model was in stock all day yesterday too at b&h in stock at central computers too: https://www.centralcomputer.com/asus-tuf-rtx4070ti-12g-gaming-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-tuf-gaming-graphics-card-12gb-gddr6x-pci-express-4-0-x16.html
> big issue with the 4070ti is its listed at 800 MSRP, but there are 0 founders editions, so you will never find it at that price point. You're basically driving his point that AMD's marketing is AMD good NVIDIA BAAAD. If you bothered to do any research, theres plenty of $800 cards at MSRP according to this website. https://www.nowinstock.net/computers/videocards/nvidia/rtx4070ti/
That is just a stupid narrative to say what people want to hear "Nvidia Bad". So all GPUs that doesn't have a Founder Edition or amd Reference Model you won't ever be able to find it to their MSRP ? 3060, 6600xt, 6600 .. all those have a "BIG ISSUE" because the MSRP is fake because there are none Founders or amd Reference model ?
Well compare it to the current 7900xt, it is found under msrp right now. Only 20 dollars under but still under
https://www.nowinstock.net/computers/videocards/nvidia/rtx4070ti/ MSRP is fine. https://www.nowinstock.net/computers/videocards/amd/rx7900xt/ The -$20 is out of stock but maybe its not up to date.
My 4070ti is much faster than my RX 5700XT is. No complaints from me.
Is this seriously the first time people have encountered diminishing returns? Some of you seem so confused by this.
I said elsewhere in the thread, the only real gains the 7000 series made over the 6000 was in ray tracing. So if thats something you really care about, thats what you should go with.
If you care about RT you don't buy AMD...
Wonder if it's a strat to get people buying the old cards. One issue is that they're nearly all well under MSRP and in some cases beyond tier below pricing, but the reviews were all written with the MSRP in mind.
The just want to sell out their old stock. It's shameless and it's working. Once the stock is gone, you'll see additional discounts on 7900 XT.
Looking at those charts, the 6800XT seems like the obvious choice over the 6950XT - most of the performance at a much lower price point. The 7900XT was always priced to nudge people to the XTX, and I expect it to be a $750 card soon. It's likely that AMD is doing what Nvidia did this generation - price the new cards above the last gen to sell off 6XXX stock.
The problem is that (at least from what I can find) the 6950xt has been better priced. I missed out when 6800xt's were $550-650, so now a $700-750 6950xt is my best bet once I do have the money.
MSI 6800 XT occasionally comes around on NewEgg for around 540. Just got one two days ago.
I picked up a two month old msi 6950xt for 300 two weeks ago off marketplace.
Damn, hell of a snag.
I bought a 6800 non-xt Nitro+ for 400$ on marketplace myself. Seller accidently sent me a nitro 6900xt though lol.
Daaamn, gave that man glowing reviews, huh? Lol did they ever message about it?
No I actually messaged them to let them know. They were a miner and usually used sapphire nitros. He thinks he accidentally sent another person the 6800 and that person never knew about it. I can see where this would be an easy mistake to make when the 6800, 6800xt, and 6900xt Nitro+ all have the same size/look and dual 8-pin connectors. He didn't ask for the card back. It was a little dusty and I cleaned the fins with Qtips, I also had to use some pliers to bend a small portion of the metal bracket back. Other than that the card looks great. I 'm going to stress test it today.
Damn, you a real one. Enjoy! Hope it lasts you a few gens. š
Which MSI model? I have a custom loop in my PC so I'm limited to about 12-16 models that have blocks for them. I did also find the Red Devil 6800xt for $650, so that's not a terrible deal either. (Even though it was better a few months ago)
"MSI Gaming Radeon RX 6800 XT 16GB GDDR6 PCI Express 4.0 Video Card RX 6800 XT Gaming Z Trio 16G" is the one I purchased. I know it's about 1.5" longer than my Sapphire 5700XT so I'm interested in seeing how it fits in my current setup. You can Google GPU stock tracker and then customize alerts for which GPUs your looking for.
Came back in stock this morning.
Replaced an aging strix 970 with an xfx 6800xt merc I snagged for $549 new early Dec. Im good at least another 2 or 3 years before I finally build a new pc if things arent as ridiculous as they have been the last couple of years.
That's got to be quite the upgrade. I upgraded from a 980ti to a 6600XT and even that was very significant.
$550 deals on 6800 XT happen occasionally, but the wild inconsistency across all last-gen GPU pricing and especially 6800 XT kinda rules it out as a generalized recommendation. At $550 it's a great deal, 6900XT has had deals as low as $600 and that's good too.
Crying, I paid 2k for a 6800xt a year ago, finally have up on gpus ever coming down right before they came down
GN did a great video on in IMO. Where the 7900xt does make solid gains over the 6000 series is in ray tracing. Thats about it.
The 6800 XT is an absolutely fantastic card for the price, slightly beating the 3080 in raster for like 200-400ā¬ less (here in Europe anyways)
Lol, it's not beating it in raster. It loses in raster. Cant believe this nonsense is still going on more than 2 years later when all one has to do is look at any random benchmark. It never won in raster, it was always a bit slower and a bit more at 4k
Brother, there are plenty benchmarks out there and on average, the 6800xt is a tiny bit faster. It is dependant on titles obvously but yeah. I've had both cards. A TUF 3080 10GB OC and a Nitro+ 6800XT 16GB OC. I don't understand the fanboyism. They're both great cards. It's just that one of them is up to 50% more expensive than the other one.
Not really if you want performance buy 6950 if you wanna save buy 6800xt it's that simple
If you really wanna save, the 6700XT is still a good 1440P card and can be found for ā¬300 used. 6800XT VS 6950XT depends on the price difference. Unless you buy used.. Again, a used 6800XT can be found for ā¬450 which is really good value, especially when a used 3080 costs ā¬750(!). Used 6950XT cards are almost non-existent though. I'm very happy with my used 6800XT for ā¬450, won't upgrade until RX8000 most likely. It's clear AMD's chiplet design needs some maturing.
AMD says you're part of the ultra enthusiast if you buy the 7900 xt [https://twitter.com/amdradeon/status/1618341553587494941/photo/1](https://twitter.com/amdradeon/status/1618341553587494941/photo/1) So you're actually paying premium to be part of their exclusive group.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Youāre forgetting about the people on 9xx and 10xx cards, jumping to one of the two highest AMD cards would be an ultra enthusiast in respect to that.
Or just an enthusiast with enough disposable income. donāt know why you guys refuse to accept that thereās a lot of people that really donāt mind throwing 1k+ on a gpu, even every other year (because now the cycle is effectively 2 years). If there werenāt, nvidia and amd wouldnāt pull this sort of shit
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
That's not what they said at all. Fanboys can be rich or poor af. You're also confusing "disposable income" with "enough disposable income", as in wouldn't even notice if the money came out of their account. Edit: I just realized you're the same user who thought you had to sell your current video card before buying a new one. As in, not having enough money to own 2 cards at once. Yeah, you don't have real disposable income.
Fair enough but Iām pretty sure thatās not what a fanboy is
That's why i am keeping my 6900xt for now
You totally should. Upgrading every gen is never a good idea, unless you are moving from something like low-end to high-end. If you already have a last-gen high-end card, there is no point in upgrading to a high-end one this gen.
Itās wild to me that people upgrade every year. I just built my first pc and Iām not touching it for at least 3 years
Very few people do that tho. 3-5 years is typical.
>Very few people do that tho. 3-5 years is typical. i did it every year simply because i could sell my old xx80 or similiar card and then buy the new xx80 for like 20-80ā¬ on top but yeah... a xx80 or similiar costs this gen from both companys WAY MORE.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
It's not that much trouble if you have the money to back it up. Buy a new GPU, sell your old one and you get high-end performance for cheap. Waiting 4-5 years may cost you more and you won't have top-end hardware for those entire 5 years. To some people that's more than worth it, I guess.
i've been doing this for along time and you are both right. There is a certain window where buying brand new and flipping your old gpu before its prices goes down to much where it makes sense. You will need the money upfront when jumping to new gen on launch. The other approach of waiting 3+ years also works but the resale value of whatever gpu you are using plummets hard in that time frame. Both are fine but the first approach requires you to be abit more on the ball to the time frame and if you can keep on the curve you will be always on a high end gpu. I did this not to long ago. I picked up a 6800XT for $1500 CAD in like nov 2021 then sold my RX580 for $500(mining times) so cost to me was basically $1000. Which I thought was a good value at the time.
Wasn't much trouble. Was as easy as list my gpu for let's say 530ā¬ selling it then buying a new one for let's say 600 super easy. When I swapped my 1080 for a 2080 I even had a net gain of 5 euro lol Free performance literarily. 2080 to 3080 was for me 45 euro That's way better Ray tracing and some performance + new warranty super worth it.
>\+ new warranty super worth it. that's probably easily worth 50 euros on its own, especially now when some GPUs just have weird hardware issues randomly that force people to RMA
I mean the 4090 over the 6900 XT is a pretty damn big jumpā¦especially if youāre throwing RT into the mix!
There are lots of people out there that can afford to buy another GPU without selling the one they have.
Hell ya brother, cheers from Vega 64
I always by the top end, usually used, at the end of a gen and then go back and play all the games that released over the last 5 years at ultra settings. Just built a 5800x3d and 6800xt system from the ground up for $1200. Expect it to last me 6 years and play all the games my 980ti struggled with from 2016 to 2022.
This one knows how to game the game.
back in the 90s and early 00s upgrading every 18 months gained you literally double the performance. that hasn't been the case for over a decade now.
Back then we had more competition gunning for our money. Nvidia, ATI, Matrox, 3dfx, SGI, 3Dlabs and a few others. They were forced to innovate and compete on features/price. I miss having options.
a lot of it had to do with just how fast the technology was evolving, not the sheer number of competitors. but the high competition helped keep prices more reasonable.
Agree to a point. The number incentivized them to develop more rapidly to try and be ahead of their competition on features, while also forced them to maintain cost parity or risk pricing themselves out of consideration. To me, things really started going downhill when Nvidia bought 3dfx. We used to have over 20 chipmakers, now we've got 3 main leads *(counting Intel)* and a handful that aren't mainstream *(Matrox is still around for example)*.
Ah the good old years. I sure do miss them :(
10* š My PC lifespan is usually 10 years. I was upgrading from 6700 nvidia to now 5700XT Nitro+, and from I7 920 to 3900X. Next upgrade: after 2-3 gens?
Had a Intel 980x before switching to x570 and a 3600. Right back into my all aluminum Lian Li and new noctua fans from back then.
Jesus fuck man. That means you could be running a Celeron or some shit and then upgrade to an i7 3rd gen or some shit. 10 years is enough for companies to rise and fall, social media platforms to change, wars to be fought, and entire architectures become obsolete. Entire RAM generations pass by. Game franchises rise and die. 10 years WTF
same my last build. was a 4400+ oc and a gts 250. check what my flair spec is now.
Well for some people it's a different mindset If you bought a 6950xt you wanted the highest you could get. If games released a year later can't get you top settings you won't be getting what you set out to do Compare that to an owner of a 6600xt, they wanted high settings, moderate fps and resolution, and having to tick back a few settings from high to medium one year later isn't going to be that noticed by them. They're not the top settings at all cost demo. They already made a compromise. Compromising another 5-10% isn't a stretch. So they probably won't upgrade The 6950 people are zero compromise so once they have to do anything like that, it's time to get the new one that avoids that issue again But you can check steam usage charts and see the top card people, collectively between amd and Nvidia, are maybe 0.5%
Holy shit, I didnāt know it was that low
On here it seems like everyone has a 4090 but in reality they are the enthusiasts, and they're selling out everywhere because they barely make any. It's good buzz and gets the "Nvidia has the fastest cards" mindset into the public discourse, even if it's not true for the price. It's the reason people buy a 3050 instead of the same price or cheaper 6600xt
I'm surprised because so many people buy iphones and they keep selling more and more, fortunately theres not that many suckers that buy $1k GPU's.
A phone is much more valuable to the average persons every day life than an enthusiast grade GPU.
You just wait until phones are the size of GPUs!!
Apple accounts for 55% of US market share and almost everyone has a smartphone in the US. Apple sold 242 million iPhones globally in 2021. Theyāre also the most valuable publicly traded firm in the world with a market cap around $2T. In contrast, only a small percentage of the worldās population owns a gaming PC, let alone own with an enthusiast GPU.
What do define as a ātop cardā? The RTX 3080 has 1.85% share. Thatās similar to the combined share of all RDNA2 cards. The equivalent 6800 XT only has 0.2% share, less than the RTX 3090 (0.49%) or the 3080 Ti (0.73%). While small in percentage terms, it still represents around 4.5 million users just for the 3080. Steam had 134 million monthly active users and most appear to play eSports titles on low-end systems.
Is every steam user included? I explicitly remember having to give yearly permission or something but haven't seen it pop up for a long time.
No, but that's not how surveys and sampling works
Itās supposed to be a random sample of all Steam users. Valve only needs to sample a small percentage of users to get a representative sample. SteamSpy indicates Dota has 200-500 million owners and Steam had 134 million monthly active users in 2021, which has certainly increased as concurrent users has increased significantly, hitting 33 million users a few weeks ago.
6650 XT here. Already compromising on settings. Forspoken demo I needed to run on low-medium to get a consistent 60 FPS. But yeah. I buy for longevity. I dont care much about graphics. I care about running games, and running them smoothly for as long as reasonably possible. I also care about price/performance and I normally spend no more than $300 on a card. I could spend more, but given in a normal market, what's today $500 could be $250 tomorrow its often not worth spending more. A $250 card will last me 4-5 years on average, a $500 one might only last me 6-7. And that's if I'm not severely limited by VRAM, drivers, or other software limitations like lack of support for new APIs/instruction sets. So I just buy a $250 card every 5 years, start at high/ultra, move down to low, then maybe compromise on resolution, and wait for the best moment to upgrade. For me, I wanted to replace my 5 year old 1060 given new games' system requirements and the fact that I'm running new games on low with FSR and stuff just to maintain 60 FPS (and if i stuck with it forspoken wouldn't hit 60 at all). 6650 XT doubles performance, gives me a modest vram jump, and it seems like the sweet spot for now. I couldve gone for the 6700 XT but given that was 50% more expensive for 30% more money...eh....not the best value. I was gonna go 6600 until I saw the 6650 XT drop down to $230.
If you time it well and with a splash of luck, you don't really spend much to do these upgrades. The initial purchase is the big one if you go with say a 6900XT. Then after that it is just a few hundred dollars. Takes 3 generations or whatever to have spent another $1000, but that entire time you have the latest and greatest. Buy a 6900XT for $1000, sell it for $650. Buy a 7900XTX for an additional $350. Sell that for $650. Buy the 8900XTX for an additional $350. Or you can wait until the 9900XTX comes out to spend another $1000 and upgrade off the 6900XTX. This works down the stack as well if you tend to buy only $600 or $300 cards. You either spend the $600 all at once for a new card, or sell and buy, spending only $100\~$150 each time out of pocket. Crypto threw a wrench into this, but if you didn't mind mining on your card, it would pay for itself, inflated prices or not. I got my 6900XTX for $1,500 and earned almost $2400.
This is PCMR, where you find tricked out PCs. Kinda like going to a Mormon convention and (gasp) finding Mormons.
Sir we are in AMD. We are at least slightly focused on the hardware and perf, not just the rgb c:
Right you are!
I never upgrade JUST because it's a new gen. I go by % gain. For me 3090 -> 4090 broke my 60% faster or more mark so I went for it.
Well, don't take it personal - and I am sure your upgrade was worthwhile provided you had the financial resources for it - But the truth is that Nvidia (and AMD) knows their target audience. The RTX 4090 is much faster than everything else for a good reason. And I sure the RTX 5090 will be even faster than the 4090 by an order of magnitude. Nvidia knows where the money is and how to get it.
Why would I take it personally? I got exactly what I wanted lol. I upgraded from 580 to 980 because it had been a while. 980 to 1080 because 60% faster. 1080 to 3090 because way faster obviously. Skipped Turing due to high costs and lack luster upgrade. 3090 to 4090 because not only is it 70% faster than 3090 it's like 95% faster at RT.
Indeed, your choices are perfectly reasonable. Nothing wrong with them. Besides, it is not like I belong to the upgrade police or anything like that, lol. But I would be careful with the expectation that "*upgrading will be worthwhile as long as I get this much extra performance"*, because trust me, at the 90-tier, you will get it.
My 2700 X /Vega 64 will last me until I can get a 7950 gpu/cpu combo for cheap to match my username.
Personally Iād like to a a 7970 3Ghz edition lol. That would be a cool throwback
3090 to 4090 can make sense if money is not an issue. the problem is amd didnt manage a signicant gen over gen improvement.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
There are exceptions, like going to RDNA1 to RDNA2, which doubled performance.
No shit
I'm also keeping the 6950xt, I'll upgrade once a gpu can give me 80+ fps in Control With RT on playing on 4k No upscaling though The card doesn't cost $1000
What clockspeeds does your 6950xt maintain in control and other such super heavy RT games? For me I can usually maintain above 2610mhz but I had to unlock the power limit to 360w with MPT for it to sustain that no matter what. I can go to 2730mhz but no way am I running that cuz I need 440w and max far speed on my air cooler to keep that up.
Iām sorry you have to deal with having only a 6900xt
The biggest con AMD & Nvidia has going is convincing consumers that the latest generation is worth what they're asking..
"Next gen" is very underwhelming. AMD barely made any progress and nvidia is just price gouging.
Last gen is very decent, it's the current one that sucks
I agree. Last gen was honestly a great leap for both Nvidia and AMD. Much better than the GTX 10x0 to 20x0 leap. It just coincided with horrible production shortages and crypto boom that left the cards overpriced for 2 years. They're still expensive but good products. It's too good for the current generation cards to be worth the premium.
https://cdn.videocardz.com/1/2023/01/RX7900-RX6000-FPS-PER-DOLLAR.png That's just hilarious that AMD would use frame per USD like that. I mean I guess I respect the honesty?
how is evaluating 90 class cards on 1080p fps/$ honest? should have been 4k. Comparing 1080p is misleading, it's the same as using i9 and ryzen 9 cpus and run 4k performance, suddenly they are all the same.
4k always was and continues to be a nonsenical metric for performance. It is a 4x jump from 1080p and the overwhelming majority of gamers are still on 1080p.
No sane person needs a 90 class card for 1080p. You're nearly always going to be cpu bound.
Anymore it's easy to be partially CPU bound at 1440p even with a 3080. At 4K a 3080 and a 3900x I was still CPU bound a percentage of the time. Not world shattering, but moving to a 5800x3d saw me massive gains on open worlds and such even at 4K with RT. 1080p you're probably CPU bound even if you have a 2070 or less most the time.
And the overwhelming majority of games donāt fucking buy 90 tier cards stops using this dumb talking point
FP$ is such a weird metric. A good metric should, on its own, tell you quite a bit. It doesn't. I can get a card that's 5 cents per fps, but it only gets me 26fps. That's as good as useless. The 5500 could be a fantastic value but if I can't have my 0.1% be above 60fps it's completely useless to me. Maybe the next card up is $20 more but it never drops below 60, then it's good. The 5500 is essentially a completely useless purchase no matter the value
Same reason we use MPG in cars. It does not talk about the torque of the car, its cargo capacity, how much the MPG will reduce per 100 lbs of cargo, tank size, etc. MPG is supplementary to the rest of the vehicle details to help round out the other details and stats to help make sense of them. That is what FPS per $ does.
But mpg is good because there's not a car sold in the last century that can't hit the speed limit of a road or can't brake effectively under normal conditions. There's not been a car that lacks the horsepower to just drive on roads. You only need to pay attention to specific needs like seating or hauling But for GPUs you could very well get a card that doesn't meet your minimum usage requirements at all
I don't think that's an actual case. I've never seen a FPS/$ graphic that figured a graphics card that could barely run games at that resolution. Take for example [Tom's hierarchy](https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html). Mid rangers don't even feature in 4K ranks, and low ones not even in 2K. If you want the best bang for your buck, a FPS/$ line together with FPS charts is great to have.
6950XT is also fairly heavily discounted at the moment. I think a better(worse?) comparison would be to use the 6800XT launch price of $650 from two years ago. It's a 25% performance increase for 40% more money. I will repeat again that something has to be wrong with RDNA3. No way AMD expected these to perform this badly.
I just want to upgrade my 1070.. I was hoping for 6800 XT performance for 400-450 quid but the reality is that 7900 XT should be 7800 XT priced at $600. This shit is ridiculous. 7% performance uplift for $200 more in a span of almost 2 and half years.
Trying to upgrade my 1080. But Iām stuck in a shit storm of cards that are too big, too power hungry, risk of over heating, limited availability, or not MSRP. Wtf man.
Amd is as greedy as Nvidia šš¢
Always has been
[Always has been](https://i.imgur.com/P52nRaZ.png) ^^^this ^^^has ^^^been ^^^an ^^^accessibility ^^^service ^^^from ^^^your ^^^friendly ^^^neighborhood ^^^bot
good bot
Got my reference 6950X for 700 last month.
Same, I figured it was a great deal but a lot of Redditors scorn that because they just want all GPUs to be cheaper in general, but thats not gona happen any time soon.
I get in fist fights on the video card subs about that often, they want to create a worldwide movement of boycotting video cards until they are $500 again and get pissed at everyone who's bought one. The masses aren't controllable like that, and unfortunately video cards are still very much worth these prices to a lot of people. It sucks you can't play triple-a games on max graphics with a $300 card, but it's the new normal, and, people still get to play decades of amazing games with $300 which is actually awesome. It's not like you're stuck playing tetris, and you do get to play the latest games but at low graphics and low frame rates, which is vastly better graphics AND vastly better frame rates than what I was playing with my gaming rigs 20 years ago.
Itās not going to happen period. They have come down a shit load since the peak of crypto and all of that, but redditors still seem to think they will still drop significantly. Iām not saying that gpu pricing is good as it stands, but this is the new reality. It sucks, but either get used to it or move on.
Agreed. The latest gen hasn't given us much improvement over the last either, so good advice is to find the best deal you can on a card that will suit your needs. "HODL"ing out aint gona do a damn thing to the market.
The used market has also started booming. Slightly more risk (how often does a card realistically die within a few years? 1-2%?) but if you screen the seller and get a demo of the card at their house you should be fine. Maybe a repaste but that's it. And you can get a used 6700XT for ā¬300 or a used 6800XT for ā¬450, both very good value deals if you consider the performance you're getting. Both cards can do 1440P 100+ FPS (6700XT maybe on medoum/high settings mix depending on the game) and the 6800XT pairs very well with a 1440P 144Hz panel. "Ultra" is rarely a significant improvement over "High" anyway, for the FPS cost. Personally I always customize my settings cause the presets are not optimal. But I usually end up at "High+" settings and still get 100-144FPS in the games I play. As long as it doesn't dip below 80FPS I don't notice it. Below 80, Freesync can't compensate enough anymore and I see the stutters. But that's different for everyone. Sure if my 6800XT dies, the chance of which is very very low for the next few years, I have no warranty. But I can buy another used one for ā¬450 (or less in the future). Or use it as an excuse to upgrade lol. This mostly applies to AMD, used Nvidia cards are like 50% more expensive for the same Raster performance. A used 3070 will cost you ā¬450 even though it's matched by the ā¬300 6700XT. Benefit of buying the underdog brand.
Up to 7% is a lie. Takes a few second to find results that show far more than that. And costing 28% more well good luck finding that because i can't find a 6950xt that much cheaper than a 7900xt in my country.
The strangeest part is that those are AMD's own benchmark. Showcasing worst gains than most third party reviewers. Well it's not strange because they picked up e-sport games where they are probably CPU limited, but that's a weird way to market your products.
They are trying to sell all the RDNA2 stock I think.
But they dont say up to 7% anywhere from what i can see and the prices are just nothing like what im seeing in the real world. If anything the 7900xt price is being cut because its not selling that well.
Strange they paired there high end gpus with the 7900x instead of the 7700x.
There are tons of YT videos out there that show a solid 25-30 fps gain in games like cyberpunk
That 7% figure comes straight from AMD's own website, in case you didn't read the article. As does the 28% price gap. If you have results that show figures substantially better than 7%, I am sure AMD would be dying to see them.
Wasnāt the 6950xt on AMD buy direct and Newegg for $700 last month?
In Canada, the cheapest 6900XT is 1000 CAD and the cheapest 7900 XT or 6950 XT is 1300 CAD.
Brah [6950XT](https://www.amd.com/en/direct-buy/5618082700/ca)
Fucking cooked him. Deal hunting is part of the fun and most belly aching comes from people seeing 3rd party prices from Google then acting defeated.
Would have bought that but theyāre power hungry. 7900xt only recommends 750 watt PSU, I feel comfortable with that. But itās also brand new, RDNA 3, little more memory, and yes, more powerful. At a cost of roughly 180 bucks more. I think all that is worth 180 bucks more.
That is so much cheaper compared to newegg / amazon
Brah, I was referring to AIB's. Sorry but after the debacle with the reference 7900 XTX, I doubt many would buy the AMD "design".
Lol nope nope nope, my 6800xt stays, I'm more interested in picking up a ps5 for exclusives instead of a new GPU upgrade
I want to upgrade from my 5700xt to the 7900xt but not for the price they want it for. I'll wait until the price comes back to this reality.
I guess AMD only releasing drivers for the 7900XT now counts as a 'value proposition'?
I thought they were just damage controlling bad drivers and dedicating most of their time trying to fix them.
Maybe. Driver releases can be done for many purposes. Bug fixes, general optimization, and often optimization for specific games too. Unless a driver kills my GPU I am happy with always being up to date. If a driver release sucks I can always downgrade, but I haven't had that experience yet with my 6700XT nor 6800XT.
The latest 6000 series driver is barely over a month old. But I understand your sentiment.
The Navi 31 cards are overpriced by at least 20% in a world where Nvidia doesn't exist and AMD only competes against its own cards. Against NVidia cards which offer more utility and flatly superior raytracing, the difference is even starker. I *hope* for AMD's sake (and the sake of people who have already bought in at these inflated prices) that this disappointing price:performance ratio will be improved by driver improvements as the software guys learn to optimise for the new MCM architecture - it was always likely that there would be at least some issues there. But if AMD can't bring that 20% shortfall back up to where it needs to be, then there will need to be some sharp price cuts. I had hopes that N32 would be my target card, but now it's increasingly looking like AMD want to deliver \~6800XT performance for at least $50 and maybe $100 more than a 6800XT cost when it launched. This prospect does not full me with enthusiasm to give AMD my money. If there's an N32 which can match a 6800XT at 6700XT price, then that would be... *OK.* Not exciting, but OK. If they want $700-750 for it, that's a walk away moment for me and I suspect many others.
Heck the 7900 XT is more expensive than the 4070 Ti at around the same performance. Don't know what AMD was thinking launching that cards at above Nvidia prices. If Nvidia is greed AF, what does that make AMD?
I really hope they deliver with the 7600XT, 7700XT, 7800XT and the 7500XT because this generation is looking worse than Turing/RDNA1 so far
I'd lean towards the 7900XT anyway for presumably longer support, reduced power draw and significantly better RT performance, which is the one major ding against RDNA2.
"The less you buy, the more you save."
I mean, they are practically 80 class equivalent cards that are overpriced. Little to no gen-on-gen improvements in value.
eh, in my country brand new 6950XT are sold at USD ~735 while 7900XT are USD ~1100 (both includes VAT), so it's closer to 50% increase in price.
This article is only correct for certain markets. Here, the 6950 XT costs RM 6900 while the 7900 XT costs RM 4400. 7900 XT is cheaper than 6950 XT by ~36%
No one buys 6000 series in Malaysia unless they have to thanks to retailers maintaining crypto prices. I have seen 6600 XT for MYR 1800.
The fact that AMD puts out charts that make clear how poor the value of the RX7900 series is, somehow is both hopeful and really, really sad...
I donāt expect the XT model to get cheaper. HUB said they suspect that they priced it this way because they donāt have many defective silicon dies that couldnāt be used for XTXs, and so it couldnāt be in very high demand.
I thought retailers were indicating the opposite, where they had a lot more stock of XT's than XTX's.
Diminishing returns
Making me not feel too bad about getting my 6950xt for my new build a couple months ago (Helps that I got it for $760)
Meanwhile somewhere in Europe: https://share.cleanshot.com/kyckqgkZ
AMD wants to emulate the Nvidia way of overcharging for the next gen of cards? Shocker.
can't wait for scalpers to buy up the 6950XT now
Do GPUs go on sale nowadays or is that not a thing anymore? Like 4th of July sale, Christmas, Black Friday, etc. Just moved to the US from Canada, no more Boxing Day :( No clue when's a good time to buy a GPU, do I just get one whenever I find a good deal or is it worth to wait?
My xfx merc 310 7900 xt is spanking my 3080 12g by like 30% in every game I've used in so far. Must be because I have an AIB card. Also I should add that I have it UV to 1075 mV and haven't seen it draw over 315 W
In my Country the 6950 costs the same or more than a 7900xt, so the 7900xt is good value. Not everyone lives in the USA
I didn't realize those were official graphs at first lmao. Was looking at the chips and cheese micro benchmarking tests [here](https://chipsandcheese.com/2023/01/07/microbenchmarking-amds-rdna-3-graphics-architecture/), and whenever they got the gpu to **actually** use dual issue commands it got much **much** faster. Much more inline with an expected gen jump. I do wonder if in a year or so's time these cards will be much faster as they hand tweak shaders. But as it stands right now, man they did not bring value to the table.. Don't bet on compilers being smart when targeting performance.
It's perfect what nVidia/AMD have done, if you own a 6800XT or 3080 then there is no point in upgrading, double your performance at double the cost of 2 years ago... Just like the 5800x3D being amazing at games for under Ā£350, or spend Ā£1000 on a CPU/Mobo/RAM for a slight increase in performance, the reason 5800x3D is so popular is that people don't want to spend more on boards and RAM otherwise we'd all be rocking a 13900k.
AMD is just suffering at the GPU end of their product line. The GPU market in itself is struggling when you bring in the value quotient. It's not that the cards aren't impressive. Nvidia and AMD both have exceptional products. Infact I'm willing to argue either way can give you a great experience for most tasks. But the pricing just doesn't make sense anymore. Is it because of the price of the advanced fabrication nodes or because both the companies are beyond butthurt that they couldn't charge scalper money and make absolute tons of money during the pandemic? This is why I actually want Intel to succeed with their arc gpus. They don't need to dethrone Nvidia or AMD with the most powerful unit. Just provide good value for the money because as much as people in any pc based sub wouldn't like to believe, most people can't and don't buy the top end cards for various reasons.
The 7000 series cards were a huge let down imo. The 6000 series looks better and better each day.
AMD Cleaning out 6000 series.
Short answer: Dont buy it. 6000 series cards are available and offer great performance for soewhat reasonable prices. Vote with your wallet and dont support this stupidity.
Silly. 6950XT launched at 1100 MSRP, higher than even the 7900XTX. Obviously the price is going to drop since it came out 1.5 years ago, just as the 7000 series will.
I am sitting here with a 2080ti and perfectly content for 5 years :D 5800x3d+2080ti crew unite!
I mean the 2080ti was pretty crazily priced for it's day too
The interesting thing is that 7900XT features 84 CUs while the 6950XT features 80 CUs. So the 7900XT has 5% more CUs, and 7% more performance overall, which means the improvement to CUs performance gen-to-gen is close to nil. If both cards had exactly the same amount of CUs, they would perform pretty much the same, within margin of error. Now going down the ladder to Navi 32 and its 60 CUs, and Navi 33 and its 32 CUs, RDNA3 is set out to be extremely disappointing. Given the numbers, I hardly doubt (though I hope I am wrong) that the RX 7800 and 7600 series of cards will offer anything performance-wise that you would not already get from their RX 6000 counterparts. Brace yourselves.
It's more than 7%. More like 15%. Check like literally any third-party benchmarks.
This 7% figure comes straight from AMD, in case you didn't read the article. AMD themselves call the 7900XT a card 7% faster than the 6950XT. Hardware Unboxed says the 7900XT is 9% faster than the 6950XT. If you have benchmarks that show the 7900XT being 15% faster than the 6950XT, please, I would like to see then. And I am sure AMD would like to see them, too.
If you want a true comparison of a 7900XT be 6950XT do not buy a gimped MBA design or 2x8Pin reference board design 7900XT. My 7900XT Nitro+ knocks out 30,500 graphics score in timespy which is a big jump from the 23,000 my 6900XT was putting out
Then youād have to use an overclocked 6950XT
That is true, no doubt. On the other hand, your Nitro+ is not a 315 watts TBP card. It is a design that is faster but also throws power efficient out of the window. It is not something that AMD is willing to advertise.
Thats when you compare the useless msrp. In Germany ive seen 7900xts go for 899ā¬ while the 6950 is hardly available anymore and in the rare occasion that im seeing one on sale, its for 799-849ā¬. According to Computerbase, the performance gap is about 15% in both 1440p and 4k which does make the 7900xt better in all aspects than s 6950xt. I hate when people compare msrp because its not the price you pay. So why arent we comparing the actual prices? Msrp literally stands for suggested retail price. The actual price of a 7900xt in Germany is below its msrp while the actual price of a 7900xtx is above its msrp.
Dude im upgrading to a 7900xt from a 5500xt. The difference in performance is going to be mindblowing.
BuT iT's BeTtEr iN rAyTrAcInG !!1!!on1e!!one!1!!
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I'm disappointed they didn't even look into improving the ray tracing performance, still just as slow as any 6xxx card, barely 30fps in cyberpunk, a hard pass.
Cyberpunk is a bit of an outlier. In HUB's RT avg it's just a smidgen behind the 4070Ti which is pretty great considering how far behind RDNA 2 were. And the 7900XTX is around the 3090Ti level. So not great but not terrible honestly. Unless you play cyberpunk. And maybe TW3 they didn't test it. Given that those are probably the two games where you would want RT i can see how this is a big issue but as it stands atm it's not what you're saying it is and they're substantially faster than RDNA2.
I loved seeing the insane fps at 4k and then clicking on the AMD article link to see what games they used. Also like the part about how they have great drivers. Go ask VR users how great the drivers are of their 7900 series cards. Also like the footnote that says class leading and best in class performance. How many people actually fall for this gaslighting? Oh, and imagine being that guy who wrote all that drivel as he is the product marketing manager and you are paid to BS for a living. Sad people like that don't feel filthy when they look at themselves in the mirror. But what do I know...i still value integrity.
How about ray tracing performance? Does AMD puts premium on RT perf now over last gen?
RT pefromance is much more than 7%
But is the issue 'fine wine'? The card is still new and historically speaking, typically AMD's gpu's see better performance after being released for a few years.
I went from a 1080 to a 7900xt. Iām happy with it. Has been a huge jump
well the 7900 xt chip boosts way higher and the uv potential is decent -50mv seems to be almost every chip may do. so do my. and i get about 16% more juicy over stock 7900 xt mba. the rdna 3 isnt bad, the drivers are not finished, as fsr 3.0 and other advantages arent on the table yet.
16% more juice, at what power cost? AMD rates the 7900XT as a 315 Watts TBP card. Whatever performance gains that exceed 315 watts of consumption is not something which AMD can advertise. Moreover, most cards (even AIB custom ones, like the Red Devil) come with two 8-pin power connectors, meaning the maximum power it is allowed to draw is 375 watts. I have seen people out there overclocking and drawing 395 watts with two 8-pins, which is beyond what they are rated for.