Support NeoGAF

[Crayon]

Based on Redgamingtech's newest video posting, the way the RDNA 3 architecture is designed, it can hit close to 3 Ghz. AMD just chose not to do it with some inconsistencies in performance and yields. These cards will definitely be overclocked to see how far it can go.

There's only so much the leakers (rumormongers? I like rgt, but tablespoon of salt) can get. If it goes up that high, amd was sandbagging. There may be something about this first stab at chhiplets that makes the higher frequencies harder to hit.

 

[//DEVIL//]

Here is my take as a Canadian customer

- the Reference card for the 7900xtx is goung to be 1500$ ( 1400$ if we are lucky but its going to be 1499$ ).
- Add to that the US Tax for the card ( No I am not including the Canadian Tax we will have to pay for customs when the card arrives ) so that is 10% US ? 130$ extra CAD. that makes the price of the card about....1630$ CAD ( not including Taxes at customs which are the Canadian taxes we pay etc, this is how much the card will cost before it even arrives in Canada )


- in Canada, the 4090 FE is 2100 ( That is how much I paid for mine ). - 1630$, we are talking 470$ CAD. which is about 350$ US between the AMD reference card and a 4090 FE.

350$ US... at this point I would rather pay the premium difference and just end up with a better product all around. whatever performance, ray tracing, warranty, DLSS ( and the FSR AMD talk about since it's for all modern GPUs) etc.

Not sure how accurate is my calculation but it's about close based on previous experience.

I know it's nice sometimes to vote for the underdog but.... not this time. especially with the card still bad at ray tracing, the performance of a 4080 16GB ( I am pretty sure the up to 1.7 performance is a very selective AMD sponsored games ( best scenario and Still not beating the 4090 ), come to normal games.... yeah no )

I like the package and the price point as a whole. but they are not really worth the price difference. let alone the resale value at least here in Canada / Ottawa heavily favors the Nvidia for future sale if needed.

If someone was in the US. and almost impossible for him to grab an FE but can grab a reference card, then yeah the price difference will be worth it as AIB nvidia cards are at least 100$ more expensive than FE for any self-respectful card with a vapor chamber. But if it's the other way around where you can manage an FE but not a reference card and you have to pay the high price of AIB AMD cards ( which are usually always higher than Nvidia for some fucked up reason ), then no go FE lol.

 

[Crayon]

Here is my take as a Canadian customer

- the Reference card for the 7900xtx is goung to be 1500$ ( 1400$ if we are lucky but its going to be 1499$ ).
- Add to that the US Tax for the card ( No I am not including the Canadian Tax we will have to pay for customs when the card arrives ) so that is 10% US ? 130$ extra CAD. that makes the price of the card about....1630$ CAD ( not including Taxes at customs which are the Canadian taxes we pay etc, this is how much the card will cost before it even arrives in Canada )


- in Canada, the 4090 FE is 2100 ( That is how much I paid for mine ). - 1630$, we are talking 470$ CAD. which is about 350$ US between the AMD reference card and a 4090 FE.

350$ US... at this point I would rather pay the premium difference and just end up with a better product all around. whatever performance, ray tracing, warranty, DLSS ( and the FSR AMD talk about since it's for all modern GPUs) etc.

Not sure how accurate is my calculation but it's about close based on previous experience.

I know it's nice sometimes to vote for the underdog but.... not this time. especially with the card still bad at ray tracing, the performance of a 4080 16GB ( I am pretty sure the up to 1.7 performance is a very selective AMD sponsored games ( best scenario and Still not beating the 4090 ), come to normal games.... yeah no )

I like the package and the price point as a whole. but they are not really worth the price difference. let alone the resale value at least here in Canada / Ottawa heavily favors the Nvidia for future sale if needed.

If someone was in the US. and almost impossible for him to grab an FE but can grab a reference card, then yeah the price difference will be worth it as AIB nvidia cards are at least 100$ more expensive than FE for any self-respectful card with a vapor chamber. But if it's the other way around where you can manage an FE but not a reference card and you have to pay the high price of AIB AMD cards ( which are usually always higher than Nvidia for some fucked up reason ), then no go FE lol.

I think you are in the ballpark, but i've already heard many variations of "might as well pay xxx for the nvidia". Right up to "if you are buying a $1000 card, its only $600 more for the nvidia", which I think is nuts. As if anyone willing and able to pay $1000 can just as easily spend 60% more.

Your example is only like 15% more and is way closer to what the actual spread in performance is going to be but 350 bucks is still a chunk of change that one could buy some other toy with even if others think it's insignificant. That's a whole gpu for someone with less means. Some people have to save to really treat themselves like a $1000 gpu. If you are just slamming it on a credit card and spending less then half a paycheck it's easy to say "mght as well pay more".

 

[rnlval]

From https://www.techpowerup.com/300648/...performs-within-striking-distance-of-rtx-4090

Estimates.

 

[rnlval]

Based on Redgamingtech's newest video posting, the way the RDNA 3 architecture is designed, it can hit close to 3 Ghz. AMD just chose not to do it with some inconsistencies in performance and yields. These cards will definitely be overclocked to see how far it can go.

AMD's lower bar reference cards enable product differentiation for the AIB partners.

AMD can release RX 7950 XTX as a reference OC config later e.g. .Radeon R9-390X made R9-290X AIB overclocked SKUs as a reference design.

 

[//DEVIL//]

I think you are in the ballpark, but i've already heard many variations of "might as well pay xxx for the nvidia". Right up to "if you are buying a $1000 card, its only $600 more for the nvidia", which I think is nuts. As if anyone willing and able to pay $1000 can just as easily spend 60% more.

Your example is only like 15% more and is way closer to what the actual spread in performance is going to be but 350 bucks is still a chunk of change that one could buy some other toy with even if others think it's insignificant. That's a whole gpu for someone with less means. Some people have to save to really treat themselves like a $1000 gpu. If you are just slamming it on a credit card and spending less then half a paycheck it's easy to say "mght as well pay more".

In theory, you are right, but when someone is going to spend 1000$ on a video card. It means you are targeting high-end stuff and money at this point isn't the big factor. otherwise, it's a 3080 used for 400$ and call it a day.

with that being out of the window, it comes down to what high-end product you want, 350$ difference between the best card in everything vs an amazing card that loses in everytging....
DLSS almost alone is worth the premium to me ( again, FSR from AMD ill get it for free but I will not even come close to it unless the game has no DLSS) + Ray tracing gab + better performance in resta.... yeah man.. your call but I am paying the 350$ extra with a smile on my face too lol ( already did but I was honestly willing to return it or sell it if AMD showed something that is better or same performance but cheaper ) but that didn't happen.

I do not have a loyalty to a company or a logo. Whether it's Nvidia or Sony or MS. they are just corporates that are fighting for my money.

 

[Irobot82]

lol @ all of these performance guesses. We'll find out where everything sits next month.

 

[SportsFan581]

I don't get the strange thing where people assume if you'll pay $1k, you'll automatically pay 1.2k or 1.4k or more. We have real world numbers for this kind of thing (via sales performance) and it becomes obvious that even $150-$200 becomes an important figure in GPU purchases. If it didn't everyone would always purchase the highest-end part, and that simply doesn't happen. The 3070 sold more than the 3080, who wouldn't just choose the 3080 for $200 with that logic. These price differences absolutely matter. Most GPU buyers pick a price point they are comfortable with and get the best card they can at that price, there will always be a better option for just a little more. You have a very small subset of users that want the very best, but that group isn't that important in the overall picture. Thus 3090 represents such a small part of 3000 series sales.

With that said, Nvidia's popularity has often resulted in people choosing the best Nvidia card they could buy, even when AMD had the better offering at the price point. I include myself here because I've always chosen Nvidia even when better values were out there.

 

[Leonidas]

AMD confirms the RX 7900 XT is a 4080 competitor.

[Radeon RX 7900 XTX] is designed to go against 4080 and we don’t have benchmarks numbers on 4080. That’s the primary reason why you didnt see any NVIDIA compares. […] $999 card is not a 4090 competitor, which costs 60% more, this is a 4080 competitor.

— Frank Azor to PCWorld

AMD confirms RX 7900 XTX is RTX 4080 competitor, FSR3 may be supported by pre-RDNA3 architectures - VideoCardz.com

AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX to compete with GeForce RTX 4080 PCWorld has another great interview on a subject of AMD RDNA3 architecture. One of the most common questions after the RDNA3 event ended was why didn’t AMD compare their RX 7900 series with GeForce RTX 40 GPUs. The answer was provided by...

videocardz.com

Sad to see it, last gen they seemed more competitive...

 

[SatansReverence]

rather dissappointing that a X9XX card is only competing with a XX8X card.

 

[BearNecessity]

AMD confirms the RX 7900 XT is a 4080 competitor.

AMD confirms RX 7900 XTX is RTX 4080 competitor, FSR3 may be supported by pre-RDNA3 architectures - VideoCardz.com

AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX to compete with GeForce RTX 4080 PCWorld has another great interview on a subject of AMD RDNA3 architecture. One of the most common questions after the RDNA3 event ended was why didn’t AMD compare their RX 7900 series with GeForce RTX 40 GPUs. The answer was provided by...

videocardz.com

Sad to see it, last gen they seemed more competitive...

Nvidia uses much bigger chips compared to AMD, and this time around they also have a node advantage(n4).
I think AMD made the right choice by making a smaller chip to undercut nvidia in price.
If the actual benchmarks are even 90% as good as these estimated benchmarks then I think AMD will be the most competitive theyve been in years. You would have to be absolutely crazy to get a 4080.

 

[Tams]

In theory, you are right, but when someone is going to spend 1000$ on a video card. It means you are targeting a high-end stuff and money at this point isn't the big factor. otherwise it's a 3080 used for 400$ and call it a day.

with that being out of the window, it comes down to what high-end product you want, 350$ difference between the best card in everything vs an amazing card that loses in everytging....
DLSS almost alone is worth the premium to me ( again, FSR from AMD ill get it for free but I will not even though it unless the game has no DLSS) + Ray tracing gab + better performance in resta.... yeah man.. your call but I am paying the 350$ extra with a smile on my face too lol ( already did but I was honestly willing to return it or sell it if AMD showed something that is better or same performance but cheaper ) but that didn't happen.

I do not have a loyalty to a company or a logo. Whether it's Nvidia or Sony or MS. they are just corporates that are fighting for my money.

But a GPU is the big ticket item for a PC. Followed by the CPU.

Higher end GPUs also appeal to people on a budget. To them, saving even a few 100 in whatever currency does matter. And if you look at what YouTube videos are popular, or on PC building forums, or sales data there are a lot of such people.

They don't really care if they have to go with lesser RAM, less and lesser storage, a less efficient power supply, a less feature-packed motherboard, or even a worse monitor (which should matter, but people being people will use high-end hardware with shit monitors).

 

[hlm666]

AMD confirms the RX 7900 XT is a 4080 competitor.

Don't think anyone is expecting it to beat the 4080 in RT now, so is this AMD maybe setting expectations that in raster it will trade blows with a 4080? The quote also says it's the xtx not the cheaper xt.

 

[SportsFan581]

AMD confirms the RX 7900 XT is a 4080 competitor.

AMD confirms RX 7900 XTX is RTX 4080 competitor, FSR3 may be supported by pre-RDNA3 architectures - VideoCardz.com

AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX to compete with GeForce RTX 4080 PCWorld has another great interview on a subject of AMD RDNA3 architecture. One of the most common questions after the RDNA3 event ended was why didn’t AMD compare their RX 7900 series with GeForce RTX 40 GPUs. The answer was provided by...

videocardz.com

Sad to see it, last gen they seemed more competitive...

Which is really more competitive though. Pricing alongside a part you will probably lose to anyway, or pricing your products in a way that sets the stage for easy victories. Honestly the 7900XT at $900 seems super competitive to me.

Been a long time since the price of a card came down from series to series and we get good uplift.

DLSS would still make it hard for me to change teams, but if Nvidia prices a cheap ass bastard out, what are you going to do.

 

[Crayon]

In theory, you are right, but when someone is going to spend 1000$ on a video card. It means you are targeting a high-end stuff and money at this point isn't the big factor. otherwise it's a 3080 used for 400$ and call it a day.

with that being out of the window, it comes down to what high-end product you want, 350$ difference between the best card in everything vs an amazing card that loses in everytging....
DLSS almost alone is worth the premium to me ( again, FSR from AMD ill get it for free but I will not even though it unless the game has no DLSS) + Ray tracing gab + better performance in resta.... yeah man.. your call but I am paying the 350$ extra with a smile on my face too lol ( already did but I was honestly willing to return it or sell it if AMD showed something that is better or same performance but cheaper ) but that didn't happen.

I do not have a loyalty to a company or a logo. Whether it's Nvidia or Sony or MS. they are just corporates that are fighting for my money.

Okay, how about this imo close analogy- the best mountain bike is $6000 (guessing and in denial, it's probably disgustingly more than that. Idk, both my bikes are over 15 years old). Why do they make bikes that are $4,000? If you're going to buy a 4,000 bike, you might as well buy the $6,000 bike, right?

I don't buy it. I think it's a simplistic line of thinking and doesn't map to my experience of luxury spending. A $5,000 sound system does not exist for the sole reason of selling a $7,000 sound system. It's there because it's better than a $3,000 sound system and more affordable than a $7,000 sound system. There's a segment who are willing and able to spend $5,000 and have a budget. They put that budget before overextending for the pride of having the best thing you can buy for a whole year.

 

[Leonidas]

If the actual benchmarks are even 90% as good as these estimated benchmarks then I think AMD will be the most competitive theyve been in years. You would have to be absolutely crazy to get a 4080.

They were closer to Nvidia last gen, them competing with a weak 4080 is them conceding defeat at the high end, something they didn't do last gen... they are unequivocally less competitive than last gen in terms of performance. Pricing seems good only because the 4080 price is too high.

Which is really more competitive though. Pricing alongside a part you will probably lose to anyway, or pricing your products in a way that sets the stage for easy victories. Honestly the 7900XT at $900 seems super competitive to me.

It's just disappointing that AMD couldn't match Nvidia at the high end is all I'm saying. It only seems competitive because Nvidia priced the 4080 too high.

The 7900 XT seems competitive but to me it's not. It's cut down a massive 14% from the XTX yet it's basically the same name and they only give a $100 discount.

Last gen AMD gave us 6800 XT which was only cut down 11% and was priced at $650, a $350 discount for a much less cut down card.

 

[//DEVIL//]

Okay, how about this imo close analogy- the best mountain bike is $6000 (guessing and in denial, it's probably disgustingly more than that. Idk, both my bikes are over 15 years old). Why do they make bikes that are $4,000? If you're going to buy a 4,000 bike, you might as well buy the $6,000 bike, right?

I don't buy it. I think it's a simplistic line of thinking and doesn't map to my experience of luxury spending. A $5,000 sound system does not exist for the sole reason of selling a $7,000 sound system. It's there because it's better than a $3,000 sound system and more affordable than a $7,000 sound system. There's a segment who are willing and able to spend $5,000 and have a budget. They put that budget before overextending for the pride of having the best thing you can buy for a whole year.

First of all, the difference here for a clear better card in the Canadian market at least is 350$ US. not 2000$. there are different numbers to swallow depending on one person to another. If 4090 is 2000$ and AMD is 1000$, that is a big game that one might say well fuck that is too much now. double the price .. is it really worth it ( to you and me probably not but to others sure why not they shit money )


However, its all matter of opinion at the end of the day and I respect yours. even if I go by your analogy if I like bikes Crayon and I ride one every day like I do for my video card? bet your ass I will buy the expensive better bike. it's a hobby that I love, It's also something I want to enjoy riding. same reason why people buy BMW and others buy a Kia Rio.

If I have the money. I enjoy cars.... why buy a slower and less feature car?

This is all in line and basically exactly what you said. different segments of people. but when it comes to 350$? I dunno I do not think anyone who is going to be spending 1000$ on a card is in a different segment from the guy who is spending 350$ on top ( at least in Canada, in US it's a 600$ difference and It's really hard to swallow), but then again if the AMD card is same level performance as a 4080, exact same performance in rasta, Ill still buy an Nvidia card for 200$ and get better ray tracing and DLSS support. that is just me.

 

[Crayon]

First of all, the difference here for a clear better card in the Canadian market at least is 350$ US. not 2000$. there are different numbers to swallow depending on one person to another. If 4090 is 2000$ and AMD is 1000$, that is a big game that one might say well fuck that is too much now. double the price .. is it really worth it ( to you and me probably not but to others sure why not they shit money )


However, its all matter of opinion at the end of the day and I respect yours. even if I go by your analogy if I like bikes Crayon and I ride one every day like I do for my video card? bet your ass I will buy the expensive better bike. it's a hobby that I love, It's also something I want to enjoy riding. same reason why people buy BMW and others buy a Kia Rio.

If I have the money. I enjoy cars.... why buy a slower and less feature car?

This is all in line and basically exactly what you said. different segments of people. but when it comes to 350$? I dunno I do not think anyone who is going to be spending 1000$ on a card is in a different segment from the guy who is spending 350$ on top ( at least in Canada, in US it's a 600$ difference and It's really hard to swallow), but then again if the AMD card is same level performance as a 4080, exact same performance in rasta, Ill still buy an Nvidia card for 200$ and get better ray tracing and DLSS support. that is just me.

Oh, I acknowledged that you were talking about the Canadian dollar difference, and then went right on ranting about the US dollar difference. The 350 Canadian dollar difference I think would still have some effect but would be far less potent than the 600 US dollar difference.

Sorry, I'm riding a mild Friday night crossfade.

I am in a segment where I want to get quality bike that will do what I need to do. I don't like blowing money. But when it comes to the bikes, I will make what I consider a big spend, but I will be happier if I choose something that is simply adequate for me and not overspend.

 

[Sophist]

Outside of classic rasterization, AMD can't compete anymore with NVIDIA. On Blender, A 6900xt falls behind a mere RTX3060. Deep Learning, Video encoding/decoding, Offscreen rendering, Monitor synchronization, Upscaling, ... Nvidia is vastly superior and it show in market numbers; on Steam, AMD went from 16.2% to 13% in one year.

 

[Tams]

First of all, the difference here for a clear better card in the Canadian market at least is 350$ US. not 2000$. there are different numbers to swallow depending on one person to another. If 4090 is 2000$ and AMD is 1000$, that is a big game that one might say well fuck that is too much now. double the price .. is it really worth it ( to you and me probably not but to others sure why not they shit money )


However, its all matter of opinion at the end of the day and I respect yours. even if I go by your analogy if I like bikes Crayon and I ride one every day like I do for my video card? bet your ass I will buy the expensive better bike. it's a hobby that I love, It's also something I want to enjoy riding. same reason why people buy BMW and others buy a Kia Rio.

If I have the money. I enjoy cars.... why buy a slower and less feature car?

This is all in line and basically exactly what you said. different segments of people. but when it comes to 350$? I dunno I do not think anyone who is going to be spending 1000$ on a card is in a different segment from the guy who is spending 350$ on top ( at least in Canada, in US it's a 600$ difference and It's really hard to swallow), but then again if the AMD card is same level performance as a 4080, exact same performance in rasta, Ill still buy an Nvidia card for 200$ and get better ray tracing and DLSS support. that is just me.

Canada
Canada
Canada

Oh, Canada

There are only 38 million of you, of which of course not many are interested in or able to buy such expensive computer components.

 

[BearNecessity]

They were closer to Nvidia last gen, them competing with a weak 4080 is them conceding defeat at the high end, something they didn't do last gen... they are unequivocally less competitive than last gen in terms of performance. Pricing seems good only because the 4080 price is too high.

4080 is the highend. The $1500 gpu market is something else, ultra ultra enthusiast or whatever they wanna call it nowadays.
I wouldnt say the 6900xt was more competetive back then simply cause the covid market was messed up. AMD couldnt figure out production so they barely even made any 6900xts, and the ones that came out were price gouged to heck anyways.
AMD could still mess up production of the 7900xt too so who knows.

 

[Crayon]

AMD confirms the RX 7900 XT is a 4080 competitor.

http://[URL][URL][URL]https://video...3-may-be-supported-by-pre-rdna3-architectures

[/URL][/URL][/URL]

Sad to see it, last gen they seemed more competitive...

I'm good with that. I'm not even trying to buy a $1,000 card. I'm more interested in what this means for $400 cards less than a year from now.

DLSS would still make it hard for me to change teams, but if Nvidia prices a cheap ass bastard out, what are you going to do.

I've never used dlss first hand and I only have one game with FSR 2.1. but, I must say the image on that game with quality 1440p is great.

Outside of classic rasterization, AMD can't compete anymore with NVIDIA. On Blender, A 6900xt falls behind a mere RTX3060. Deep Learning, Video encoding/decoding, Offscreen rendering, Monitor synchronization, Upscaling, ... Nvidia is vastly superior and it show in market numbers; on Steam, AMD went from 16.2% to 13% in one year.

When it comes to those non gaming tasks you mention, Nvidia curbstomps amd. That's a different use case, though. I choose to dismiss it. Lol jk but really I think that adds value to the rtx but it's different.

That steam survey is for people who need rasterization performance and memory for their buck. We know another stat in the steam survey is that people are using 1060s.

For gaming, the big picture is that amd sacrifices ray tracing. ( that doesn't mean they could match Nvidia even if they wanted to or anything like that) If the product stack continues this pattern vs 4080, you'll get more raster and more memory for your 6, 5, 4 hundred bucks with amd. Let's see if they can get back to that 16% in a year. Or if it takes 3. Or never happens.

 

[Marlenus]

Oh I even forgot this about the techpowerup charts for 4090 that’s been the circulating all the time since last night..

RTX 4090: 521.90

They didn’t even use the 522.25 improved performance drivers..

The press driver for the 4090 had the same updates as the 522.25 driver. All it did was make the 4090 appear a bit faster than the 3090Ti in the launch reviews because the 3090Ti and other ampere cards gained 3-4%

 

[Haint]

From https://www.techpowerup.com/300648/...performs-within-striking-distance-of-rtx-4090

Estimates.

LOL @ beating a 4090 in Metro RT and Cyber RT. Some people gonna be so crushed and defeated when the benchmarks release, reviewers might want to link suicide prevention hotlines. This is next level delusions.

4080 is the highend. The $1500 gpu market is something else, ultra ultra enthusiast or whatever they wanna call it nowadays.
I wouldnt say the 6900xt was more competetive back then simply cause the covid market was messed up. AMD couldnt figure out production so they barely even made any 6900xts, and the ones that came out were price gouged to heck anyways.
AMD could still mess up production of the 7900xt too so who knows.

$1000, $1200, and $1500 are all the same customer, super enthusiast ultra luxury market. Anyone spending that much wants the best, not a bargain, and not a bunch of caveats/qualifiers. If $1000 doesn't buy it, the overwhelming majority will choose to spend the extra $500. AMD will be fighting over 4090 scraps and praying Nvidia continues to fail at production. The 4080 16G is also going to bomb. $699 or maybe $799 (post inflation) is where you hit another demographic entirely. Far far fewer of them are willing to increase their budget cause most of them are XX60 and XX70 buyers who already increased their budget to the max just to hit the historical XX80 tier.

 

[bbeach123]

Any hope for the 7700xt pricing at 500$ ?

 

[Marlenus]

Any hope for the 7700xt pricing at 500$ ?

Maybe. Half the MCDs, half the memory chips, 2/3rds GCD but using cut versions / below the bottom 7800 bin. Probably half the power consumption unless they push clocks but 7800XT has to fit in the 230-300W range so maybe a 200W 7700XT.

Yea $500-$550 seems viable.

 

[rnlval]

LOL @ beating a 4090 in Metro RT and Cyber RT. Some people gonna be so crushed and defeated when the benchmarks release, reviewers might want to link suicide prevention hotlines. This is next level delusions.



$1000, $1200, and $1500 are all the same customer, super enthusiasts. Anyone spending that much wants the best, not a bunch of caveats and qualifiers. If $1000 doesn't buy it, the overwhelming majority will choose to spend the extra $500. AMD will be fighting over 4090 scraps and praying Nvidia continues to fail at production. $699 or maybe $799 (post inflation) is where you hit another demographic entirely. Far far fewer of them are willing to increase their budget cause most of them were XX60 and XX70 buyers who already increased their budget just to hit the historical XX80 tier.

From https://www.igorslab.de/en/nvidia-g...s-edition-24gb-review-drink-less-work-more/5/

Apply 1.5X on RX 6950 XT's 40 fps yields 60 fps.

Don't use RX 6900 XT as the baseline AMD GPU.

A proper review will be required.

 

[rnlval]

I'm good with that. I'm not even trying to buy a $1,000 card. I'm more interested in what this means for $400 cards less than a year from now.

I've never used dlss first hand and I only have one game with FSR 2.1. but, I must say the image on that game with quality 1440p is great.

When it comes to those non gaming tasks you mention, Nvidia curbstomps amd. That's a different use case, though. I choose to dismiss it. Lol jk but really I think that adds value to the rtx but it's different.

That steam survey is for people who need rasterization performance and memory for their buck. We know another stat in the steam survey is that people are using 1060s.

For gaming, the big picture is that amd sacrifices ray tracing. ( that doesn't mean they could match Nvidia even if they wanted to or anything like that) If the product stack continues this pattern vs 4080, you'll get more raster and more memory for your 6, 5, 4 hundred bucks with amd. Let's see if they can get back to that 16% in a year. Or if it takes 3. Or never happens.

For Blender 3D raytracing, NAVI 21 doesn't fully accelerate the BVH raytracing search engine i.e. 2 of 3. NAVI 31 fully accelerates accelerate the BVH raytracing search engine.

After the BVH raytracing search engine, traditional compute shaders are still used to shade it, hence GA102 (~38 TFLOPS compute) still has the TFLOPS advantage against NAVI 21's ~24 TFLOPS compute.

 

[Haint]

From https://www.igorslab.de/en/nvidia-g...s-edition-24gb-review-drink-less-work-more/5/

Apply 1.5X on RX 6950 XT's 40 fps yields 60 fps.

Don't use RX 6900 XT as the baseline AMD GPU.

A proper review will be required.

I shouldn't have to point out that an 8 FPS or 15% delta between the 3090 and 4090 immediately speaks to a deeply flawed and erroneous benchmark. The 6900XT runs Metro EE at 39FPS average while a 4090's manages 114 avg with significantly higher peaks. So yeah, 50% is a LONG ways off from 300%, comical levels of wish-crafting going on here. So to again illustrate my other point, no one spending $1000+ for a GPU is going to buy something that's 250% slower to save $500 in what is already an ultra luxury price segment.

 

[Orta]

AMD cards are trash both hardware and software wise, don't buy that.

Thanks I won't then. Can you PM me your home address, I'd like to send you a thank you card and present.

 

[Petopia]

Went Nvidia and never went back capped for amd when they were known for ati and these guys drivers will for ever suck no matter how much times they put data out.

 

[GymWolf]

The base 4080 is already 1200 dollars.
A 4080"20G is likely 1400 dollars.

From a price/performance perspective AMD has completely walked Nvidia with their 900 dollar near 4090 card.

Theyve purposely gimped the reference model at 375W
Imagine AIBs giving the card 400W.
It will absolutely murder the 4080'16G when it can hit 3000Mhz.

Is it easy to remove what they did in the vanilla card? Like do i need to physically do something on the card or just unlocking something via software?

 

[rnlval]

I shouldn't have to point out that an 8 FPS or 15% delta between the 3090 and 4090 immediately speaks to a deeply flawed and erroneous benchmark. The 6900XT runs Metro EE at 39FPS average while a 4090's manages 114 avg with significantly higher peaks. So yea, 50% is a LONG ways off from 300%.

From https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-review/3

>100 fps from RTX 4090 has DLSS.

Without DLSS, RTX 4090 has a 74.3 fps average.
Used Intel Alderlake CPU.
Intel Core i9-12900K
MSI Pro Z690-A WiFi DDR4
Corsair 2x16GB DDR4-3600 CL16

-----

From https://www.forbes.com/sites/antony...just-how-fast-is-it-in-games/?sh=3bb45b2c1f42

With Metro Exodus Enhanced Edition, 4K, Hairworks off, Ray Tracing Ultra, RTX 4090 has an 89 fps average.

-----
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-founders-edition/34.html
With Metro Exodus 4K, and Ray Tracing enabled, RTX 4090 has a 116 fps average. Used AMD Ryzen 7 5800X CPU with PBO Max Enabled.

Processor:	AMD Ryzen 7 5800X, PBO Max Enabled (Zen 3, 32 MB Cache)​
Motherboard:	EVGA X570 Dark BIOS 1.08​
Resizable BAR:	Enabled on all supported AMD, NVIDIA & Intel cards​
Memory:	Thermaltake TOUGHRAM, 16 GB DDR4 @ 4000 MHz 20-23-23-42 1T Infinity Fabric @ 2000 MHz (1:1)​

 

[GymWolf]

AMD cards are trash both hardware and software wise, don't buy that.

If sophist's choice was about chosing between amd and nvidia, the movie would have been way shorter.

 

[Haint]

From https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-review/3

>100 fps from RTX 4090 has DLSS.

Without DLSS, RTX 4090 has 74.3 fps.

Very improbable Digital Foundry is benching unlabeled DLSS (Quality? Performance? Balanced?) against Native AMD. Additionally, this Toms bench has the 6900XT at a 40% disadvantage under DF and Igor (mid 20's Vs. high 30's)

 

[Black_Stride]

Is it easy to remove what they did in the vanilla card? Like do i need to physically do something on the card or just unlocking something via software?

The 375W limit is a physical limit on the card.
A vBios flash wont magically bend the laws of physics.
If you wanted to go above that you shouldnt be buying the reference design anyway.

AIBs already have 3x8pin cards in the works.
So those have ~500W power limits.

 

[GymWolf]

The 375W limit is a physical limit on the card.
A vBios flash wont magically bend the laws of physics.
If you wanted to go above that you shouldnt be buying the reference design anyway.

AIBs already have 3x8pin cards in the works.
So those have ~500W power limits.

I don't want to overclock, does a third party gpu like asus or giga already go sensibly faster because they are unlocked? or without overclock they go like a vanilla amd card?

Like does it work the same as locked cpu and K version that even without overclock reach way higher frequencies?

Thanks.

 

[twilo99]

Went Nvidia and never went back capped for amd when they were known for ati and these guys drivers will for ever suck no matter how much times they put data out.

Drivers have been fine for me for a while now.. I'd say no issues for about two years

 

[Black_Stride]

I don't want to overclock, does a third party gpu like asus or giga already go sensibly faster because they are unlocked? or without overclock they go like a vanilla amd card?

Like does it work the same as locked cpu and K version that even without overclock reach way higher frequencies?

Thanks.

We dont know yet.
But in theory a 375W hardlimit should be gimping the reference design.
Simply having extra power will likely lead to the clocks going higher out of the box

For instance look at the powerlimited 4090.
I imagine the 7900XTX will have a similar or better power/performance curve.

 

[Crayon]

Watching all these youtube videos trying to messily extrapolate the performance from the shitty charts. I'm starting to lean towards 20% slower in raster than the 4090. Also thinking the ray tracing might be worthwhile even if it's behind.

 

[GymWolf]

Curious to see if the european prices are gonna be a scam like with nividia.

Third parties are gonna cost like 1500 euros

 

[yamaci17]

I don't want to overclock, does a third party gpu like asus or giga already go sensibly faster because they are unlocked? or without overclock they go like a vanilla amd card?

Like does it work the same as locked cpu and K version that even without overclock reach way higher frequencies?

Thanks.

not sensibly it is the most overrated feature of last 10 yrs most likely

i have a 300w bios 3070.

between 220w and 300w, at best i noticed a minor %4-7 perf. bump and that was the most extreme case possible (games that can actually load all the SMs).

games that cannot fully saturate SMs do not even benefit from high power limits, since they will never use super high power to begin with (such as anvil engine and some others)

that's a whopping %36 power increase for a minor %4-7 perf bump. that's just laughable. people just be chasing unnecessarily irrevelant performance gains. but noo one can stop them.

 

[SolidQ]

RT seems fine perfomance, especially when drivers will add like 10-15% perfomance

 

[GymWolf]

not sensibly it is the most overrated feature of last 10 yrs most likely

i have a 300w bios 3070.

between 220w and 300w, at best i noticed a minor %4-7 perf. bump and that was the most extreme case possible (games that can actually load all the SMs).

games that cannot fully saturate SMs do not even benefit from high power limits, since they will never use super high power to begin with (such as anvil engine and some others)

that's a whopping %36 power increase for a minor %4-7 perf bump. that's just laughable. people just be chasing unnecessarily irrevelant performance gains. but noo one can stop them.

So the tldr is to go with a vanilla amd card and save money?

In here people talk like reaching 4090 performance is not out of question with some overclock...

Do we know if ue5 use these high power limits? i don't want to be gimped too much for all the future games with that engine.

 

[THE DUCK]

Where is our midrange cards from previous generations? Even with inflation, these $899, 999 and $1599 (nvidia) are out of reach for the vast majority of buyers. I want to see a 4060 or 7880xtx at 40tf for $399 or $499.

 

[SolidQ]

Where is our midrange cards from previous generations? Even with inflation, these $899, 999 and $1599 (nvidia) are out of reach for the vast majority of buyers. I want to see a 4060 or 7880xtx at 40tf for $399 or $499.

NV and AMD need empty shelf's, than they can sell 5/6/7/8 cards, but for now still alot current gen cards on shelf's

 

[KungFucius]

I don't want to overclock, does a third party gpu like asus or giga already go sensibly faster because they are unlocked? or without overclock they go like a vanilla amd card?

Like does it work the same as locked cpu and K version that even without overclock reach way higher frequencies?

Thanks.

Don't buy ASUS anything unless you can get one of the rare MSRP ones. They are a total piece of shit company that charges 200 bucks for a factory OC on their 4090 and they have an army of idiots who worship the stupid ROG Strix which is extremely overengineered and overpriced. It's all smoke and mirror hype that manipulates people.

If you want to run at base settings just get a reference card for AMD or the MSRP cards for NVidia. Absolutely non of the other stuff is necessary. All cards can be OCed with software. It is worth it to see if you can get a modest OC on any card, but not really necessary. Factory OCs vs non factory OCs on the same card are just a BS way for a company to claim they have a model at MSRP while only really making the OC one. They tweak the clocks in firmware by a tiny amount that any card will operate at and tack on 50 bucks to the price, or if you are ASSUS and like to make asses out of their customers, you charge fucking 200. The factory OC is something you could get on your card with SW.

There are also reference cards and custom cards and the wildcard that is the silicon lottery. The reference cards generally do not have the ability to be pushed well beyond spec with any OC SW. In some cases going out of spec, like higher power, allows users to OC more. That is the draw. But really it is obnoxious in some cases. The 4090 Ti is Speced for 450W but some cards can be set to take 600W. One result I saw showed that many of the 450W cards OC to 2900 MHz. Some guy on some site was gushing over his GB OC 4090 that he pushed to 600W that could do 3 Ghz. The extra 150W, or 33% more power helped him get 100 Mhz better than average or ~ 3%. By contrast, many users have shown that they can undervolt the card and run it ~300W while only losing ~5%. Each GPU family will have a different ability to OC and you can look at reviews to decide if it is worthwhile for you. For this gen AMD it might turn out that a non reference card that is a little bit more expensive can OC alot more than a reference one, or it might be like the 4090 where you are talking maybe a few percent if you are lucky.

I don't want to sound like I don't appreciate the fun that can be had from tweaking a system and trying to get everything out of it, because that is a good engineering activity. The thing I don't think is good engineering is throwing a ton of money at it by buying overpriced, overengineered parts. Being a good tweaker could help with a job in tech, using the most expensive parts that add so little and thinking that is smart could lead to pissing people off at a tech job. I mean who the fuck wants to pay engineers to design a product that costs 10-25% more that performs 3% better than the configuration that doesn't? This is different from paying engineers to design something that costs them 2% more to make that marketing can then manipulate people into paying 10-25% more for so they can get 3% more performance which is what these cards really are. As an end user and the engineer of your PC, you should balance cost and performance rather than throwing a few hundred extra dollars at the problem that you could use to buy your kid a console with or something.

 

[Caio]

Hey guys, December 13th is my birthday, you all could collect the money to buy a 7900 XTX, and make a Gift for me

 

[Self_Destructive]

LOL @ beating a 4090 in Metro RT and Cyber RT. Some people gonna be so crushed and defeated when the benchmarks release, reviewers might want to link suicide prevention hotlines. This is next level delusions.

For real LOL

 

[PeteBull]

Based on what I'm grasping here from the comments:

-Rasterization performance close to 4090 (5%-10% less)

Everything else checks out, but wait for reviews/independend benchmarks, amd did some sheaneningans with their graphs this time(different cpu for different gpus) so just to be sure better wait, its not cheap impulse buy territory purchase.

Said all that even 20% lower raster in 4k vs 4090 when not cpu constrained will still be great result/amazing deal if its actually 1k bucks at retail(same thing here, dont compare msrp vs msrp but actual price u can get those cards online or at ur local area, might be way different vs msrp depending on where u live/if u are lucky with avaiability/buy early-, for example here in europe u cant get even worst aib 4090 models below 2500euro currently, hell dunno if u can get them below 3k euro even;/).