• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

OcUK RX6900XT review thread

Don’t like the reviews that use SAM either. Shouldn’t publish performance based on a feature that requires you to buy a whole new CPU. Let’s go by performance regardless of what CPU you are running.
 
I just don't get it. The 3080 is blow for blow the same as the 6800xt. The 6800xt being cheaper should be the one to buy. No?

In the jayztwocents review he said the gpu would only use 250w. Did all the other reviews have this problem aswell? If they had changed to the 300w it is suppose to use like jayztwocents did it would have been better wouldnt it? I'm sure jayz charts all used the 250w instead of the 300w because "they use out of the box settings for fairness" even though its obvious that is a bug.
 
Grim5 said:
so basically

Vr: the broken on amd
Dlss: non existent on amd
Ray tracing: bad performance on amd
Rendering: bad performance on amd
Ray Traced rendering: broken on amd and bad performance

These things all add up
Click to expand...

VR is fine on AMD, have ran a Vive on a Fury and Vega.
DLSS, soon™
Agreed but early days.
Er... lol? In what way?
Now you're just duplicating an earlier point to make your list look longer. :rolleyes:
 
robfosters said:
Don’t like the reviews that use SAM either. Shouldn’t publish performance based on a feature that requires you to buy a whole new CPU. Let’s go by performance regardless of what CPU you are running.
Click to expand...

Surely most reviews - at least the ones I've looked at - show both on and off?
 
Grim5 said:
For the raster rendering stuff, check Linus Tech Tips review, the 6900xt only performs like a RTX3060ti.

And if you enable ray traced rendering, the 6900xt like all RDNA 2 cards produces a very noisy image that can't then be used for any commercial purposes - any ray traced rendering looks like it's got the worst film grain known to man.

if you don't like Linus, you can also check out OptimumTech's channel as he also benches rendering because it's something he uses to make his youtube content and he flat out said he would not recommend the 6900xt/6800xt for rendering.
Click to expand...


That bit near the end made me chuckle lol
 
My general view is this.

If your someone who's walking around with a dangerous level of horniness requiring you to take frequent cold showers at the idea of playing the 2 games that actually have a half decent Ray Tracing support then sure go and buy a 3090, otherwise it's just not worth it for Ray Tracing alone.

If you're the sort of person who spends £1500 on a GPU I would expect you're the sort of person that buys frequently and regulary most likely Gen to Gen, or skipping one in between. Neither have mind blowing performance. Then my general view is get the 3090 or 6900xt which ever is in stock first. At the end of the day in a years/2 years time when the next cards come out you will upgrade again anyway and there's not enough games currently that support the features to justify the price tag.

There's a lot of talk regarding 4k performance... as someone who went to future proof myself and bought a 144hz 4K monitor... i'm still dissapointed with 4k performance on all GPUs.

When it comes to the 6800xt vs 3080 same as above get which ever is closest to RRP and available first. It's still going to be another 2 or 3 iterations of GPU before Ray Tracing is not only worth the purchase but actually has a notable number of games that support it in a worth while way that incorporate it in full.

I'd probably get the 6800xt as it's cheaper. If they were the same price i'd get the 3080 as even though the games that use Nvidia features are few and far between at the same price i'm getting extra features at no extra cost, hope in hell though i'd pay for them (personal view on that of course)

The same applies to all the lower tiers as well, at the moment they trade blows pretty damn well, so get what's available first that's listed at a reasonable price.

I don't really think there even really needs to be a debate at the moment, we have two very competative companies performing almost on par with each other for the first time in years, sure you can argue which unavailable card will beat the other unavailable card but that amounts to nothing. If you need a new GPU, just buy the one that becomes available first the debate will happen next year when stock is available for all cards at all price points and the RRP settles.
 
Grim5 said:
For the raster rendering stuff, check Linus Tech Tips review, the 6900xt only performs like a RTX3060ti.

And if you enable ray traced rendering, the 6900xt like all RDNA 2 cards produces a very noisy image that can't then be used for any commercial purposes - any ray traced rendering looks like it's got the worst film grain known to man.

if you don't like Linus, you can also check out OptimumTech's channel as he also benches rendering because it's something he uses to make his youtube content and he flat out said he would not recommend the 6900xt/6800xt for rendering.
Click to expand...

Oh I see, sorry! I didn't realise the reference was rendering in a non-gaming format.
I'm not buying these cards for RT either, RT is of no interest to me (personally) but I can see how that might not appeal to those who do want RT.

Do you think the rendering is just poor software utilisation?
 
Grim5 said:
so basically

Vr: the broken on amd
Dlss: non existent on amd
Ray tracing: bad performance on amd
Rendering: bad performance on amd
Ray Traced rendering: broken on amd and bad performance

These things all add up
Click to expand...

I would say you had balls of solid brass... but I think your just anti-AMD, surprised the mods haven't put a chastity belt on you yet Grimmy! :D
 
In all seriousness this is what happens when there is absolutely no/very little driver optimization (this is my best guess as to why a nvidia sponsored title, CB2077, is tanking a 3090). Which is ironic as the shoe is on the other foot now. Which is why many have been pointing out games like Dirt 5, GodFall, Valhalla, etc. working well with AMD. As those games were simply optimized to run well on AMD coming from a console as a pc port.

But lets see how well performance improves, or not, once the patch is released. CB2077 is not a console port, lets be clear on that.

If the developer takes the time to code the game properly for the hardware the hardware will run it well thus encourage consumers to buy the game. Now why Nvidia sponsored games like CB2077 and Fortnite tanks in performance with Ampere when rt is on is another story entirely.

As it stands now those results are valid as it gives us a peek as to what happens when a game is created with "bare bones" generic optimizations in mind. IE: Being able to start the game and play it (bugs and all the stuffs). As you can see, it tanks nvidia as well. Not an AMD thing.

Edit:
But if they need to patch the game in order to get performance then they are simply using Nvidia blackbox code directly in the game.

I feel sorry for anyone with a AMD GPU who buys this game if that turns out to be true.
 
Last edited:
Where as last week I thought a rtx3080ti would be pointless, it's looking much more appealing as a viable product this week. Even if it's say 5% slower than the 3090, it would still be faster than the 6900xt and if priced right it would pretty much kill of any sales for the 6900xt that was already killed by how its performance can be matched by aib 3080/6800xt - I suspect most orders for the 6900xt is people just looking for a card, any card and hoping this new card might arrive faster than their order for an existing card
 
Grim5 said:
Where as last week I thought a rtx3080ti would be pointless, it's looking much more appealing as a viable product this week. Even if it's say 5% slower than the 3090, it would still be faster than the 6900xt and if priced right it would pretty much kill of any sales for the 6900xt that was already killed by how its performance can be matched by aib 3080/6800xt - I suspect most orders for the 6900xt is people just looking for a card, any card and hoping this new card might arrive faster than their order for an existing card
Click to expand...

Complete agree. Very interesting times ahead. I imagine the rtx3080ti will cause a lot of buyers remorse who purchased this.
 
malachi said:
So where are these guys now then? When the RX6900XT was first announced saying?!?!?!

"WHOOOAAA!!!! THE RX6900XT IS AN RTX3090 KILLLER AND CHEAPER!!!!!! NVIDIA IS FINISHED!!!!!!FINNNNNIIISSSHHHEDDD!!!!!!"

They seem quiet now?
Click to expand...

I just watched the reviews of the 6900xt and very underwhelmed even more than I expected to be. Wish them luck selling them and their drivers get better or something. Anyone that thought this was going to be a 3090 destroying card has a few screws loose. It was never going to happen and especially afer the 6800xt reviews came out.

It's just typical AMD being AMD when they introduce graphics cards and now with their CPUs too playing the dirty tricks with SAM only on 5000 series when reality it can work on the 3000 series cpus because as they told us its the same I.O die.. but now making excuses and then you have motherboard makers turning it on for intel boards and cpus. Some here think AMD is their friend .. they have shown their true face this time round to even people that had no idea who they are.

Anyways.. 3090 destroyer can be now dropped more like an overpriced 3080 with 16GB Vram and features that are missing (RT +DLSS) at every level from current gen games to work related applications.. AMD did the good sell but a product that still needs some work to fill in both sections graphics cards are used for.. gaming and work related applications. The rendering related types of applications can never be used with this generation of AMD GPUs.

They actually made the 3090 look like a good buy now to people spending on that type of range card. The £500 saving for a 6900xt compared to a 3090 is well still not good enough as it fails on many important things to me.
 
Last edited:
Verctor said:
Complete agree. Very interesting times ahead. I imagine the rtx3080ti will cause a lot of buyers remorse who purchased this.
Click to expand...
If you can get your hands on one that is. If NVIDIA launches this end of January, don't expect to get your hands on one till March/April at the very least
D1craig said:
SAM is a feature just like DLSS and raytracing? Remember it took nvidia nearly a year to get DLSS into any usable condition.
Click to expand...
Not really. SAM comes with the RX 6000 series but needs a 5000 CPU to use it. DLSS doesn't have any such hardware requirements.
 
Grim5 said:
Where as last week I thought a rtx3080ti would be pointless, it's looking much more appealing as a viable product this week. Even if it's say 5% slower than the 3090, it would still be faster than the 6900xt and if priced right it would pretty much kill of any sales for the 6900xt that was already killed by how its performance can be matched by aib 3080/6800xt - I suspect most orders for the 6900xt is people just looking for a card, any card and hoping this new card might arrive faster than their order for an existing card
Click to expand...
If anything, I thought it rather made the 3080 Ti pointless at £999. At these prices, you can expect users to be having 4k 120hz monitors and its barely 2% faster than a STOCK 3080 and lacks ray tracing and DLSS performance. I think NVIDIA will charge nothing short of £1100-£1200 for the Ti as MSRP now.
 
In conclusion looking back at all 3 cards , AMD has gotten their prices completely wrong.
You could argue the 6800xt is priced correctly but the 6800 and 6900xt are just wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom