• 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.

AMD fine wine

I really think AMD focus should be on optimising their existing products rather than paper launching 7800, 7700xts….

It would be great if they can get the XTX to meet the 4090 halfway….
 
I really think AMD focus should be on optimising their existing products rather than paper launching 7800, 7700xts….
This is what they might be doing BEFORE launching them, taking a chance that fps will improve overall and it seems to be working (at least from what we've seen, needs more testing really). Oh, I got a 7900XTX Pulse to have a play with, very nice card!
 
Last edited:
This is what they might be doing BEFORE launching them, taking a chance that fps will improve overall and it seems to be working (at least from what we've seen, needs more testing really). Oh, I got a 7900XTX Pulse to have a play with, very nice card!
4090 is overall 30% faster than a XTX or have I got that wrong?
 
Remnant 2 for instance

1440p
image.png


4k!!
image.png
 
4090 is overall 30% faster than a XTX or have I got that wrong?

22% at 4K according to TPU.


Edit: if you were to retest them now it might be a few percentage points closer.
 
Last edited:
22% at 4K according to TPU.


Edit: if you were to retest them now it might be a few percentage points closer.
Those charts look a lot closer than I recall seeing originally in January! Even the XT is only 28% slower at 1440p than a 4090 for 50% less outlay.
 
Last edited:
Those charts look a lot closer than I recall seeing originally in January! Even the XT is only 28% slower than a 4090 for 50% less outlay.

The 7900XT was reviewed as over priced, i agree it was.

But the 7900XTX was lumped in the same over priced category despite being 47% faster than the 6900XT its replaced for the same $999, the problem is reviewers like HUB expect AMD to do what ever it takes to make Nvidia cards cheaper and being at the time 5% faster than the 4080 and 20% cheaper isn't anything like enough, so they hate on it.
While at the same time give a card with the same amount of VRam, 20% faster for 60% more money a glowing backside kissing review. and they wonder why people call them Nvidia fanboys?

I think it just seems like the 7900XTX was worse than it actually was because quite a few people gave it such a bad review because it didn't meet their expectations of metering Nvidia.

Look the RX 7600 was originally meant to be $329, the same price as the RX 6600 its replaced, like the 7900XTX vs 6900XT, after being told over and over again the other two GPU's were too expensive and would be given a bad review, HUB told them again this now was too expensive, so this time AMD listened and dropped it to $299, HUB told them its still too expensive, so AMD dropped it to $270, now 20% cheaper than the card its replaced at 27% faster HUB gave it a bad review for being over priced.

Mean while they actually gave the 4080 a card now 70% more expensive than its predecessor at £1200 a mixed review, its quite telling they did not draw any conclusions on its value until the 7900XTX. So they did not give it a value conclution based on its own merits, on that its shocking, instead they wait for AMD's card and hate on that if it didn't meet their standards giving the 4080 a free pass.

That is the sheer ####### state of modern tech journalism.

 
Last edited:
The 7900XT was reviewed as over priced, i agree it was.

But the 7900XTX was lumped in the same over priced category despite being 47% faster than the 6900XT its replaced for the same $999, the problem is reviewers like HUB expect AMD to do what ever it takes to make Nvidia cards cheaper and being at the time 5% faster than the 4080 and 20% cheaper isn't anything like enough, so they hate on it.
While at the same time give a card with the same amount of VRam, 20% faster for 60% more money a glowing backside kissing review. and they wonder why people call them Nvidia fanboys?

I think it just seems like the 7900XTX was worse than it actually was because quite a few people gave it such a bad review because it didn't meet their expectations of metering Nvidia.

Look the RX 7600 was originally meant to be $329, the same price as the RX 6600 its replaced, like the 7900XTX vs 6900XT, after being told over and over again the other two GPU's were too expensive and would be given a bad review, HUB told them again this now was too expensive, so this time AMD listened and dropped it to $299, HUB told them its still too expensive, so AMD dropped it to $270, now 20% cheaper than the card its replaced at 27% faster HUB gave it a bad review for being over priced.

Mean while they actually gave the 4080 a card now 70% more expensive than its predecessor at £1200 a mixed review, its quite telling they did not draw any conclusions on its value until the 7900XTX. So they did not give it a value conclution based on its own merits, on that its shocking, instead the wait for AMD's card and hate on that if it didn't meet their standards giving the 4080 a free pass.

That is the sheer ####### state of modern tech journalism.

They’re basically biased whether unconscious or not. I’ve stopped watching them as I don’t trust them anymore.

They didn’t even commend AMD for listening to outcry and cutting the XT price to $800 and then to $700.
 
Last edited:
They’re basically biased whether unconscious or not. I’ve stopped watching them as I don’t trust them anymore.

They did it even commend AMD for cutting the XT price to $800 and then to $700.

It is kinda convenient to fore go commenting on the shocking value of the 4080, not even making their usual charts on it, and instead just say "lets wait for AMD before making any conclusions on that" and then give that a bad review despite it being faster and much cheaper.

So they managed to get away with not saying its terrible and instead divert that attention on AMD, horrendously undeservedly, brillient, Jenson would be proud, right out of his playbook. People are constantly calling them out for being Nvidia shills, yeah.....
 
Last edited:
essentially identical in this game for all intended purposes
both run like ****, not a good start for unreal engine 5, a bunch of poor performing games have been released for this game engine


7900XTX seems to do about 5 to 10% better than the 4090.

Unreal Engine 5 is next gen, the hardware needs to catch up.

PS: why do people still have lengthy channel intros in their video's?, 4 minute video, 30 second channel intro, stop it.....
 
Last edited:
I noticed a few other instances where UE5 seems to run slightly better on equivalent AMD hardware. Makes you think whether this has to do with the amount of console releases using UE5?? Shame AMD can't actually release their whole range quickly like Nvidia does.
 
Last edited:
I noticed a few other instances where UE5 seems to run slightly better on equivalent AMD hardware.

AMD partnered with Unreal Engine a few years ago, around the time of Boarderlands 3

Lumen, Nanite.... Epic Games didn't do these things on their own.... industry changing stuff like that are never done without the help of one of the hardware vendors, like Screen Space GI, transparent foliage, hair physics....

 
Last edited:
UE5 or its not showcased well ? visually doesnt look any better from what I've seen before and considering how taxing it is

Not my work, i'm making a much larger one but its on hold until i can get a GPU with some VRam.

The authors credits are inside.

 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom