Associate
- Joined
- 5 Nov 2014
- Posts
- 234
Majority of the pc master race seems to think you need a 80 series or above for it to last long. Literally just taper off the details and/or lean more heavily into DLSS etc. As time goes by
-
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.
At what point do you say GPU's are too expensive and refuse to buy?
- Thread starter Sparky
- Start date
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 1,946
This will be MFG soon enough, everyone using it, who doesn't want to upgrade.
10% at 1080p, 22% at 2160p.
AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX Review - Disrupting the GeForce RTX 4080
Navi 31 is here! The new $999 Radeon RX 7900 XTX in this review is AMD's new flagship card based on the wonderful chiplet technology that made the Ryzen Effect possible. In our testing we can confirm that the new RX 7900 XTX is indeed faster than the GeForce RTX 4080, but only with RT disabled.
Charts in my post here are from TPU and the 5080 review: https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/t...sive-and-refuse-to-buy.18998169/post-37895681 | AMD fine wine striking?10% at 1080p, 22% at 2160p.
AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX Review - Disrupting the GeForce RTX 4080
Navi 31 is here! The new $999 Radeon RX 7900 XTX in this review is AMD's new flagship card based on the wonderful chiplet technology that made the Ryzen Effect possible. In our testing we can confirm that the new RX 7900 XTX is indeed faster than the GeForce RTX 4080, but only with RT disabled.www.techpowerup.com
Yeah it does surprise me, that's why regardless of peoples opinion on the release price, a 4070 has done me well, and continues to.
As aforementioned, I have maxed out every game bar Alan Wake 2 at 4K DLSS without RT on, with no issue.
So I simply played it at 1440P DLSS max settings, not a big deal. I should have tried lowering some settings at 4K really, as I was getting low 50's often, but hey ho, still looked decent.
For what it is, I think the 4070 was decent if you weren't coming from the previous generation. A 2.5 slot short length card, 200W or 135-150W (when undervolted), near silent, 60-66C cool running GPU that can play basically any modern AAA single player game at max settings 4K DLSS 60FPS, with the bonus fallback of frame generation and reflex as and when you need it.
I feel like I got a well kept secret in that regard, many AMD cards at the time were huge, loud coil wine, and ran in the 90's with the fans maxed out...
I know people love triple figure FPS, but for what I paid, I'm not bothered, as I prefer single player games to look their best visually, playing at 60FPS, any FPS above that, is a bonus.
If I really cared/wanted triple figure FPS or close to it, I can always play in 1440P, saying that though, I've played multiplayer COD at 120+ FPS max settings 4K DLSS, and CS2 will produce ridiculous FPS as is no surprise... So it depends what games you want the extra FPS in.
Aha... My post was for the 5080 against the 7900 XTX - not the 4090. This was the post that I replied to:
This is why I said "not even 15%" and posted the charts. I did not address the latter question of deviation's post.
Last edited:
Well my limit for a GPU was always £500, this week I paid £519 for the Pulse 9070 and its double the perf of my old 3060 Ti which I paid £445 for 3 years ago.. I think it was worth it even though it isnt quite MSRP but I've had enough of waiting 
Just think, in a week/month, you'll be gutted you didn't spend the extra £81 for the XTWell my limit for a GPU was always £500, this week I paid £519 for the Pulse 9070 and its double the perf of my old 3060 Ti which I paid £445 for 3 years ago.. I think it was worth it even though it isnt quite MSRP but I've had enough of waiting
Stuff like that always plays on my mind haha!
I would have bought the Pulse XT but it deffo wont fit in my Corsair 400C case lolJust think, in a week/month, you'll be gutted you didn't spend the extra £81 for the XT
Stuff like that always plays on my mind haha!
Always the way, I like my case, but my AIO will only fit in the front, but it's not a good enough reason to change the case
Same here, its a squeeze up top and cant release the RAM modules as the rad fans block them off..Always the way, I like my case, but my AIO will only fit in the front, but it's not a good enough reason to change the case
See pic in spoiler, this is why I have to have the rad in the front which stops me from having a GPU more than around 320mm long
Apparently a 360mm rad will fit in the front of my case, Im kinda thinking about buying one and seeing if it will actually fit
Nice mate!Same here, its a squeeze up top and cant release the RAM modules as the rad fans block them off..
See pic in spoiler, this is why I have to have the rad in the front which stops me from having a GPU more than around 320mm long
Apparently a 360mm rad will fit in the front of my case, Im kinda thinking about buying one and seeing if it will actually fit
Yeah I went anal and got the calipers out and measured everywhere in mine, and yep
Associate
- Joined
- 28 Jul 2015
- Posts
- 559
Your chart says it's 14.9% faster? 100/87=1.149. Or if you prefer, 100-87 = 13, 13/87 = 0.149
It's the same way the 7900 XTX is 102% faster than the 2080 Ti, not 44%
The 5070s and 9070s are a pretty good price right now. I wouldn't fault anyone for buying one, maligned as though they were on release. 9070 was only hated due to its close pricing tier to the XT, but there's nothing wrong with it. Hell, the power efficiency on that thing is actually pretty impressive.Well my limit for a GPU was always £500, this week I paid £519 for the Pulse 9070 and its double the perf of my old 3060 Ti which I paid £445 for 3 years ago.. I think it was worth it even though it isnt quite MSRP but I've had enough of waiting
When did 14.9% become 15%? Oooh, pedantic maths. 14.9% is still not 15% though, is it...Your chart says it's 14.9% faster? 100/87=1.149. Or if you prefer, 100-87 = 13, 13/87 = 0.149
It's the same way the 7900 XTX is 102% faster than the 2080 Ti, not 44%
I see we have a few Einstein contenders in this thread lately.
Come on, have a maths fight, you know you both wannaWhen did 14.9% become 15%? Oooh, pedantic maths. 14.9% is still not 15% though, is it...
I see we have a few Einstein contenders in this thread lately.
Same here, its a squeeze up top and cant release the RAM modules as the rad fans block them off..
See pic in spoiler, this is why I have to have the rad in the front which stops me from having a GPU more than around 320mm long
Apparently a 360mm rad will fit in the front of my case, Im kinda thinking about buying one and seeing if it will actually fit
I'm triggered by that
AIO's do have air in them, a small amount but they are never completely full, with that in mind look at where the highest point of that cooling setup is, its the top of the rad, where the pump feeds in and out of the rad, that's where the air is........
The best way is to have the rad is at the top.
Last edited: