As I said - I was just cheekily cherry picking where a 3080 beats a 6900XT. Witcher 3 may be an old game some some reviewers still use it.
By some you mean Digital Foundry? Yes, that is not at all surprising. Using a game that is in no way indicitive of current game performance on the whole as a way to measure performance using the latest CPUs and GPUs.
There was no RT used. I know it favours Nvidia - that and TR I purposely picked. It doesn't really matter if its an old game.
Agreed, I never said it does use RT though. Just thought it would be worthwhile to mention the developer as you specifically cited this game in your post.
However, it does matter if it's an old game (see the reason above) and my statement that you quoted does not take into account certain older games like this using legacy APIs and heavily favouring certain GPUs.
I have been vaceacious, yes. Purposely pulling out cherry picked stuff like others have. It created banter but some time folk have become so offended - that they spend so much of their time getting so mad.
Well, no offence taken here.
Tombraider - I'd have to DL the game. I looked at a guru3D game review for 3080Ti - that is all.
Okay, only mentioned this as you cited that game. It favours Nvidia, but the 3080 is not faster than the 6900 XT at 4K in this title unless you enable RT. Also, RT was tacked onto the game well after it was released.
AT the end of the day - when playing any game at any resolution - no one would be able to notice if they were using a 3080/3090/6800XT or a 6900XT. AT any resolution. The difference in FPS would be unnoticeable to the eye.
We've always agreed here and I've never really argued otherwise.
Must be people who bench and want the biggest number, thinking their cards are MUCH faster than someone else's when in fact very few could pick it out in ablind test when using gfx cards for their intended purpose. I'm sure you've had more than one merc in the search of the best of that range, no?
It's a hobby for some, each to their own. I spend 99% of my time playing games and just a small amount of time running benchmarks. Once you've got the best score what else is there to do?
So the statement you gave as an AMD employee will always be horrendously biased and you even knock down your competitor saying that RT has something to do with image quality. It doesn't - that's DLSS - RT is to do with reflections and light - Control does a great job with it - it's in it's infancy but still, because AMD don't have it then it must be rubbish. Finishing what you say with, anything other than your view is fantacism and mindshare - you'll be a politician next.
I could have used a better word than fanaticism.
My point was that RT offers very little improvement to image quality for a high FPS cost. Some people feel the same way, some don't. It's very subjective.
I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion on a 'competitor' based off what I posted. Fact is that Image reconstruction does reduce image quality. People either don't want to believe it or are blissfully ignorant to the various well known drawbacks. Of course there are some positives too, but native is king - for now.
You are an AMD employee and it is in your best interests that your input is to put AMD in the best light and knock Nvidia, I get that.
No, I'm just an enthusiast of PC hardware and I use what I know. I gain nothing from being critical or positive towards anything. This is a huge misconception because I used to be the AMD Community rep here. It's essentially just used as a retort to dismiss my opinion if i speak negatively towards Ray Tracing or image reconstruction.
I just took the chance of a jibe in retort, and the response from pro AMD folk was more in the name of mindshare and fantacism. Still I guess the midshare and fantacism is more prominent concerning AMD as the Nvidia positive people didn't become abusive with what they wrote - but still met with vitriol.
Half a dozen of one tbh as always with these type of things. My fanaticism comment was unnecessary, but the mindshare part was valid.
People are entitled to have different opinions that's healthy. The problem comes when people can't accept someone else's opinion, even if it is wrong in their eyes - and there was definitely some of that when i gave my initial opinion.
Which I still stand by, but there will always be corner cases and examples where my opinion is wrong as discussed above.
So the OP still stands - if these 6800XT's are so good - why are they all on the shelf at OCUK?
As we know, from a gamers point of view there is no discernible difference you'll feel at your monitor - you just wont notice it without an fps counter - even then most games it's singular fps between the top end cards.
Must be that most people are under the Nvidia mindshare and fantacism spell?
I have no insight into stock levels and sales at OcuK or elsewhere. Looking at the financial records thread from results that have been publicly posted at Techpowerup, it appears that RDNA2 has been very well received.
I dunno, people going mad at some numbers that in the real world of gaming. Could you see the difference between an average of 110/123 or 195/215 - choose any res and any game.
Without an FPS meter and as long as the FPS are within a certain range I'm sure most of us couldn't tell the difference when the numbers are close enough.
