I'm not in the beta myself but I can tell you from seeing it first hand that performance on an old ryzen 1600 paired with a RX 5700XT is more than fine at 1440p. So I think you golden
Last edited:
-
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 RDNA3 unveiling event
- Thread starter CAT-THE-FIFTH
- Start date
more info out
www.tomshardware.com
AMD RDNA 3 GPU Architecture Deep Dive: The Ryzen Moment for GPUs
Swimming with the next generation GPUs
Soldato
xtx is 20% faster for 11% more cost, xt aint selling.
Permabanned
If the 7800 XT releases, I expect it to be around par with the 6950 XT for 100 less than the 7900 XT making it also not a great deal. For those needing a GPU now, grab the Blac k Friday 6900XT from OCUK. I doubt the 6900XT will be topped any time soon for price right now. Yes RT is worse, but even I moved on from it and thought meh I don't really play games and think oh look amazing RT! even with it on.
It will, to those frustrated at missing out on the XTX and an irresistible dose of FOMO...too many people would rather settle for 2nd best rather than have some patience and wait an extra month or so to get what they really wanted.
It looks suspiciously like the 7900XT is a decoy product. If so, then I expect the 7800XT to be reasonable value, but less profitable for AMD. The 7900XT is then intended to make the more profitable 7900XT look like better value because users will compare 7900XTX to 7900XT, and 7900XT to 7800XT, avoiding the comparison of 7900XTX to 7800XT.
Soldato
I haven't checked exactly but the last time I poked into it AMD were making the same % on GPUs as Nvidia. Which IMO was a bit cynical, given they lack in features.
However the design of this leads me to believe it is WAY cheaper than anything Nvidia are doing, hence why they can knock them out much cheaper. This new design is a master stroke, meaning the only expensive thing on there is the main die, the rest is all way cheaper than last round.
It also looks to me like they are not trying to beat Nvidia at all with the paper launched cards. Technically it seems they could, but what is the point in making another £1600 GPU with the climate being the way it is? much better to have your Maxwell moment, and actually sell gaming cards to gamers rather than rebadged server hardware with a stupid price tag.
It's a decoy product as in it should have been a 7800XT for $700, now the 7800XT is going to be watered down to a 7700XT level card and be around the same performance as last gens top cards.
AMD are doing exactly the same thing as nvidia by putting out lower tier cards with higher end names, it's just that AMDs pricing isn't quite as daft.
Last edited:
Soldato
I don't think they are doing the same.
They could have released much bigger dies than this it would seem, but what is the point? I would strongly imagine they have now learned a lot from the 7000 CPU launch which was abysmal, and have realised it is time to just wind things down a bit and make them cheaper for people to buy.
Nvidia on the other hand totally tried that with the 12gb 4080. Which they have now named a 4070ti, which tbh? is still taking the pee. It shouldn't even be that. And they are going to totally over charge for that too.
If you look at tier stacking it is clear the 4070ti will be a country mile behind the 4080, which too is a country mile behind the 4090. I suppose AMD will be looking to fill those huge gaps at lower prices.
I am more interested to see how cheap they (AMD) can make the cards that people actually buy. Like the 7700XT and 7800XT. If they can make those perform like last gen 6800XT and 6900XT for half the price? they will be onto a winner. And I don't mean the fake RRP either, I mean the board partner prices that we will actually get.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Jun 2018
- Posts
- 2,827
I found these results intriguing for MW2.
As this is my game of interest. I am not inclined to make gpu purchases based on single player games because I am not competing against anyone to care what they are getting vs what I am getting. As long as the target minimums are above 60 fps at my resolution.
the 4070ti and 7800XT will be in the same ballpark on performance while costing £600-800, what upgrade do either of these offer someone like me who bought a 3080 for £649? A 10-15% bump in performance for a similar cost despite being on a more advanced node. Meanwhile those who bought a 6900XT or 3090 are getting 60% for the same price or + $100.
Only high end buyers or those prepared to pay a lot more money are getting an upgrade this generation.
Soldato
I would love to see the 7800XT at £500-£550 but I am sure it'll be more like £650 RRP and £700 actual.
£700 for 6900XT performance doesn't sound like a deal to me. Can already get that now for £650.
ASROCK 6900 XT NOW ONLY £689.99 (£649.99 FOR LOYAL FORUM MEMBERS)
So what? Is that some sort of defense? Just saying we seem to be spoiled now with stuff now having a 2 year warranty
forums.overclockers.co.uk
Last edited:
Soldato
£700 for 6900XT performance doesn't sound like a deal to me. Can already get that now for £650.
ASROCK 6900 XT NOW ONLY £689.99 (£649.99 FOR LOYAL FORUM MEMBERS)
So what? Is that some sort of defense? Just saying we seem to be spoiled now with stuff now having a 2 year warranty
1) We don't know what the performance will be exactly.
2) The 6900XT won't be in stock forever, especially at that price
3) the 7800XT hasn't even been announced yet so we have no idea how long it'll take to arrive.
100% this. I was expecting the 7800XT to be around 40% - 50% faster than a 6800XT and RTX 3080 in raster. To be fair I was hoping for 50% but figured 40% would be OK. So I was wrong and you were right, kudos to you on that one.
So the numbers for the 7900XT show it ~30% faster than a 6950XT which is ~15% faster than a 3080. So from those raster numbers alone the 7900XT is ~45% faster than the 3080 (or 6800 XT) and what the 7800XT should have been.
So the 7800XT they eventually release will be maybe (at best) 25% faster than a 6800 XT for a bit more money than the 6800 XT MSRP.
So as suspected AMD have moved the 7800XT up one tier and called it a 7900 XT. And will now make the 7800 the new 7800 XT. If Nvidia had priced the 4080 like it should be AMD would not be able to pull this ****. I have said for a long time AMD are not our friends and this leaves a sour taste, but still nowhere near as bitter as those 4080 prices and the joke 4080 12GB.
EDIT: I meant the 7800 XT would be better than 6800 XT by max 25% (not the 6950 XT).
Last edited:
Soldato
TBH I think the "4070Ti" or whatever Nvidia call it next week is merely a placeholder. Whatever it is and ends up as will strongly depend on how these AMD cards go. And how they actually perform, because right now it's all a bit vague. So until we see those numbers you can expect Nvidia to be ready to change pretty much anything.
The 4090, IIRC, was nowhere near what they could have done either, so you can fully expect a refresh of that with a Ti on the end for more money at some point too.
The 7800XT etc? are all a complete unknown right now. They may well be much cheaper than people expect them to be, depending on the die layout and main die size. And I think that is where AMD could really win this round, and get back a lot of market/mind share.
The 6900XT for £649 thread shows this very clearly. Lots of people are buying it, because it is right about the limit on what someone who actually games will pay. So the general buzz for being able to get that card theoretically for £550 because of the games has created a real buzz. IMO AMD are better targeting those sorts of customers than trying to get someone to cough two grand for a GPU.
It is expected, even to me (who now owns two 6000 series cards) that AMD cards should be cheaper. For the most part? because they have less features. Even I feel that way when handing over my cash for a GPU, as should any one else really. That said at the same time I am totally anti BS, so I just want a card to game on not trace rays with.
The 3080 at £649 was a rare event. I am quite aware of just how difficult that was to obtain, and I really just couldn't be arsed with camping on websites trying to find one. That said, the 3080 was a totally different kettle of fish being a Samsung el cheapo die. Which has been clearly demonstrated by the "because I got high" price tag on the 4090, and price points for GPUs below it.
If the past week has shown me anything? it is that AMD are willing to massively cut their prices. Not release a tank storage heater and then "manipulate" their target audience. If they keep that ideology up Nvidia will have no choice but to drop prices and lower their greedy profit margin down from 70%. Which will be good for everyone.
The 4090, IIRC, was nowhere near what they could have done either, so you can fully expect a refresh of that with a Ti on the end for more money at some point too.
The 7800XT etc? are all a complete unknown right now. They may well be much cheaper than people expect them to be, depending on the die layout and main die size. And I think that is where AMD could really win this round, and get back a lot of market/mind share.
The 6900XT for £649 thread shows this very clearly. Lots of people are buying it, because it is right about the limit on what someone who actually games will pay. So the general buzz for being able to get that card theoretically for £550 because of the games has created a real buzz. IMO AMD are better targeting those sorts of customers than trying to get someone to cough two grand for a GPU.
It is expected, even to me (who now owns two 6000 series cards) that AMD cards should be cheaper. For the most part? because they have less features. Even I feel that way when handing over my cash for a GPU, as should any one else really. That said at the same time I am totally anti BS, so I just want a card to game on not trace rays with.
The 3080 at £649 was a rare event. I am quite aware of just how difficult that was to obtain, and I really just couldn't be arsed with camping on websites trying to find one. That said, the 3080 was a totally different kettle of fish being a Samsung el cheapo die. Which has been clearly demonstrated by the "because I got high" price tag on the 4090, and price points for GPUs below it.
If the past week has shown me anything? it is that AMD are willing to massively cut their prices. Not release a tank storage heater and then "manipulate" their target audience. If they keep that ideology up Nvidia will have no choice but to drop prices and lower their greedy profit margin down from 70%. Which will be good for everyone.
Associate
Those AMD graphs hurt my poor brain. They may as well say 'It's a bit faster'.
Soldato
Yeah I wasn't impressed at all tbh. All a bit too cloak and dagger to me, and the 8k part made me pure cringe.
Caporegime
I would not pay too much attention to that Warzone benchmark he is using render resolution so it's not running at true 4k native.
I found these results intriguing for MW2.
As this is my game of interest. I am not inclined to make gpu purchases based on single player games because I am not competing against anyone to care what they are getting vs what I am getting. As long as the target minimums are above 60 fps at my resolution.
Here's my 4090-running stock, 4K max settings in Modern Warfare 2. This is true max settings btw, if you select the highest preset you are not truly running max.
