• 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 RX6000 vs Nvidia Ampere performance benchmarks (from AMD's website and compiled by Redditor)

all i can say is
noice.jpg
 
Did you check footnotes 5/6/7?

did you?

Of course *i*
did, and it doesnt answer my question. they are footnotes on the hardware configurations. Doesnt tell me how many runs, doesnt tell me if the numbers are lows, averages or highs. Doesnt tell me if the AMD numbers even represent the same results as the nvidia numbers. It tells me nothing.

  1. Testing done by AMD performance labs October 18 2020 on RX 6900 XT (20.45-201013n driver) , RTX 3080 (456.71 driver), AMD Ryzen 9 5900X (3.70GHz) CPU, 16GB DDR4-3200MHz, Engineering AM4 motherboard, Win10 Pro 64. Following games were tested at 4K with each cards best API : Battlefield V DX11 Ultra, Borderlands 3 best API Badass, Call of Duty: MW DX12 Ultra, Division 2 DX12 Ultra, Doom Eternal Vulkan Ultra Nightmare, Forza DX12 Ultra, Gears 5 DX12 Ultra, Resident Evil 3 best API Ultra, and Shadow of the Tomb Raider DX12 Highest, Wolfenstein: Young Blood Vulkan Mein Leben. AMD Smart Access Memory and Rage Mode were enabled. Performance may vary. RX-567
  2. Testing done by AMD performance labs October 18 2020 on RX 6800 XT (20.45-201013n driver) , RTX 3080 (456.71 driver), AMD Ryzen 9 5900X (3.70GHz) CPU, 16GB DDR4-3200MHz, Engineering AM4 motherboard, Win10 Pro 64. Following games were tested at 4k at max settings: Borderlands 3, best API Ultra; Doom Eternal, Vulkan Ultra Nightmare; Forza Horizon 4, DX 12 Ultra; Gears 5, DX12 Ultra; Hitman 2, DX12 Ultra; Resident Evil 3, best API, Ultra; Wolfenstein: Young Blood, Vulkan Mein Leben. AMD Smart Access Memory and Rage Mode were enabled. Performance may vary. RX-559
  3. Testing done by AMD performance labs October 18 2020 on RTX 2080 Ti (456.71 driver), RX 6800 (20.45-201013n driver) with AMD Smart Access Memory enabled, AMD Ryzen 9 5900X (3.70GHz) CPU, 16GB DDR4-3200MHz, Engineering AM4 motherboard, Win10 Pro 64. Following games were tested at 4K with each cards best API : Battlefield V Ultra, Borderlands 3 DX12 Ultra, Call of Duty: MW DX12 Ultra, Division 2 DX12 Ultra, Doom Eternal Vulkan Ultra Nightmare, Forza DX12 Ultra, Gears 5 DX12 Ultra, Resident Evil 3 DX11 Ultra, and Shadow of the Tomb Raider DX12 Highest, Wolfenstein: Young Blood Vulkan Mein Leben. Performance may vary. RX-555

well?

..and compare them with settings shown in panel results

So again your response to me asking why nobody else was questioning the numbers, is for me to go look up the nvidia numbers shown. That's no an answer it is? And what do i compare AMD's numbers to?

If you're hairsplitting atleast do it correctly :)

If you're going to accuse me of hairsplitting, at least learn what it means first.

1) Are those numbers averages or highs ('up to' sure sounds like highs)
2) If they are highs then what are the real averages? Are they significantly different? You'd have thought that would be rather important information (well i do, but it's 'hairsplitting' apparently) BUT who knows, because there no information on it.

Lack of information. Wanting that clarified is not hairsplitting, not any anyone's dictionary other than your own.

Btw you completely ignored my advice to cross-reference geforce numbers shown by AMD.

Give me some good advice and i'll listen. the 'advice' you've offered so far is nonsense and not an answer to my question in any way.

As for my position...

Not interested in your position, you've made your 'position' pretty clear with your crap advice and dodging of questions. I'm interested in facts, not irrelevant tangents.
 
Last edited:
According to the benchmarks from AMD the 6800XT is around 4% faster than a 3080 on average.

DLSS would add an extra performance on top for the 3080s, yes I'm away AMD is developing something similar.

I played Watch Dogs Legion with DLSS "Quality" and let me tell you, vs native 4k, no noticeable difference.
 
did you?



So again your response to me asking why nobody else was questioning the numbers, is for me to go look them up myself. That's no an answer it is?



If you're going to accuse me of hairsplitting, at least learn what it means first.



Give me some good advice and i'll listen. the 'advice' you've offered so far is nonsense and not an answer to my question.



Not interested in your position, you've made your 'position' pretty clear with your crap advice and dodging of questions.

Footnote 5/6 rage mode on
Footnote 7 rage mode not on
Panel data: no mention of rage mode
Rx6800 results should match

Improper hairsplitting is trying to figure out which of the 2 results in +/- 3% range is max fps in absence of definitions and then blatantly ignoring footnotes ?

I can't argue BS anymore..
 
Footnote 5/6 rage mode on
Footnote 7 rage mode not on
Panel data: no mention of rage mode
Rx6800 results should match

Improper hairsplitting is trying to figure out which of the 2 results in +/- 3% range is max fps in absence of definitions and then blatantly ignoring footnotes ?

What does rage mode have to do with anything? Again, i ask what the numbers mean and you try to tell me to look at a footnote because it mentions rage mode? Not an answer. You are clearing unwilling to answer or don't understand the question. Which would just be hilarious.

I can't argue BS anymore..

Answer my question and stop with your BS then: what do the AMD numbers mean? What are they Nabloperator? Not your nonsense 'common sense', tell me, verifiably, what they mean. No more nonsense, answer my question.
 
Last edited:
What does rage mode have to do with it?

Ok
Rage mode is a preset overclocking profile..real world performance impact seems to be a placebo atm with low single digit perf gains shown that may not be statistically significant..

So the 6800xt/6900xt were tested twice once with rage mode on and then with rage mode off.. so there are 2 different datasets being used for these cards while the 6800 was tested only once with rage mode off

Anyhow the above discussion is like lawyer speak because the difference between the 2 datasets is so low that it can be ignored, rather than trying to figure out which one is maximum?
 
What does rage mode have to do with anything? Again, i ask what the numbers mean and you try to tell me to look at a footnote because it mentions rage mode? Not an answer. You are clearing unwilling to answer or don't understand the question. Which would just be hilarious.

Answer my question and stop with your BS then: what do the AMD numbers mean? What are they Nabloperator? Not your nonsense 'common sense', tell me, verifiably, what they mean. No more nonsense, answer my question.

Not sure why you are trying to make a mountain out of a molehill. Most of the games tested have builtin benchmarks so they will be using them and showing the average fps. Why on earth would AMD show the high values for their cards and the average for the Nvidia cards? They would be crucified in the reviews if the numbers were nowhere near the ones shown.

If AMD were going to fake anything they would have leaked the results much earlier to stop the 3080 hype dead when it was announced.
 
Not sure why you are trying to make a mountain out of a molehill. Most of the games tested have builtin benchmarks so they will be using them and showing the average fps. Why on earth would AMD show the high values for their cards and the average for the Nvidia cards? They would be crucified in the reviews if the numbers were nowhere near the ones shown.

If AMD were going to fake anything they would have leaked the results much earlier to stop the 3080 hype dead when it was announced.
I wonder if he did the same when Nvidia puts out their claims like X times better in ray tracing with Turing and all their crap.
Just wait for reviews Jesus.:rolleyes:
 
Ok
Rage mode is a preset overclocking profile..real world performance impact seems to be a placebo atm with low single digit perf gains shown that may not be statistically significant..

So the 6800xt/6900xt were tested twice once with rage mode on and then with rage mode off.. so there are 2 different datasets being used for these cards while the 6800 was tested only once with rage mode off

Anyhow the above discussion is like lawyer speak because the difference between the 2 datasets is so low that it can be ignored, rather than trying to figure out which one is maximum?

I'm not trying to figure out the difference between the two sets, i'm assuming they are the same thing - both 'up to'. In this backwards arse thread, assuming 'up to' to mean 'max' or some equivalent of, isn't common sense. In which case, common sense must mean 'up to' equals 'average', I guess. Or, the 'max of x numbers of average runs' even though there's no statement supporting that assumption.

fs123 said:
Not sure why you are trying to make a mountain out of a molehill. Most of the games tested have builtin benchmarks so they will be using them and showing the average fps. Why on earth would AMD show the high values for their cards and the average for the Nvidia cards? They would be crucified in the reviews if the numbers were nowhere near the ones shown.

Questioning the lack of clarification is not making a mountain out of a molehill. The rest of that, strawman. I havent said what the numbers are. I said there's was nothing telling me what they were, and i dont understand why you lot are just accepting them. No information on the numbers, number of runs ('up to' means the max of average figures from 3 runs remember, common sense so i'm told), nothing. We cant question ambiguous figures from a manufacturer now?

Nablaooperator said:
Isn't that also called hairsplitting?
LOL. no it isn't. That's not what it means at all. Oh dear.

Maintain out of a molehole = exaggerating the importantance of a trivial matter. Eg, 'elbows are too pointy'
hairsplitting = making unnecessary distinctions. 'it's not duck egg blue, it's light teal'

Hilarious.


I wonder if he did the same when Nvidia puts out their claims like X times better in ray tracing with Turing and all their crap.
Just wait for reviews Jesus.:rolleyes:

I never said the numbers were a lie, i asked why nobody else was worried that there is a complete lack of information on those numbers. hardware configs are there, that's all great, but nothing on the numbers. And nobody else was talking about it. that is weird. As for wait for the reviews, well, join the club son. That's what i said. The only reason i keep stating my position is because i keep getting misdirections and strawman back as answers.

As for my view on RT, i said from the beginning i wasnt interested in it. I said it wasnt fast enough for me to be interested.

me (aug 2019) said:
A huge chunk of silicon indeed. Nvidia could have dropped RTX and turning would have been smaller (around 40% as I recall), cheaper to manufacture and cheaper to buy .... who am I kidding, this is nVidia we are talking about - it wouldn't have been any cheaper to buy. Anyway, the point is given the state of RTX and the cost of the silicon to run RTX, nVidia had the option to not bundle it and not pass those costs on to the consumer. They didn't do that, instead consumers got to pay a 'fair price' for a big lump of silicon that, in the minds of all those people who aren't interested in RTX , is a complete waste of transistors. Hmm.

I have always treated any numbers provided by manufacturers the way they should be treated - with a bag of salt on standby.

Stop trying to pretend there's some nvidia-related motive here. There isnt one.
 
Last edited:
LOL. no it isn't. That's not what it means at all. Oh dear.

Maintain out of a molehole = exaggerating the importantance of a trivial matter. Eg, 'elbows are too pointy'
hairsplitting = making unnecessary distinctions. 'it's not duck egg blue, it's light teal'

Lol.. you tend to interpret language out of context.. just check out the kind of overfine distinction you made out of context again
 
I assume AMD have posted average frame rates as that's standard practice, would be very odd to post maximums, as someone else pointed out, they'd be crucified come review time.

As for the 'up to' bit, I'm sure that's to include rage mode and their high end test rig, some legal reasons too I expect.

Nice to have some competition at the high end again :)
 
Has nobody answered his question yet?

:p

I assume AMD have posted average frame rates as that's standard practice, would be very odd to post maximums, as someone else pointed out, they'd be crucified come review time.

As for the 'up to' bit, I'm sure that's to include rage mode and their high end test rig, some legal reasons too I expect.

Nice to have some competition at the high end again :)
By far the most sensible assumption so far :)
 
Ok
Rage mode is a preset overclocking profile..real world performance impact seems to be a placebo atm with low single digit perf gains shown that may not be statistically significant..

So the 6800xt/6900xt were tested twice once with rage mode on and then with rage mode off.. so there are 2 different datasets being used for these cards while the 6800 was tested only once with rage mode off

Anyhow the above discussion is like lawyer speak because the difference between the 2 datasets is so low that it can be ignored, rather than trying to figure out which one is maximum?

Are you sure about that. Gamer's Nexus did a video stating AMD told them Rage mode is just a power increase like moving the slider for Nvidia cards in Afterburner. It does not change clocks.
 
Back
Top Bottom