Any news on 7800 xt?

[G J]

I'm wondering if there's going to be some strategic pivots regarding UE5 - if devs are delivering games that run at 720p with shaky framerates on consoles and exclude a huge amount of PC players, I suspect the sales figures for UE5 titles are going to be distinctly underwhelming.

I bet CDPR is wondering if sunsetting Red Engine was actually the right move.

Cut out the picture to save space. If the people with lower end / 8GB cards dont upgrade then there's going to be a massive chunk of the market they may not have access to and unless things change even the current mid range and some high end will have to upgrade if they want to maintain ultra/high settings in UE5 games.

The people with a fetish regarding this games great it makes my hardware struggle will have fun I guess.

 

[Nexus18]

I'm wondering if there's going to be some strategic pivots regarding UE5 - if devs are delivering games that run at 720p with shaky framerates on consoles and exclude a huge amount of PC players, I suspect the sales figures for UE5 titles are going to be distinctly underwhelming.

I bet CDPR is wondering if sunsetting Red Engine was actually the right move.

Well that's it ultimately, no one especially, people paying ££££ want to see their games struggling to hit 60 fps @ 1080p..... I simply won't touch or play those games let alone no chance I'm paying £40+ for them and I imagine a lot of gamers from both the console and pc platform will be the same so what will that mean for game sales?

The problem is people for the past 2-3 years have only been pointing the fingers at the hardware vendors for not providing better hardware when a game launches and runs like ****, mostly at nvidia and mostly for vram..... yet here we are, no amount of vram in the world is going to save you from downright **** optimisation. The only ones who can get better from our hardware are the game devs so people should be pointing the fingers at devs/publishers, it's clear that they are now relying on upscaling and frame gen to be their "optimisation".

I'm hoping this is purely just with UE 5 being new, devs will require some time to find out how to get the best from it but given the comments around "ue 5 games are made with upscaling and fake frame gen in mind", I'm not hopeful

 

[thesnowdog1971]

Bit more than I thought, ive seen others around 11%, but if the 7800XT is going to sit between 6800XT and 6950XT, i'll take the newer tech and efficiency.

As I said I looked at 6800/90/95XT and I'm glad I waited.

Choices for me would be 7800XT or go big and get 7900XT @ £700.

But we haven't seen any real benchmarks yet.

Yup, I'm looking at those same choices, too.

I'm guessing that the cheapest that I'll be able to get a 7800XT for will be around £500 and a 7900XT for £700.

I'm building a new VR PC with a maximum budget of £1200 in October or November and minus the GPU I'm going to be spending around £950.

I'll hopefully have around £300 worth of vouchers for a well known online retailer who shall remain nameless, so that leaves me with £550 to spend on the GPU.

I was originally planning on getting the GPU later next year in April or May, a 7900XT, but I'm VERY tempted to get it all this year and go for a 7800XT instead.

I guess I'll wait for reviews and stuff next month.

 

[Raumarik]

7800XT has my attention, I've been sitting on the fence about the 7900 XT/XTX and 4080 for a while now not pulling the trigger on any of them for various reasons - temps, power draw, performance and price but also size (I want to move to ITX eventually).

This seems like it may be less powerful but give options, definately waiting to see some Hardware unbox and GN reviews.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Looking at TPU the RX6800XT has 10% more TFLOPS than the RX7800XT, but the RX7800XT has 21% more memory bandwidth. So I expect in less memory intensive games the RX6800XT might push ahead, but in other situations the RX7800XT should win.

I wonder if this will be an HD6870/HD5870 situation?

 

[GhostDog1981]

Not that you directed that at me or that you probably care but I'm bored so you can have my answer.

I probably will be, I've been using a 570 4GB that was meant as an emergency, temporary, replacement for 3 years now and i don't relish the idea of waiting another 2-3 in the hope that sanity will return to the graphics card market.

I was going to get a 6800/900/950XT but the idea of buying a previous gen card this close to its successor being launched was putting me off and the idea of paying more than £600 for a half decent 4070 is pretty insulting to me, especially with how gimped the memory subsystem is on that, the features they're trying to sell me that i have no interest in (RT/upscaling), and their less than stellar support of Linux.

If the 7800XT's MSRP is $499 I'm hoping I'll be able to get a decent AIB card with three fans and a higher power limit for under £600.

Are you not worried about lack of grunt at 4k with the 7800XT?

 

[Twinz]

I recently pulled the 4080 off my back-up rig's upgrade list because I experienced what seemed to be a memory bandwidth limitation while building a VR sim rig for someone.

On an HP Reverb G2, in iRacing, the 4080 could max all settings except for one. And that was AA.

It straight up hit a brick wall at max AA. With AA set to medium (4X IIRC?) it was locked at 90FPS with no discernable dips. -felt like it had loads of headroom. That last AA setting was just a bridge too far though. It was stuck around 70FPS. Frametime consistency was still surprisingly good, so I could drive, but it was certainly a sub-optimal experience.

The card just felt like it had a LOT more GPU grunt than the memory bus could handle.

 

[Ross Thomson]

Sure, but most people on an enthusiast forum will be on 1440p minimum.

why would they be. Not everyone can afford or want more pixels. Not every one will have a high enough card to power 1440p

 

[Apex]

why would they be. Not everyone can afford or want more pixels. Not every one will have a high enough card to power 1440p

Why? because they're enthusiasts. If you wanted to run a poll at what resolution people game at the large majority will be 1440p and above.

 

[JJimmyJ]

Hmm, currently on a 3060ti fe, got during the pandemic, so managed to sell my vega 56 for more than I bought it for.
I only have a 650w psu, so love the low wattage and design of the 3060ti, but concerned about longevity. Looking at graphs etc, 7800xt looks about 30% better? Seems my only viable option if I want to upgrade

 

[Troezar]

Hmm, currently on a 3060ti fe, got during the pandemic, so managed to sell my vega 56 for more than I bought it for.
I only have a 650w psu, so love the low wattage and design of the 3060ti, but concerned about longevity. Looking at graphs etc, 7800xt looks about 30% better? Seems my only viable option if I want to upgrade

Yes I went from the 3060Ti to a 6950XT but for your case I'd say the 7800XT is a better option.

 

[Murphy]

TBH, I've found DLSS fairly useful. While I'd agree with most people saying more performance at said price point to not need to upscale would be my desired choice, DLSS has been fairly good for me at 1080p tbh. Works well enough in the titles i use it in, and DLAA is better than other AA types that most games have. Is it worth the premium they charge? **** no. But it's definitely better than I expected, and when I've compared it to FSR it did have an edge IMO. Though the gap may well close at higher resolutions.

Yea that's why i specifically said upscaling and not DLSS, the DLAA part of DLSS is better than most other methods of AA from what i can tell but for me the upscaling would be something I'd try to avoid until it's absolutely necessary in the future if, as I've done in the past, i bought a game only to discover that it runs like dog doo-doo because i over (or is it under) estimated the games minimum requirements.

To me it's a kind of future proofing, if there's such a thing, in that i may use it in the future so it's a nice to have I'm not going to pay £100+ for something i may never use.

RT however, it's pretty for screenshots . About it in my experience on my 3060ti, as performance hit is generally too big to use. Also not worth the premium they charge at, at least not for anything that can't run it well enough (YMMV).

Agreed, it makes more sense if you've got the performance (and money) to throw at it but the lower down the stacks you go the less sense it makes outside of looking at the pretty only to turn it off to play the game.

Plus for me games are about much more than how nice they look.

Are you not worried about lack of grunt at 4k with the 7800XT?

LOL, i probably wouldn't go 4k even if i had the money, which i don't.

Nah I'll be using it for 1440p, the amount improvement in image quality of 4k just isn't worth the sizeable increased cost IMO.

 

[KompuKare]

I'm wondering if there's going to be some strategic pivots regarding UE5 - if devs are delivering games that run at 720p with shaky framerates on consoles and exclude a huge amount of PC players, I suspect the sales figures for UE5 titles are going to be distinctly underwhelming.

I bet CDPR is wondering if sunsetting Red Engine was actually the right move.

Maybe, but a far more pertinent question IMO is: if CD Protect Red a studio with game budgets in the 100s of millions have decided to stop doing their own engines, what will smaller studies do?

UE5 may indeed be a one size fits all, but did studios it is not just not having to write their own engine but rather that UE5 is far far easier to use than most internal tools. It even lets you edit stuff in the engine.

The good news for modders is that UE5 should make mods easier. The is a good reason why on Nexus mods, the Bethesda games which come with creation kits have so many more mods than anything else. Or even, just look at how few mods there are for The Witcher 3 and most of those are the kind of thing you can do without a mod creation kit (texture mods etc.) whereas for Bethesda games there are far more full quest mods and so on.

 

[ALXAndy]

Wait... AMD's New GPUs are Actually Good?? or...

WINDOWS AT A HUGE DISCOUNT!SCDKEY Back to School Sale 25% code: vexWindows 10 pro ($15): https://biitt.ly/TFR1GWindows 11 pro($21): https://biitt.ly/U9jCZWin...

www.youtube.com

So broken down if you remove RT then the 7800XT is looking to be 17% faster in raster than the 6800XT. Yesterday I posted some benchmarks that showed the 6800XT as being 18% slower than the 6950XT. Which, if you want to be childish and laugh or not is as fast and sometimes faster than a 3090Ti. And as I said before, and it was laughed at (Nvidia market so well) the 3090Ti was launched because the 6950XT was faster than the 3090.

This is why I ignore RT as I have maintained, and concentrate solely on raster.

So for those saying "Same as the 6800XT for the same price" that is wrong also. The 6800XT RRP was $150 more.

So looking at all of the data? at $500, if it is indeed 17% faster in raster than the 6800XT and costs $150 less? then this is the best GPU to launch since Pascal. Also, as I eluded to before? this could be as fast as the 4070ti for $300 less.

 

[ALXAndy]

Bit more than I thought, ive seen others around 11%, but if the 7800XT is going to sit between 6800XT and 6950XT, i'll take the newer tech and efficiency.

As I said I looked at 6800/90/95XT and I'm glad I waited.

Choices for me would be 7800XT or go big and get 7900XT @ £700.

But we haven't seen any real benchmarks yet.

We have seen benchmarks. Whether they are true? is what we don't know. Seriously man, you should really deep dive into things more. The 6950XT was an absolute beast. It just released at completely the wrong time.

Any way, going back to it all? the 7800XT may well be as fast as the 6950XT, which will explain why they have launched it. The 7900XT is only 10-15% faster than a 6950XT. So if the 7800XT is the 6950XTs replacement (and on pascal and prior that was how it worked) they don't need to launch anything else in that bracket.

The reason why I am so obsessed with plain raster and plain res? is because that is how both AMD and Nvidia grade their GPUs whether people want to believe it or not. RT? DLSS? is all marketing and marketing as usual is often always poop.

 

[Twinz]

I will be shocked if 7800 XT is more than a single digit percentage increase over the 6800XT on average.

It's the price that makes the 7800XT a good generational improvement, not the performance. (At least the performance isn't impressive for the *name* they chose to put on the box.)

 

[ALXAndy]

I will be shocked if 7800 XT is more than a single digit percentage increase over the 6800XT on average.

It's the price that makes the 7800XT a good generational improvement, not the performance. (At least the performance isn't impressive for the *name* they chose to put on the box.)

If it is even 5% faster than the 6800XT in pure raster it is a win. Why? because it is $150 cheaper ! This was how GPU launches used to be. Generation over generation you would get a top end card, now in mid range, for a lot less.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Hmm, currently on a 3060ti fe, got during the pandemic, so managed to sell my vega 56 for more than I bought it for.
I only have a 650w psu, so love the low wattage and design of the 3060ti, but concerned about longevity. Looking at graphs etc, 7800xt looks about 30% better? Seems my only viable option if I want to upgrade

I am in a similar situation. If the RX7800XT matches the RX6800XT it's around 46% according to TPU:

https://tpucdn.com/review/asus-geforce-rtx-4060-ti-dual-oc/images/relative-performance-2560-1440.png

 

[Joxeon]

If it is even 5% faster than the 6800XT in pure raster it is a win. Why? because it is $150 cheaper ! This was how GPU launches used to be. Generation over generation you would get a top end card, now in mid range, for a lot less.

I think we still need some perspective here, $500 for previous gen 80 performance is still $100 more than previous gen 80 performance has usually cost, the biggest thing here is that you get 16gb VRAM but 8gb of VRAM is likely costing under $20 these days.

It looks good because of how bad Nvidia's offerings are but in a traditional sense this card isn't pulling up trees for its price / performance.

 

[ALXAndy]

I think we still need some perspective here, $500 for previous gen 80 performance is still $100 more than previous gen 80 performance has usually cost, the biggest thing here is that you get 16gb VRAM but 8gb of VRAM is likely costing under $20 these days.

It looks good because of how bad Nvidia's offerings are but in a traditional sense this card isn't pulling up trees for its price / performance.

AMD did not have a 8 card before big Navi. They had a 5700 and 5700XT, the latter being $400 or so.

The 5700XT barely scraped to a 1080ti level. To put it in perspective? the 6800XT was up there with the 3090 in pure raster terms. And yes, I have not mentioned the 6800 non XT because IMO it was a bum card and a crap move from AMD to sell more GPUs to miners.

BTW let me do some aloud thinking. And, downgrade expectations to nothing. So the 7800XT, let's say, is 5% SLOWER than the 6800XT. Well it costs $150 less. $650 vs $500. That is what? 20%? so to pull an Nvidia they could be charging the same money for it than the last card. Because at the lower end that is exactly what Nvidia have done.