-
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.
Anyone planning to buy the RX 6900 XT, rather than RTX 3080?
- Thread starter g67575
- Start date
I don't know... I could be wrong, there *might* be some games where the performance is better.
It's certainly an optimistic prizing strategy, I think they will sell them though (they will be limited edition cards more or less), it seems that many are desperate to get any mid - high end GPU right now.
It's certainly an optimistic prizing strategy, I think they will sell them though (they will be limited edition cards more or less), it seems that many are desperate to get any mid - high end GPU right now.
DLSS is always relevant if the GPU utilization is reaching 100% / close to it, in games with DLSS off. I know it doesn't appeal to everyone, but it's a very easy way to boost performance, whilst keeping the benefits of a higher output resolution.
The only obvious drawback, is quite a lot of recently released games don't support it. There are still games that fully utilize a RTX 3090 at high resolutions, so anything that help to reduce the load on the GPU is an obvious benefit. If Flight Simulator (highly GPU intensive) had DLSS, I'm sure the RTX 3090 could handle it at high framerates, at 4K.
I notice many reviews seem to ignore DLSS, to try to give a fairer view of AMD and Nvidia GPUs. But, I don't think this gives a realistic view of performance for many games (when you compare many games at 4K, with DLSS most RTX 3000 series cards can generally hit 60 FPS or more at 4K, equivalent AMD cards often cannot). It does seem strange to me that some still debate the effectiveness of DLSS, I can only guess this is a case of "The Fox and the Grapes".
Having said that, perhaps AMD will be able to develop an equivalent technology to DLSS this year, at which point, I think the RX 6800 XT and RX 6900 will become a much more attractive choice. Although, there may be even better GPUs from AMD coming next year, so maybe not the best time to buy, with the supply situation as it is.
The only obvious drawback, is quite a lot of recently released games don't support it. There are still games that fully utilize a RTX 3090 at high resolutions, so anything that help to reduce the load on the GPU is an obvious benefit. If Flight Simulator (highly GPU intensive) had DLSS, I'm sure the RTX 3090 could handle it at high framerates, at 4K.
I notice many reviews seem to ignore DLSS, to try to give a fairer view of AMD and Nvidia GPUs. But, I don't think this gives a realistic view of performance for many games (when you compare many games at 4K, with DLSS most RTX 3000 series cards can generally hit 60 FPS or more at 4K, equivalent AMD cards often cannot). It does seem strange to me that some still debate the effectiveness of DLSS, I can only guess this is a case of "The Fox and the Grapes".
Having said that, perhaps AMD will be able to develop an equivalent technology to DLSS this year, at which point, I think the RX 6800 XT and RX 6900 will become a much more attractive choice. Although, there may be even better GPUs from AMD coming next year, so maybe not the best time to buy, with the supply situation as it is.
Last edited:
I think that to a large extent, AMD has failed to compete with Nvidia in the last couple of years (both on price and product availability), I don't know if it's something they could've avoided though, it might just be that sufficient production capacity at TSMC simply isn't enough to cope with demand. But, did they buy as much capacity as they could have?
For AMD though, their main focus seems to be on desktop and server CPUs (they appear to be prioritizing the 5nm node for CPUs next year, rather than for graphics cards according to their CPU and GPU roadmaps). This makes sense, as they have been making a lot of profit recently with their Zen 3 CPUs.
We still need AMD to try to bring GPU prices down, Nvidia certainty won't (in fact, they generally do the opposite). And Intel is too new to the GPU market to put a dent in Nvidia's success.
For AMD though, their main focus seems to be on desktop and server CPUs (they appear to be prioritizing the 5nm node for CPUs next year, rather than for graphics cards according to their CPU and GPU roadmaps). This makes sense, as they have been making a lot of profit recently with their Zen 3 CPUs.
We still need AMD to try to bring GPU prices down, Nvidia certainty won't (in fact, they generally do the opposite). And Intel is too new to the GPU market to put a dent in Nvidia's success.
Last edited:
Below 4K, and I think the internal resolution is a bit too low, but it depends on the size of your monitor how much visual difference this makes.
DLSS 4K Quality mode looks good. 4K DLSS Performance mode is fine too (Performance sets the internal resolution to 50% of your display resolution). In Watchdogs Legion, the antialiasing for quality mode is noticeably improved vs performance mode, at a distance. Performance mode was fine in most situations though, and the name describes it well.
Ultra performance is pretty crap though, I don't see the point in it tbh.
Obviously, if you have a RTX 3080, 4K DLSS performance mode probably won't be needed in most cases, 4K DLSS Quality mode should be achievable.
I've noticed that even DLSS quality mode doesn't look particularly good above 4K resolution (native DSR reduced aliasing more effectively), I imagine Nvidia will rectify this as people start using monitors above 4K resolution.
DLSS 4K Quality mode looks good. 4K DLSS Performance mode is fine too (Performance sets the internal resolution to 50% of your display resolution). In Watchdogs Legion, the antialiasing for quality mode is noticeably improved vs performance mode, at a distance. Performance mode was fine in most situations though, and the name describes it well.
Ultra performance is pretty crap though, I don't see the point in it tbh.
Obviously, if you have a RTX 3080, 4K DLSS performance mode probably won't be needed in most cases, 4K DLSS Quality mode should be achievable.
I've noticed that even DLSS quality mode doesn't look particularly good above 4K resolution (native DSR reduced aliasing more effectively), I imagine Nvidia will rectify this as people start using monitors above 4K resolution.
Last edited:
Takes like 5 seconds to Google lol. It's not that hard to believe is it?
This is pretty interesting, particularly the bit about keeping the internal and output resolution matched, so that you don't lose any quality vs with DLSS off, but also get improved antialiasing ( he says this was what DLSS was originally intended for).
I can see this becoming the preferred way to play in the next couple of years, if it can provide better quality than 4K native, or perhaps higher resolutions.
Yup, but DLSS Quality mode's internal resolution is ~66% of the output resolution (although it does a good job despite this). I'd like games to add support for DLSS with 100% internal resolution, as far as I know, most games don't have an option for this (yet). I think this would win over critics of DLSS too...
4K DLSS at 100% internal resolution should look more than good enough for small-mid size displays, perhaps even rivalling native resolutions with 16 million / 32 million pixels.
Last edited: