Anyone planning to buy the RX 6900 XT, rather than RTX 3080?

[g67575]

Similar performance level in most games. Which do you prefer and why?

 

[chroniclard]

Ones £650, if you can get it. One is £900, if you can get it.

Why would anyone outside a crazy AMD fan buy a 6900 XT if they are "similar performance level in most games".

 

[g67575]

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.

 

[Woodsta888]

Ones £650, if you can get it. One is £900, if you can get it.

Why would anyone outside a crazy AMD fan buy a 6900 XT if they are "similar performance level in most games".

Even a retailer scalped 3080 is £850 - you'd be one of the lucky F5'ers to get an FE at RRP. Not impossible but the 'right click at the right time'.

 

[g67575]

I just hope they are still producing Founders Edition RTX GPUs in a month or 2...

Doesn't sound like AMD will bother with RX 6000 series reference models beyond 2020.

 

[Steveno1091]

Yeah me 6900xt as it fits in my computer lol

 

[Kaapstad]

Asus Strix 6900 XT AIO with increased power limit, move over RTX 3090.

 

[zx128k]

6900xt is not a good card, it is within the OC range of the RTX 3080, just a 1-2% faster in DX12 games https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt/35.html. In RT or DX12u games like Control the 6900xt performs below the 3070 https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt/38.html. Best overall GPU is the rtx 3080, has a better performance balance between DX12 and DX12u games. Just be awhere that AMD ryzen 5000 series systems with SAM enabled will reduce the performance of the RTX 3080 and 3090. While at the same time boosting the 6800xt and 6900xt performacne. The issue is that nothing can fix the AMD 6000 series RT performance issues other than game optimizations that hide this deficiency.

Actual 3D performance gained from overclocking is 3.7%. https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt/40.html

RTX 3090 is still the fastest GPU you can buy. The rtx 3080 is faster than the 6900xt overall.

You need SAM and the ryzen 5000 OC with DDR4-3800 to boost performance. Without it a 6900xt has performance in rasterization within a few percent of a rtx 3080.

Compared to other cards at 4K, we see 6900 XT 2% in front of RTX 3080—an important win. AMD has achieved the unthinkable: The RX 6900 XT is twice as fast as last generation's RX 5700 XT and more energy efficient. NVIDIA's flagship, the RTX 3090, is still 8% faster. If we consider the Ryzen 5900X + SAM data point, that gap shrinks to 6%, which is still not enough to catch the RTX 3090. If you cherry pick results and exclude the games where NVIDIA wins, you could come to the conclusion that the RX 6900 XT matches or exceeds the RTX 3090, an assessment I'd still not agree with. While rasterization performance is no doubt important, everyone expects raytracing to be the next big thing, and here, it's just no contest. The RTX 3090 delivers much better raytracing performance than the RX 6900 XT; FPS is 45% higher in Metro Exodus and 78% (!) higher in Control. Two games is a small sample size, of course, and all raytracing games so far have been developed primarily on NVIDIA as that's the hardware developers had access to. This has changed now—the new consoles use the same AMD RDNA2 architecture as the RX 6900 XT, which means game developers will possibly optimize for this architecture first, fine-tuning the amount of raytracing to the hardware capabilities of the new consoles. Whether that can help make up for SO much of a performance difference nobody knows—guess we'll know more in a year or so. NVIDIA also has DLSS, which improves performance through upscaling with minimal loss in image quality, although AMD is working on a competitor but has no updates on that yet (we asked).

Some recent leaks got people all hyped up because AMD raised the overclocking limit on RX 6900 XT to 3 GHz. Firstly, I think people should rather ask why there is an artificial limit. My manual overclocking topped out at the 2.8 GHz "maximum clock" set in Radeon Settings, which translated into an actual clock frequency of 2434 MHz and is pretty similar to the RX 6800 and RX 6800 XT. What's holding the card back is the power limit, which I had to raise before I saw any gains at all. Even at its maximum, the power limit is not high enough; custom design RX 6800 XT cards with a higher power limit are able to achieve very similar performance results. The watercooled ASUS RX 6800 XT STRIX OC even ran 4.5% faster than the RX 6900 XT—both after manual overclocking to the max.

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt/41.html

AMD has set an MSRP of $999 for the RX 6900 XT, which is a lot of money and new territory for AMD. The RX 5700 XT launched at $400, and the Radeon VII at $700. No doubt, AMD looked at NVIDIA's pricing and thought that with the RX 6900 XT faster than the RTX 3080, it is definitely worth more than $700; and with the RTX 3090, which can't be caught, at $1500, they made it $999, a nice three-figure number. If the market were normal, I'd be unsure about how feasible this price point would be. The RTX 3080 is very similar in rasterization performance, better in raytracing, and runs a bit louder due to higher power draw, all for $300 less—most people would probably go for it. The RTX 3090, on the other hand, offers only minimal gains over RTX 3080, but screams "over the top" due to how NVIDIA positions it as the TITAN replacement—the RX 6900 XT is different. When comparing specification sheets, it looks like a small upgrade because most specifications are identical. I'm also not sure if I would be willing to spend an additional $350 over the RX 6800 XT for roughly 10% higher performance. In all fairness, I absolutely wouldn't spend +$800 for the RTX 3090 over the RTX 3080, either.

So a stock 3080 FE is 2% slower in rasterization but massively faster in RT games. On balance the RTX 3080 is the better card. Remember this is RTX 3080 FE vs the 6900xt. The RTX 3090 FE is the fastest GPU money can buy.

 

[Kaapstad]

6900xt is not a good card, it is within the OC range of the RTX 3080, just a 1-2% faster in DX12 games https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt/35.html. In RT or DX12u games like Control the 6900xt performs below the 3070 https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt/38.html. Best overall GPU is the rtx 3080, has a better performance balance between DX12 and DX12u games. Just be awhere that AMD ryzen 5000 series systems with SAM enabled will reduce the performance of the RTX 3080 and 3090. While at the same time boosting the 6800xt and 6900xt performacne. The issue is that nothing can fix the AMD 6000 series RT performance issues other than game optimizations that hide this deficiency.

Actual 3D performance gained from overclocking is 3.7%. https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt/40.html

RTX 3090 is still the fastest GPU you can buy. The rtx 3080 is faster than the 6900xt overall.

The problem with the reference 6900 XT when overclocking is the power limit and power consumption or rather lack of it compared to the 6800 XT for example.

This should change with the arrival of AIB partner cards like the Asus 6900 XT Strix which will be an absolute beast if their 6800 XT is anything to go by.

 

[zx128k]

The problem with the reference 6900 XT when overclocking is the power limit and power consumption or rather lack of it compared to the 6800 XT for example.

This should change with the arrival of AIB partner cards like the Asus 6900 XT Strix which will be an absolute beast if their 6800 XT is anything to go by.

Its 3080 FE/3090 FE vs 6900xt. If the Asus rog strix 3080 gaming oc had have been used then the 6900xt would have been slower. Note overclocking gives little performance. AIO version of the 6800xt was not a powerhouse for overclocking.

The sapphire 6800xt version has an actual 3D performance gained from overclocking is 5.5%. https://www.techpowerup.com/review/sapphire-radeon-rx-6800-xt-nitro-plus/38.html
Asus water cooled version, this increases to an actual 3D performance gained from overclocking is 10.9%. https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asus-radeon-rx-6800-xt-strix-oc-lc-liquid-cooled/38.html
The amd 6800xt version has an actual 3D performance gained from overclocking is 9.1%. https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6800-xt/40.html

So maxing out the power slider on the 6800xt and water cooling it gives 1.8% more performance over the stock AMD version. With a small affect on RT performance.

So yeah I think this is all most people will get out of the 6900xt. Also overclocking does not affect the real performance issues in DX12u enough to make any difference. Also overclocking wont create a version of DLSS any time soon. Its better performance wise to get a Ryzen 5000 system and 3800MT/s RAM CL14 and use SAM.

 

[Grim5]

The problem with the reference 6900 XT when overclocking is the power limit and power consumption or rather lack of it compared to the 6800 XT for example.

This should change with the arrival of AIB partner cards like the Asus 6900 XT Strix which will be an absolute beast if their 6800 XT is anything to go by.

interesting graphs, others have shown transient spikes nearing rtx3090 levels and their psu hitting over current protection limits with amd's recommended 850w spec
we're at the point where reporting average or a peak from afterburner isnt enough - using those tpu graphs you'd be forgiven for thinking you can get away with a 650w psu

knowing asus, their 6900xt strix lc will cost as much as an rtx3090 so pick your poison

 

[Kaapstad]

Its 3080 FE/3090 FE vs 6900xt. If the Asus rog strix 3080 gaming oc had have been used then the 6900xt would have been slower. Note overclocking gives little performance. AIO version of the 6800xt was not a powerhouse for overclocking.

The sapphire 6800xt version has an actual 3D performance gained from overclocking is 5.5%. https://www.techpowerup.com/review/sapphire-radeon-rx-6800-xt-nitro-plus/38.html
Asus water cooled version, this increases to an actual 3D performance gained from overclocking is 10.9%. https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asus-radeon-rx-6800-xt-strix-oc-lc-liquid-cooled/38.html
The amd 6800xt version has an actual 3D performance gained from overclocking is 9.1%. https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6800-xt/40.html

So maxing out the power slider on the 6800xt and water cooling it gives 1.8% more performance over the stock AMD version. With a small affect on RT performance.

So yeah I think this is all most people will get out of the 6900xt. Also overclocking does not affect the real performance issues in DX12u enough to make any difference. Also overclocking wont create a version of DLSS any time soon. Its better performance wise to get a Ryzen 5000 system and 3800MT/s RAM CL14 and use SAM.

The point is Asus have managed to get very good performance out of their Strix 6800 XT LC, what they can do with that they can repeat with the 6900 XT.

As to software, most of the problems ATM will be sorted or improved over time, remember this is AMDs first go at Ray Tracing and IIRC Turing was also pretty bad to start with.

I am not biased toward AMD either as I am typing this using one of my RTX 3090s.

 

[Kaapstad]

interesting graphs, others have shown transient spikes nearing rtx3090 levels and their psu hitting over current protection limits with amd's recommended 850w spec
we're at the point where reporting average or a peak from afterburner isnt enough - using those tpu graphs you'd be forgiven for thinking you can get away with a 650w psu

knowing asus, their 6900xt strix lc will cost as much as an rtx3090 so pick your poison

I would never use anything less than a 1000W PSU with any of the latest high end GPUs from either vendor, I do agree that some spikes in power consumption are just not shown in graphs.

PSUs are one of the cheapest parts of a PC so why take chances when it is easy to use a bit of overkill/safety headroom.

 

[EastCoastHandle]

interesting graphs, others have shown transient spikes nearing rtx3090 levels and their psu hitting over current protection limits with amd's recommended 850w spec
we're at the point where reporting average or a peak from afterburner isnt enough - using those tpu graphs you'd be forgiven for thinking you can get away with a 650w psu

knowing asus, their 6900xt strix lc will cost as much as an rtx3090 so pick your poison

Out the box 6900xt is capped at 250Watts. For whatever reason. You have to manually increase power limit/OC to get it to 300 watts with that reference design.

With AIB's that will not be the case. The rumored Unicorn Toxic variant is said to be on the way from Sapphire. I will believe that when I see that. If it is true it should trounce the 3090 OC'd.

But we will see.

 

[zx128k]

The point is Asus have managed to get very good performance out of their Strix 6800 XT LC, what they can do with that they can repeat with the 6900 XT.

As to software, most of the problems ATM will be sorted or improved over time, remember this is AMDs first go at Ray Tracing and IIRC Turing was also pretty bad to start with.

I am not biased toward AMD either as I am typing this using one of my RTX 3090s.

The best thing about RTX 3080/3090 is that when you watercool it power draw drops.

The performance of a watercooled 3080/3090 is massive. Time spy graphics 22.6k 4:31 extreme 4:43 12k approx for the 3090

They are talking about the 6900xt getting 18.1k stock. https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt-review,25.html or close performance wise with a RTX 3080 like the Asus rog strix 3080 gaming OC. https://static.tweaktown.com/conten...x-geforce-rtx-3080-oc-edition-review_full.png 18.3k

The reason the power limit is locked on th 6900xt to 250 watts is the high temps because the fan curve is set to be more quite. At stock there are hot spots of 95°C. Average 78°C or 81c. Temps dont change when overclocking, even if the power limit increases. https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt/33.html
https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt-review,6.html

Power is approx 320 watts https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt/31.html

The card is designed to give better performance at the same power draw as the 6800xt which means the 6800xt overclocks better and gets more performance than the 6900xt.

What's REALLY surprising here is that the ASUS STRIX 6800 XT at maximum OC is significantly faster than the AMD RX 6900 XT at maximum OC. It looks as though the AMD power limit is still too low after the manual increase, so the card can't clock as high as the ASUS card, which has a higher power limit.

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt/40.html

Other sites report poor overclocking. here 2% more performance.

https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt-review,31.html

Also you get more performance when the card is cool. So a short benchmark give good results but then as the card heats up frequency drops.

What's also important for testing is that we made sure to heat up all our cards properly before recording results. If you take a look at the first chart on page 32, you'll see that the cool RX 6900 XT starts out at 2393 MHz, but clocks drop quickly as the card heats up, down to 2293 MHz steady state—100 MHz lower, or 4%. When testing integrated benchmarks, there is no way to preheat the card, so results will be higher. These tests are quite short, too—the card will never reach maximum temperature and won't show the real performance level you'll experience while playing the game for more than five minutes.

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt/41.html

This is a review of a 6900xt overclocked with a power limit set to maximum pulling 343 watts. This is higher than the 3080 FE.
https://www.kitguru.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/OC5.png

Results here,
https://www.kitguru.net/components/graphic-cards/dominic-moass/amd-rx-6900-xt-review/32/

This overclock resulted in performance gains of between 5-6% in the games we re-tested at 4K

 

[Kaapstad]

The best thing about RTX 3080/3090 is that when you watercool it power draw drops.

The performance of a watercooled 3080/3090 is massive. Time spy graphics 22.6k 4:31 extreme 4:43 12k approx for the 3090

They are talking about the 6900xt getting 18.1k stock. https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt-review,25.html or close performance wise with a RTX 3080 like the Asus rog strix 3080 gaming OC. https://static.tweaktown.com/conten...x-geforce-rtx-3080-oc-edition-review_full.png 18.3k

The reason the power limit is locked on th 6900xt to 250 watts is the high temps because the fan curve is set to be more quite. At stock there are hot spots of 95°C. Average 78°C or 81c. Temps dont change when overclocking, even if the power limit increases. https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt/33.html
https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt-review,6.html

Power is approx 320 watts https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt/31.html

The card is designed to give better performance at the same power draw as the 6800xt which means the 6800xt overclocks better and gets more performance than the 6900xt.



https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt/40.html

Other sites report poor overclocking. here 2% more performance.

https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt-review,31.html

Also you get more performance when the card is cool. So a short benchmark give good results but then as the card heats up frequency drops.

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt/41.html

This is a review of a 6900xt overclocked with a power limit set to maximum pulling 343 watts. This is higher than the 3080 FE.
https://www.kitguru.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/OC5.png

Results here,
https://www.kitguru.net/components/graphic-cards/dominic-moass/amd-rx-6900-xt-review/32/

You are missing the point.

AIB partners = better cooling, higher power draw, better performance.

Something like an Asus Strix 6900 XT LC will be quite a handful for a 3090.

 

[Rroff]

I would never use anything less than a 1000W PSU with any of the latest high end GPUs from either vendor, I do agree that some spikes in power consumption are just not shown in graphs.

PSUs are one of the cheapest parts of a PC so why take chances when it is easy to use a bit of overkill/safety headroom.

I have a power monitor integrated inline with my setup (Zalman jobbie I can't remember the model of) it only updates at 2Hz though (500ms intervals) but shows some transient spikes with my 3070FE well above what I was seeing with my GTX1070 - but hard to get a proper figure on them or what effect they have in terms of PSU requirements.

 

[chroniclard]

Even if the AIB cards are significantly faster they are still getting trounced at 4K. They would need a ball park 15-20%(or more) performance increase to compete at 4K. Albeit this seems quite game specific and some games the AMD cards do perform exceedingly well.

 

[zx128k]

You are missing the point.

AIB partners = better cooling, higher power draw, better performance.

Something like an Asus Strix 6900 XT LC will be quite a handful for a 3090.

I already posted that for the 6800xt AMD got 9% and custom water cooled got 1% more. The 6900xt is designed to have better performance within the same power budget as the 6800xt. So its expected that the 6800xt max oc will be faster than the 6900xt max oc.

 

[eeii]

6900xt and water block bring it on with a cheeky custom bios.