Graphics cards 2021 Benchmark

[muon]

This is clearly some kind of standardised/percentage measure. Even says under unit.

My guess is its the average percentage when scaling the performance to the best performing card for a particular game.

At 1080p the 6900XT likely wins most games and so is closest to 100. Whilst at 4k it is the 3090.

 

[DarkBahamut]

It would be very weird indeed to use a normalised scale like that with nothing actually normalised to a proper value.

 

[LtMatt]

This is clearly some kind of standardised/percentage measure. Even says under unit.

My guess is its the average percentage when scaling the performance to the best performing card for a particular game.

At 1080p the 6900XT likely wins most games and so is closest to 100. Whilst at 4k it is the 3090.

Well played, I was starting to lose faith in humanity.

 

[Grim5]

Pretty comprehensive list of benchmarks run by computer base on the fastest CPU (Ryzen 5000 series) and Motherboard PCI-E 4.0 platform (AM4).

Plenty of rasterization, memory utilisation tests and some RT benchmarks too. Something for everyone.

I'll link to a few results, more in the link below for you to peruse at your convenience.

1080P






1440P







2160P





Couple of things that stand out to me. Does anyone remember when it was proclaimed that the 3080 was faster than the 6900 XT at 4K? That aged badly.

Also worth noting that the benchmark clearly shows and comments on the fact that Big Navi scales well at 4K, instead it is the other GPUs that scale poorly below 4K.

Two common myths busted and put to bed.

Link: AMD Radeon & Nvidia GeForce im Benchmark-Vergleich 2021: Testergebnisse im Detail - ComputerBase

Good trolling

 

[Grim5]

The big issue RDNA2 still has is the lack of next gen performance. Poor ray tracing and no DLSS option.







Looking at the ray tracing benchmark on here we can see RDNA2 has ~50% the performance of Ampere. Not good when buying what is supposed to be a next gen card. It will be interesting to bench Metro Exodus Enhanced Edition.

Metro exodus developer: "there is no comparison, RTX3000 are in a different league for RT performance compared to RX6000 and Xbox/PS"

 

[heartburnron]

Metro exodus developer: "there is no comparison, RTX3000 are in a different league for RT performance compared to RX6000 and Xbox/PS"

Slightly misleading there Grim. Whilst I'm not disputing that AMD are some way behind Nvidia with raytracing, he was actually comparing the 3000 series to the consoles:

With regards to ray tracing specifically, how would you characterize the different capabilities of PlayStation 5 from Xbox Series X and both consoles from the newly released RTX 3000 Series PC graphics cards? Overall, should we expect a lot of next-gen games using ray tracing in your opinion?
What I can say for sure now is PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X currently run our code at about the same performance and resolution.
As for the NV 3000-series, they are not comparable, they are in different leagues in regards to RT performance. AMD’s hybrid raytracing approach is inherently different in capability, particularly for divergent rays. On the plus side, it is more flexible, and there are myriad (probably not discovered yet) approaches to tailor it to specific needs..

Good trolling though!

 

[ChocAndGray]

To be fair it's a fact that Nvidia cards are better than AMD's offerings with regards to raytracing.

For me though this is like Zen all over again. When AMD first launched it, it was promising but still below par, now look at Zen 3. I give it 2 years before AMD take the GPU crown too.

The 6900XT is the first time I've been tempted with an AMD card for some time.

It was difficult for me to leave intel but they are actually not comparable now, Intel actually is the budget option for me. The way AMD used to be.

But Nvidia is still king for graphics cards currently (just about). But they show some of the same signs as Intel, they get complacent and if they keep on it'll be too late....The 20 series really summed them up, what a terrible overpriced series of cards.

Although from what I've seen so far, I'm not that bothered about raytracing, the likes of Cyberpunk haven't really impressed me, and DLSS looks so soft to me.

If it was possible I might be tempted to sell the 3090, pocket the difference and get the 6900xt. But no chance of picking up stock. And by the time there is stock the 3090 will probably be worth what it would cost to buy a 6900xt so not worth it.

My ideal is selling the 3090 for what I paid and then buying a 6900xt at rrp.

 

[Gerard]

Slightly misleading there Grim. Whilst I'm not disputing that AMD are some way behind Nvidia with raytracing, he was actually comparing the 3000 series to the consoles:

With regards to ray tracing specifically, how would you characterize the different capabilities of PlayStation 5 from Xbox Series X and both consoles from the newly released RTX 3000 Series PC graphics cards? Overall, should we expect a lot of next-gen games using ray tracing in your opinion?
What I can say for sure now is PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X currently run our code at about the same performance and resolution.
As for the NV 3000-series, they are not comparable, they are in different leagues in regards to RT performance. AMD’s hybrid raytracing approach is inherently different in capability, particularly for divergent rays. On the plus side, it is more flexible, and there are myriad (probably not discovered yet) approaches to tailor it to specific needs..

Good trolling though!

That's his usual mantra, takes things out of context, or leaves bits out of the quote, or flat out lies and does a runner claiming it was in an article which he has no link for. Slightly sad to say the least

 

[Chuk_Chuk]

For me though this is like Zen all over again. When AMD first launched it, it was promising but still below par, now look at Zen 3. I give it 2 years before AMD take the GPU crown too.

.

Funny enough, similar to what happened with Intel, i think there was a rumour that AMD over estimated Nvidia performance increase for this generation. AMD didn't think they would be as competitve with Nvidia as they are now.

 

[4K8KW10]

AMD has had more resources for GPU development since 2016 when they had finished the development of the original Ryzen 1000.

About ray-tracing - AMD will not support ray-tracing as you imagine it.
Ray-tracing is expensive and the only thing that it does is regression - examples - Minecraft and Quake 2.

 

[Dontrocktheboat]

Sorry LtMatt i know you got an AMD agenda to push out.

But these results look like a pile of steaming Scheisse.

 

[Brazo]

2160P
Couple of things that stand out to me. Does anyone remember when it was proclaimed that the 3080 was faster than the 6900 XT at 4K? That aged badly.

Also worth noting that the benchmark clearly shows and comments on the fact that Big Navi scales well at 4K, instead it is the other GPUs that scale poorly below 4K.

Two common myths busted and put to bed.

Link: AMD Radeon & Nvidia GeForce im Benchmark-Vergleich 2021: Testergebnisse im Detail - ComputerBase

I don’t remember 3800>6900xt @4k ever being a ‘thing’, 6800xt yes and of course still is.

Problem you have with any set of benchmarks (cherry picked or otherwise) is that they all show one thing. That neither you nor I could tell the top tier cards apart if sat down in front of a screen as the fps is so similar.

The only thing worth worrying about is availability and perhaps as an employee of AMD your efforts would be better spent that way rather than petty point scoring where let’s be honest there are no points to be won for either side.

 

[LtMatt]

I don’t remember 3800>6900xt @4k ever being a ‘thing’, 6800xt yes and of course still is.

Problem you have with any set of benchmarks (cherry picked or otherwise) is that they all show one thing. That neither you nor I could tell the top tier cards apart if sat down in front of a screen as the fps is so similar.

The only thing worth worrying about is availability and perhaps as an employee of AMD your efforts would be better spent that way rather than petty point scoring where let’s be honest there are no points to be won for either side.

It was a thing at launch and those posts are still visible on the forum with a little searching in the right threads.

I don't disagree with your second point, performance is all 'similar' and all halo products don't warranty the extra cost for the 10% or so extra performance for most (not all) people.

I'm here as a active participant of graphics benchmarking (enthusiast), so these performance comparisons are interesting to me especially when they dispel myths that were spoken about here at launch.

People that don't like what the results show often quick to unfairly dismiss them as can be seen, but that does not mean they are not valid.

 

[Gerard]

Sorry LtMatt i know you got an AMD agenda to push out

But these results look like a pile of steaming Scheisse.

Much like all of your posts

 

[Dontrocktheboat]

Much like all of your posts

Let's bury the hatchet bro, and move on?

 

[JediFragger]

Let's bury the hatchet bro

Sure, in your head?

 

[Dontrocktheboat]

Sure, in your head?

Could be worse

 

[Gerard]

Let's bury the hatchet bro, and move on?

In your taint

 

[Gerard]

I don’t remember 3800>6900xt @4k ever being a ‘thing’, 6800xt yes and of course still is.

Might want to look at the launch reviews, some have 3080 on par or slightly faster than a 6900xt in some games at 4k.

 

[nashathedog]

Might want to look at the launch reviews, some have 3080 on par or slightly faster than a 6900xt in some games at 4k.

I noticed that, I thought the 6000 series looked a little bit disappointing at 4K compared to how it performed at lower res's, I thought the 256 bit bus might be to blame and it still might be part of the problem, I doesn't have to be one or the other?
All in all I was just glad to see AMD finally being high end competitive again, at least I was until I tried to buy a card.