Suspended
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 31,179
-
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.
OcUK RTX3050 review thread
- Thread starter CAT-THE-FIFTH
- Start date
It is actually more like a 1660Ti/1660 super with DLSS and RT (and a smidge faster to boot).
Not bad, my old 1660 super was quite a trooper tbh for 1080p gaming!
I think these game specs say it all about ray tracing:
https://overclock3d.net/news/softwa...t_2_s_ray_tracing_requirements_are_insanity/1
It's a feature you turn on the make your GPU render games more slowly, at a lower resolution. At a more 'cinematic' framerate?
https://overclock3d.net/news/softwa...t_2_s_ray_tracing_requirements_are_insanity/1
It's a feature you turn on the make your GPU render games more slowly, at a lower resolution. At a more 'cinematic' framerate?
from the PCGH review (where you can helpfully easily remove cards from their charts):
https://www.pcgameshardware.de/Gefo...mark-Vergleich-vs-6500-XT-RTX-2060-1387678/2/
and BF5
Two very very poor showing from the 6500 XT (seems PCGH did manage to get their hands on a 6500 XT to review).
The 3050 isn't fast, but in those two it is over twice as fast as the 6500 XT.
TPU showed with RT and AA the RX6500XT falls apart. The issue is with only 4GB of VRAM,16MB of Infinity Cache and a slow PCI-E link,once it goes past 4GB performance goes south quickly.
The RTX3050 has only a PCI-E 8X link too,but it shows that its more than enough for the given performance.
In fact I suspect if the RX6500XT had more Infinity Cache or a wider PCI-E link size it might have performed noticeably better.
It would certainly be more consistent. If you tweak the settings down far enough on the 6500xt you can get decent performance out of it, but as soon as it goes out of the sweet spot performance drops off a cliff
Obviously Infinity Cache costs transistors and hence margins!
On the other hand having a product which is poorly received doesn't help margins either. Like not being willing to use the RX590 (12nm shrink of the 14nm Polaris) to get a well received lower power card probably ended up costing AMD a lot of money. Penny wise, pound foolish?
Desktop Navi 24 clocks crazily high but is really starved of resources. Pity nobody wants a 480P card!
AMD has a history of making nonsensical moves like this,but the reality is AMD tried a fast one with us.
Navi 24 is realistically a replacement for Baffin Pro/Polaris 21XT,AKA,the RX460/RX560:
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-rx-460.c2849
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-rx-560.c2940
In terms of dGPU size its even smaller than those two,and has a half sized memory bus.So its a fantastic replacement for those....if it was priced in that segment. Sadly companies everywhere are using the pandemic and cryptomining as an excuse to jack up prices.
As much as we can criticise Nvidia for all the nonsense they have been pulling(such as removing RRPs and helping miners),they have at least used the GA106 GPU for the RTX3050 and RTX3060,and used the larger GA104 for the RTX3060TI.
I sometimes wonder what you'd get if you took a large chip like chip like Navi21 or GA102 and ran it really low. Basically, take a 6900 XT or 3090 and massively underclock it.
But then I think of Apple's M1 Max, and there is our answer. Sort of. They certainly don't run above the process perf/watt sweetpoint, more like under it. A massively underclocked 6900/3090 is probably still far cheaper than anything Apple might make with a M1 Max.
But then I think of Apple's M1 Max, and there is our answer. Sort of. They certainly don't run above the process perf/watt sweetpoint, more like under it. A massively underclocked 6900/3090 is probably still far cheaper than anything Apple might make with a M1 Max.
and they are still providing RRP cards directly.
Where is AMD's attempt at giving gamers reasonably priced cards? Nowhere to be found unfortunately.
Soldato
Sad thing is, it’s not as powerful as a 2060, but it costs a similar amount (excluding MSRP) when comparing launch prices.
Strange times
Strange times
Soldato
They found a way to get some cards on shelves under the £300 mark by producing some that miners don't want and that also gamers don't want.
Yes!
However, if the measure of success in the GPU market was producing cards which nobody wants there would be a lot more GPU vendors rather than just the remaining two!
In the UK AMD CBA.
Last edited:
Don't forget content creators also with the lack of encode/decode support.
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 5,505
£500 for one of these is a joke.
Associate
Cheers CAT.
Acceptable at £250 but nothing to sing about.. no real price/performance gain but includes RT tech which works. Certainly makes the 6500xt look like the garbage it is.
Acceptable at £250 but nothing to sing about.. no real price/performance gain but includes RT tech which works. Certainly makes the 6500xt look like the garbage it is.
Sad thing is, it’s not as powerful as a 2060, but it costs a similar amount (excluding MSRP) when comparing launch prices.
Strange times
I'm not excusing the MRSP, but it does come with more VRAM and future drivers will close the gap on the 2060.
Wait for the Ti/Super edition, surely that will offer the best bang for the buck in the entry level range for just a bit more over the 3050.
Think of the RX6500XT as the RX560 successor,but priced more to be an RX5500XT replacement. So in one way it would be impressive on a technical level,but since its priced a tier above it isn't so great.
The RTX3050 looks more like a proper mainstream dGPU but again price is going to be the issue here!