• 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 RX7900 series review thread

Dave2150 said:
This +

1. Power consumption in gaming - higher than a 4080
2. Multi monitor power consumption & video playback 2-4 times higher than 4080/4090 - just terrible
3. Noise. Reference designs much louder than even the 4090

That RT performance is just terrible - why would someone spending £1k+ on a GPU want to go without RT? May as well just get a console instead.
Click to expand...
3090/3090 TI raytracing is not terrible, but I get your point. £1000 is still crazy money and you don't want to compromise for that price.
 
1% lows are interesting looking at a lot of reviews in more depth, the 7900xtx is consistently higher than the 4080 and sometimes by a significant margin.
 
Dave2150 said:
Every GPU has terrible ray tracing compared to 4080/4090!

What's your opinion on the power consumption for multi-monitor and video playback? Or is your solution that 7900XTX buyers need to:

1. Not use RT
2. Use single monitor, else electricity prices mean that a 4080 wouldn't take too long to pay back itself
3. Not playback video, else electricity prices mean that a 4080 wouldn't take too long to pay back itself
Click to expand...
It sounds like you're clutching at straws a bit. My solution would be to pocket the savings and wait for the patches to fix those issues as a possible idea but it depends on your obsessive compulsiveness or lack of willingness to adjust your system to get the most use out of it. If you're a multi monitor, 4k gamer (very few) then I can see you quibbling at every little thing but the vast majority of people are seeing a card here for single monitor use that is far more affordable than a 4090 thus making it a different category for consumers altogether. Your preferences suit you but that is not a rational judgement to push onto most people who don't have those requirements.

Pesonally speaking I'd be far more interested in 1440p instead of the myriad issues of trying to run 4k maxed out games and desperately hoping my $1600 purchase will stay relevant and not end up needing replacing as soon as a new game comes out (when demanding every game play perfectlly). It's your choice if you're chasing the best, the 4090 doesn't have much competition but lets not muddy the waters on that one because it's considerably more expensive and seems a clear choice if you play specific games and have a no compromise / no money too much attitude. As for anyone else? The 7900xtx is clearly putting out great performance for it's price relative to Nvidia's new and old gpu's. A few patches down the line and they may even improve things like they have done in the past over time, should that happen then Nvidia would be really struggling to justify things all over again. Like one of your examples is that 7900xtx owners should not use RT despite it being perfectly fine at this. You don't need OCD levels of performance obsession or misinformation to see the point that Harlequin made was far closer to the truth than yours, this is good RT performance even if not perfect. It's better than most other peoples cards and the price is reasonable when compared to Nvidia so trying to quibble over power usage while being biased and unfair on the RT / performance seems a bit desperate.
 
rare said:
1% lows are interesting looking at a lot of reviews in more depth, the 7900xtx is consistently higher than the 4080 and sometimes by a significant margin.
Click to expand...

The usual suspects are trying to convince everyone else that the 7900 XTX is a bad GPU and that the 4080 is suddenly an attractive option. Both are decent GPUs that trade some advantages but are just too expensive for what they offer.

Neither AMD nor Nvidia have had good GPU releases this round.
 
Last edited:
ICDP said:
The usual suspects are trying to convince everyone else that the 7900 XTX is a bad GPU and that the 4080 is suddenly an attractive option. Both are decent GPUs that trade some advantages but are just too expensive for what they offer.
Click to expand...
It’s odd. The 7900xtx is clearly above the 4080 and even more so when you consider all the benchmarks so far are the 2x8 pin cards and none of the AIB cards. It also costs less so double win.
 
delta0 said:
It’s odd. The 7900xtx is clearly above the 4080 and even more so when you consider all the benchmarks so far are the 2x8 pin cards and none of the AIB cards. It also costs less so double win.
Click to expand...

Reference card is coming in at £1050, what do you think AIBs will cost, you can get a 4080 for £1150. Performance is swings and roundabouts. Both **** buys.
 
Having read and watched as many reviews as I can I think some of the reactions on here are over the top. The xtx looks like a solid card, it has impressive performance across the board. Even the RT performance is between a 3090 and a 3090Ti, a card that only a few months back was selling for 2k. I think that’s impressive given everyone knows AMD is essentially playing catch-up when it comes to RT.

To get to that level of RT performance in two generations is impressive IMO.

1% lows are very high, better than the 4080, a overall performance is matching/exceeding the 4080.

The biggest let down IMO is power use compared to the 4080, but even so, it uses less power than a 6950XT but it offers a very reasonable generational uplift over that card. Hopefully they can fix some of the obvious faults, like the very high idle consumption. Really hope that’s not a baked in hardware issue…

The 7900xt on the other hand, doesn’t make any sense to me. If that card had been £799 or something like that it would be much more compelling.

Both are too expensive, but I don’t see that changing anytime soon.
 
Last edited:
RavenXXX2 said:
Reference card is coming in at £1050, what do you think AIBs will cost, you can get a 4080 for £1150. Performance is swings and roundabouts. Both **** buys.
Click to expand...
This is the price of hardware these days. As pointed out this has been the norm for the last few generations. I don’t think I would take a base version of 4080, a Palit.
 
7900xtx-me.jpg


For only £1000.. gee thanks AMD :confused:
 
Because I'm lazy i CBA to read through all the rx7900 stuff but would i be in the ballpark if i said the 7900's are good value for money (cost per frame) when compared to current cards on the market but if you're spending 900-1k on a GPU value for money doesn't really come into it, why spend that on a GPU when you can spend 20% more and get better features.

I can understand why you'd want to save 20% in the mid-range as it can make a big difference there and those extra features aren't much of a value add, but at the high end why not just spend the extra to get the better card (not sure of that makes much sense).
 
Murphy said:
Because I'm lazy i CBA to read through all the rx7900 stuff but would i be in the ballpark if i said the 7900's are good value for money (cost per frame) when compared to current cards on the market but if you're spending 900-1k on a GPU value for money doesn't really come into it, why spend that on a GPU when you can spend 20% more and get better features.

I can understand why you'd want to save 20% in the mid-range as it can make a big difference there and those extra features aren't much of a value add, but at the high end why not just spend the extra to get the better card (not sure of that makes much sense).
Click to expand...

Basically what the HUB 7900xtx conclusion is.
 
Murphy said:
Because I'm lazy i CBA to read through all the rx7900 stuff but would i be in the ballpark if i said the 7900's are good value for money (cost per frame) when compared to current cards on the market but if you're spending 900-1k on a GPU value for money doesn't really come into it, why spend that on a GPU when you can spend 20% more and get better features.

I can understand why you'd want to save 20% in the mid-range as it can make a big difference there and those extra features aren't much of a value add, but at the high end why not just spend the extra to get the better card (not sure of that makes much sense).
Click to expand...
If you're spending 1k+ though you may as well just get the 4090 though as it's not just a tier above these cards but almost a generation when looking at the performance slides.
 
Insanties_birth said:
Try comparing it in several games, like the reviewers have. Came out far more favourable than selectively picking a single title obviously.
Click to expand...

It exists and is more representative of future high fidelity gaming experiences than other last gen titles, it's not the only example as you well know. Future proofing is a fools errand but expecting to be able to play the latest titles using the latest features for a year isn't a big ask when it's costing you 1k imo.
 
Last edited:
rare said:
1% lows are interesting looking at a lot of reviews in more depth, the 7900xtx is consistently higher than the 4080 and sometimes by a significant margin.
Click to expand...

I 2 or 3 games where 1% were worse than a 6900xt, I think the 7900xtx is affected by cpu bottlenecks like Nvidia
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom