• 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.

RDNA 3 rumours Q3/4 2022

Status
Not open for further replies.
Aretak said:
I'll buy one if the reference cards are available in the UK at RRP. If they're not, I won't. Hopefully AMD won't use Digital River to distribute them again.
Click to expand...
No AMD store purchases for people in the UK since Brexit. Retailers only for us............
 
Last edited:
TheOracle said:
Only 5 people use VR
Click to expand...

Pretty much as many VR headsets on steam as 4k displays last I saw… so not as niche as it used to be! Around 2%.

I’m one of the 2% anyway, VR is the only thing I regularly do that really taxes my system so it’s pretty much the main thing I care about regarding performance.
 
Last edited:
ICDP said:
I see you’ve fallen for the Nvidia marketing. Now ticking that DLSS option = maxing the settings.
Click to expand...
Actually youd be wrong. There are games that actually look better with DLSS thanks to TAA being blurry as heck. Cod black ops for example, native rendering was absolute crap.
 
Robert896r1 said:
People downplaying RT are straight up luddites. Ray Tracing is what decades of GPU progress has been building towards. Ray Tracing and HDR are transformative for picture quality and put the same game years ahead in visual quality and fidelity than the version without.

While HDR is ”free” (cost to enjoy is a high end display such as aw3423dw) RT needs a lot of GPU power for now. In the end, we should be encouraging both vendors to be in an arms race to delivery 2x+ generational performance in RT while overtaking each other and swapping places. The more robust the RT performance is across the board, the more inclined developers are to use it. You need the raw power to be there along with the toolset for game devs to invest their time.

I don’t care about logos. I care about end results. I don’t want to see RT stagnation because one of the two players has decided to phone it in and play the value card.
Click to expand...
People 'downplaying' RT aren't Luddites they're just more cost conscious. I don't think there's anyone who disagrees that RT gives you the odd wow moment but for all the extra cost, not just financially but in fps, it just isn't worth it for the majority of people whose main considerations are how many fps do i get for what price.

RT may well be the future but until someone comes up with the model T of the RT world it's just going to be the exclusive of the well-heeled gamers, people are going to stick with their horse and carts because the small advantages offered by these expensive Mercedes and Rolls Royce simply aren't affordable.
 
Last edited:
TheOracle said:
Only 5 people use VR
Click to expand...
I don't get why this is being parroted.

Quest 2 has sold ~10M units link
PSVR sold >5M units link
Index sold 150k in 2019 alone link

HL:Alyx was nominated for a bunch of game of the year awards.

VR is not dominant, but A LOT of people play it.

To be fair, the steam numbers for VR are relatively poor. Something like a peak of 5k concurrent players per day. But steam is not to go to for VR, Meta is. PSVR2 will be a big one to measure peoples apetite for VR.
 
Last edited:
0h_no_not_again said:
I don't get why this is being parroted.

Quest 2 has sold ~10M units link
PSVR sold >5M units link
Index sold 150k in 2019 alone link

HL:Alyx was nominated for a bunch of game of the year awards.

VR is not dominant, but A LOT of people play it.

To be fair, the steam numbers for VR are relatively poor. Something like a peak of 5k concurrent players per day. But steam is not to go to for VR, Meta is. PSVR2 will be a big one to measure peoples apetite for VR.
Click to expand...

don't shoot the messenger *wink* *wink*
 
Murphy said:
People 'downplaying' RT aren't Luddites they're just more cost conscious. I don't think there's anyone who disagrees that RT gives you the odd wow moment but for all the extra cost, not just financially but in fps, it just isn't worth it for the majority of people whose main considerations are how many fps do i get for what price.

RT may well be the future but until someone comes up with the model T of the RT world it's just going to be the exclusive of the well-heeled gamers, people are going to stick with their horse and carts because the small advantages offered by these expensive Mercedes and Rolls Royce simply aren't affordable.
Click to expand...
People who pay over a grand for a GPU typically have 4k 120hz monitors which itself qualifies as a luxury over 1440p. Value was thrown out of the window long back when we paid over a grand. If the small improvement in visuals going from 1440p to 4k was worth it for this customer base as will ray tracing. £1,200 for a GPU is not what I would call cost conscious. It's a value product relative to 4090 but on it's own merits only those with deep pockets will buy this one as well
 
I'm really hoping the XTX can hit a rock solid 72fps on the new higher res VR headsets at medium/high settings.

3080Ti - 34.1 TFlops
7900XTX - 61.4 TFlops +27.3

57.1% Improvement

Using those figures, when I ran F1 '22 at ultra high maxed out at 3120x3120 I was getting 50fps. That increases to 78fps with the XTX. Maybe knocking down to high will reach 90fps.

Think it will be close, but doable?

Might take a punt. It's not a 4090, but then again I don't want to replace my PSU nor shell out £1,800
 
Last edited:
Wow there are some folks on here that love the taste of Jensen’s leathery plums!

It’s all theoretical until we get some real side by side comparisons but *if* AMD have reached 3090(ish) levels of RT and raster somewhere near nvidia’s latest (within 20%, say), at 60% of nvidia’s price and 75% of the power draw, then surely that’s all the better for everyone?

Frankly that’s “knocking it out the park” territory for a company that was so far on the back foot with RT.

Unless for some reason you really want a monopoly and to pay ever more for graphics hardware?
 
Last edited:
If these cards with fsr can hit 4k60 with Rt , are they a failure?

Edit: bearing in mind most gamers with 4K panels won’t have high end, high refresh rates / are probably using a tv
 
Last edited:
Given the 7900XT seems to be positioned around 3090 level RT and between 4080-4090 level raster, is hoping for a 7800XT at ~£7-750 with RT around 3080 level and raster between 4070-4080 level too unrealistic? :p
 
Last edited:
@Jimmy Weirdarms I think it’s largely because we are on an enthusiast forum, so if they aren’t physically winning in performance then they have lost… from what they showed the 4090 will still be the performance King.

In the real world they potentially have a much better proposition here than Nvidia, and I think it will force Nvidia to re-evaluate their pricing strategy for the mid range.

I’m curious about the low clocks, especially given the abundance of rumours about high clock speeds. Perhaps when the power budget goes out the window with 3rd party AIB cards there’s some decent headroom for pushing those clocks up… perhaps had AMD done it themselves it wouldn’t have fit with their efficiency and performance per watt narrative.

As always we’ll have to wait for the cards to come out and see how they compare. Not quite the slam dunk I was hoping for personally, but I’m always in need of as much performance as I can get and not the typical use case… I think I’ll be holding off until Jan or feb next year and see how everything settles out. Particularly interested in whether AMD has managed to close the gap a bit on VR performance where they’ve historically been weaker than in traditional gaming.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom