This is not necessarily a given, 7800 XT 3840 Shaders vs 6900 XT 5120, +33%.
-
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.
*** The AMD RDNA 4 Rumour Mill ***
- Thread starter humbug
- Start date
This is not necessarily a given, 7800 XT 3840 Shaders vs 6900 XT 5120, +33%.
I don't, the 6800 XT has 4608 shaders vs 3840 on the 7800 XT, the latter is 5% faster despite the former having 20% more shaders, that's a 25% difference per shader, they are clocked about the same. Actually the 7800 XT does have 625 GB/s memory bandwidth vs 512 GB/s on the 6800 XT but i'm not sure that matters much at 1440P where i'm measuring this.
With 7% more shaders, 64 CU's vs 60 and 3% more memory bandwidth 645 GB/s vs 625 GB/s about 10% higher performance looks like its on the nose, i agree and i'm not saying that's wrong, all i'm saying it you can't compare one shader to another, the difference in RDNA 1 vs RDNA 2 shaders vs RNDA 3 proves that, RDNA 3 is 2X RDNA 1 for 0.5X more shaders.
If its a 7900 GRE with better raytracing it needs to be under $450.
Last edited:
7900GRE level performance is budget card ... I've heard it all now
Take a look at the following link and look at where the 7900GRE sits and where actual mainstream budget cards (like 3060, 4060, 7600 etc) sit.
*** GPU Hierarchy ***
NVIDIAAMDINTELTier - Suggested Resolution/FPS RTX 4090 Tier A - "Elite Tier" RTX 4080 Super RTX 4080RX 7900XTX RX 7900XT Tier B RTX 4070Ti Super RTX 3090Ti RTX 4070TiRX 6950XT RX 7900 GRE Tier C RTX 3090 RTX 4070 Super RTX 3080Ti RTX 3080 (12GB) RTX 4070 RTX 3080RX 6900XT RX 7800XT RX...forums.overclockers.co.uk
These threads are the gift that keeps on giving
Too many people here have $1000+ GPU's completely skewing their idea of GPU hierarchy, that and Nvidia pricing structure, the 7800 XT by my experience is a AAA 120 Hz 1440P / 60 Hz 4K card, its high end, just because its not $1000 doesn't make it a low tier card.
I really hate this skewed view some people have
7800 XT was a flat $500, 7900 GRE / 4070 Ti its at most $450, not a penny more for a new generation, preferably $400, if its more a 7900 XT+ / 4080 $500 is good.
Last edited:
Is there any reason to think the 5070 might be much faster than the 4070 Ti in Cyberpunk RT? the 4070 needs to gain 40% in RT to beat the 4070 Ti by 10%. Given its probably going to be £600 or more i can't see anyone making the RT argument for Nvidia if the RX 9070 is £450 or less, not with a straight face, tho some may try.
Last edited:
7800 XT has plenty of raster, i don't feel any need for more of that, it is as you say all about RT, yeah if AMD can make it a relatively cheap upgrade its a winner, i'm looking at the quick turnaround pawn broker chain to see how much cash they will give me for mine and right now if the 9070 XT is £450 or less its worth it.
Last edited:
6900 XT 2293 Mhz average in game.
7800 XT 2425 Mhz average in game. +1.3%
AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT Review - The Biggest Big Navi
AMD's Radeon RX 6900 XT offers convincing 4K gaming performance, yet stays below 300 W. Thanks to this impressive efficiency, the card is almost whisper-quiet, quieter than any RTX 3090 we've ever tested. In our review, we not only benchmark the RX 6900 XT on Intel, but also on Zen 3, with fast...
AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT Review
With the Radeon RX 7800 XT, AMD is going after the GeForce RTX 4070. Our review confirms that AMD has achieved performance parity in rasterization and is pretty close in ray tracing, at a much better price point, and they are giving you 16 GB VRAM, instead of just 12 GB.
Last edited:
Both, the 7800 XT was priced well, so was the 7900 GRE on launch.
It changed when they actually launched it in the west with a higher power profile, that was all except Hardware Unboxed who tried to pretend the China one they pulled out of a prebuild was the same as the west version retail one so they could call it crap, even after AMD told them they are not the same GPU and all other reviewers with different findings were positive about it HUB still insisted they are the same. what's worse is AMD sent them a western retail version which they ignored.
Last edited:
I think "Botched" is hyperbole, they had an RDNA 4 MCM design but canaled it due to development costs and eventual retail cost, notice it has 6 GPU tiles, they already have something very similar to this in the CDNA range.
This is modern journalism, hyperbolic drama garbage for smooth brain consumption, click bait brain rot. The truth is much more boring, its unviable.
I mean, you don't think AMD could just make a larger version of Navi 48? make it 384Bit, add more CU's? is that harder than making it MCM? hm? like i said, Brain Rot.
Oh..... also, (Navi 10. Navi 21, 22, 23, 24. Navi 31, 32, 33.) The image i posted above was designated Navi 43, it no longer exists, what we do have is Navi 44 and Navi 48.
There are designs missing from Navi 2 and Navi 3 that never made it to retail, namely Navi 20 and Navi 30, there are a lot more missing from Navi 4, the only one that made it through was the smallest, Navi 44, the larger GPU is actually Navi 48 indicating it is a later design, possibly serval steps of it, Navi 45, Navi 46, Navi 47. and Navi 48 being the flagship. On top of that Navi 40 through to Navi 43 also never made it as designs.
There are designs missing from Navi 2 and Navi 3 that never made it to retail, namely Navi 20 and Navi 30, there are a lot more missing from Navi 4, the only one that made it through was the smallest, Navi 44, the larger GPU is actually Navi 48 indicating it is a later design, possibly serval steps of it, Navi 45, Navi 46, Navi 47. and Navi 48 being the flagship. On top of that Navi 40 through to Navi 43 also never made it as designs.
Last edited:
Leaker claim it's within 5% of a 4080 in games, hype train back on track? now we wait for the AMD pricing derail.
AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT expected to boost up to 3.1 GHz, 260-330W TBP depending on a model - VideoCardz.com
AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT can boost up to 3.1 GHz Chiphell leaker claims it will reach up to 330W TBP on custom models. Some enthusiasts prefer to compare graphics cards based on their power metrics. If a card consumes 300W, it is generally expected to compete with similar models from competitors...videocardz.com
7800 XT at 2.93 Ghz.
+7% CU's puts it dead even (+1%) with the RX 7900 XT, or 88.5% of the 4080, an extra 200Mhz may take it to 90% a 4080, IMO we shouldn't expect it to be more than that, it depends on price, but then again the 4070 Ti is only 18% faster than the 'reference' 7800 XT is out of the box and it is near half the price, no one cares......
Last edited:
Yeah its **** sad, not one of these tech jurnoes picked up on just how good the 7800 XT actually is for its money, all they had on their mind was DLSS, no room for much else... its only people like you and me who saw the value in them.
--------
Do you guys remember the rumour about RDNA 3 having a bug and that being why they didn't match marketing? that bug was they couldn't reach 3Ghz, they couldn't even surpass RDNA 2 in clock speeds. Navi 32 (7800 / 7700 series) was delayed for like a year, well they run quite happy at near 3Ghz, they overclock like beasts, they are hard power limited to 300 watts but even at that i've seen mine hit 3.1Ghz, up from around 2.4Ghz, that's +30%, we haven't seen that since the HD 7950, i think they fixed RDNA 3 with Navi 32 but then gimped it as to not step on the 7900 XT's toes.
Last edited:
Look at the post again i'm predicting the performance of the 9070 using RDNA 3 as a reference.
True, but i think a hypotheses is valid if we assume there is no IPC difference between the RDNA 3 and 4 core, IE just upscaling RDNA 3 to RX 9070 XT specifications, you can only really go wrong in one direction, under estimation and i think that's fair game.