• 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 Radeon RX 6900/6950 XT Owners Thread.

Sarge2255 said:
Please, enlighten me as I'm very interested to know what I'm wrong about.
I've always gone with ATi/AMD but this generation of cards, that's what I saw so far.
Click to expand...
My reasoning is as follows:
  • some still find the idea of DLSS a bit offensive and after spending £1000+ on a card don't want to run at a lesser, then scaled up resolution.
  • RT isn't that great yet and is not worth the performance hit.
  • the 6900 XT is a remarkably cool and quiet running card, particularly compared to Nvidia's equivalent offering (not sure why you think differently?)
  • the card is brilliantly responsive to tuning and has copious amounts of head room for overclocking
  • 10 GB is very quickly not going to be enough VRAM if comparing directly to the 3080.
  • 4K aside, the 6900 XT is the fastest card on the market in for the majority of games.
  • No driver overhead issues with AMD cards
  • AMD cards play nicer with AMD CPUs which are now the best.
  • SAM is superior to ReBAR on Nvidia cards.
  • Radeon software is awesome.
  • Red is a nicer colour than green. :D
 
Sarge2255 said:
Please, enlighten me as I'm very interested to know what I'm wrong about.
I've always gone with ATi/AMD but this generation of cards, that's what I saw so far.
Click to expand...
The 3080 would only be faster with RT in non AMD titles with DLSS enabled at 4K. Take a look at the bench threads on this very forum. Also happy to compare benchmark scores with my 6900 XT vs your 3080 if you are unsure. :)
 
heartburnron said:
My reasoning is as follows:
  • some still find the idea of DLSS a bit offensive and after spending £1000+ on a card don't want to run at a lesser, then scaled up resolution.
  • RT isn't that great yet and is not worth the performance hit.
  • the 6900 XT is a remarkably cool and quiet running card, particularly compared to Nvidia's equivalent offering (not sure why you think differently?)
  • the card is brilliantly responsive to tuning and has copious amounts of head room for overclocking
  • 10 GB is very quickly not going to be enough VRAM if comparing directly to the 3080.
  • 4K aside, the 6900 XT is the fastest card on the market in for the majority of games.
  • No driver overhead issues with AMD cards
  • AMD cards play nicer with AMD CPUs which are now the best.
  • SAM is superior to ReBAR on Nvidia cards.
  • Radeon software is awesome.
  • Red is a nicer colour than green. :D
Click to expand...
Think you summed it up perfectly there. Would just add its AMD CPUs and GPUs in all the consoles for the next many years too.
 
Last edited:
LtMatt said:
Think you summed it up perfectly there. Would just add its AMD CPUs and GPUs in all the consoles for the next many years too.
Click to expand...

I still can't see anything tangible
heartburnron said:
My reasoning is as follows:
  • some still find the idea of DLSS a bit offensive and after spending £1000+ on a card don't want to run at a lesser, then scaled up resolution.
  • RT isn't that great yet and is not worth the performance hit.
  • the 6900 XT is a remarkably cool and quiet running card, particularly compared to Nvidia's equivalent offering (not sure why you think differently?)
  • the card is brilliantly responsive to tuning and has copious amounts of head room for overclocking
  • 10 GB is very quickly not going to be enough VRAM if comparing directly to the 3080.
  • 4K aside, the 6900 XT is the fastest card on the market in for the majority of games.
  • No driver overhead issues with AMD cards
  • AMD cards play nicer with AMD CPUs which are now the best.
  • SAM is superior to ReBAR on Nvidia cards.
  • Radeon software is awesome.
  • Red is a nicer colour than green. :D
Click to expand...

Thanks, but I still can't see anything tangible on that list. Other than the Bazooka301's Water-cooled post.

  • I am not complaining about DLSS as a feature, as that gives 20fps at 4k with very little visual loss, at 4K you can't notice the visual loss, in fact, I'm hoping it gets better. You are right, that only a hand full of newer games use it, but it's very welcomed at 4K max setting gaming. Although I don't think this is the way forward. As I would prefer the performance straight from the card's horse power. But it's is very useful now at 4K to get an extra 20fps with very little visual loss. I didn't even notice it when I forgot that it was toggled on. Even the Metro Ray Tracing game sound fun, but how would the 6900XT cope, can it even run the game?
  • RTX 3080s run cool, mine never passed 75c on 50 to 60% fan, in a closed Micro ATX case. The fans are off when not gaming and temps sit at 35c idle. So it is 100% silent when not running. Brilliant!:p
  • I have never had any driver issues with the 3080
  • Overclocking the the GPUs again is another topic, but this usually gets 1- 3fps and puts strain on the system. When the games are running above 60fps, so I have not seen a point to overclock since owning these GPUs.
  • AMD CPUs and GPUs plays better? Again this is not correct in gaming, for productivity yes, but for gaming absolutely Not! Intel CPUs are still faster in gaming , because games are not utilising All those 20 threads etc , instead they are using the faster clock speed and a few cores and threads. Then at at 4K, the cpu is not even as significant. In games, Clock Speed is King.
  • ReBar and Sam ! Hardly worth upgrading your entire system just for those features, again this is "nit picking"
  • Radeon Software, but reviews said the video streaming software does not even work properly. Most GPUs come with thier own AIB software , like MSI Dragon Centre etc so this again is not correct.
  • Red is better than green , again this is not correct. Even FE RTX cards are not green:cry: 3080s and 3090s come in a variety of colours : black ,red , green etc. RTX cards also come with RGB which might even look nicer compared to the plain red AMD cards.
So you see I can't be convinced by a misesly 3-5 fps here and there at pre 4k resolution.

The water-cooled card looks fun, but the price and space needed to fit it would totally put me off. Water Cooled is supposed to take up less space? Looks like it takes a hectic of a lot of space. But I can see the attraction if you don't already have a loop in your system. It's more plug and play. But it's looks huge for WC.
 
Last edited:
3080s does many things, running cool is not one of them, just try any game that uses RT and keep your eye on the memory junction and you will see what i mean. (Try quake 2 RT)
 
Sarge2255 said:
Intel CPUs are still faster in gaming , because games are not utilising All those 20 threads etc , instead they are using the faster clock speed and a few cores and threads. Then at at 4K, the cpu is not even as significant. In games, Clock Speed is King.
Click to expand...
Clock speed is only 1 part of the equation with IPC and latency.

A CPU running at 4ghz but with 50% more IPC will perform better in games than one running at 5ghz.
 
_Cereal_ said:
3080s does many things, running cool is not one of them, just try any game that uses RT and keep your eye on the memory junction and you will see what i mean. (Try quake 2 RT)
Click to expand...

I use the MSI card which comes OC as standard, and it idles at 35c and the fans go off when not gaming, so it makes 0% noise :eek:. When gaming fans go up to 50% to 60% and temps are 75c maximum. VRAM temps are 85 -87c and it never passes that.

This is in a Micro ATX case.

What I did was have good airflow in the case, so have 2 x 120mm fans pointing at your card and Mobo and another 120mm fan exhausting from the back of the case. I also installed a CPU water-cooler so the heat from the CPU does not linger in the case;).
 
Sarge2255 said:
I still can't see anything tangible


Thanks, but I still can't see anything tangible on that list. Other than the Bazooka301's Water-cooled post.

  • I am not complaining about DLSS as a feature, as that gives 20fps at 4k with very little visual loss, at 4K you can't notice the visual loss, in fact, I'm hoping it gets better. You are right, that only a hand full of newer games use it, but it's very welcomed at 4K max setting gaming. Although I don't think this is the way forward. As I would prefer the performance straight from the card's horse power. But it's is very useful now at 4K to get an extra 20fps with very little visual loss. I didn't even notice it when I forgot that it was toggled on. Even the Metro Ray Tracing game sound fun, but how would the 6900XT cope, can it even run the game?
  • RTX 3080s run cool, mine never passed 75c on 50 to 60% fan, in a closed Micro ATX case. The fans are off when not gaming and temps sit at 35c idle. So it is 100% silent when not running. Brilliant!:p
  • I have never had any driver issues with the 3080
  • Overclocking the the GPUs again is another topic, but this usually gets 1- 3fps and puts strain on the system. When the games are running above 60fps, so I have not seen a point to overclock since owning these GPUs.
  • AMD CPUs and GPUs plays better? Again this is not correct in gaming, for productivity yes, but for gaming absolutely Not! Intel CPUs are still faster in gaming , because games are not utilising All those 20 threads etc , instead they are using the faster clock speed and a few cores and threads. Then at at 4K, the cpu is not even as significant. In games, Clock Speed is King.
  • ReBar and Sam ! Hardly worth upgrading your entire system just for those features, again this is "nit picking"
  • Radeon Software, but reviews said the video streaming software does not even work properly. Most GPUs come with thier own AIB software , like MSI Dragon Centre etc so this again is not correct.
  • Red is better than green , again this is not correct. Even FE RTX cards are not green:cry: 3080s and 3090s come in a variety of colours : black ,red , green etc. RTX cards also come with RGB which might even look nicer compared to the plain red AMD cards.
So you see I can't be convinced by a misesly 3-5 fps here and there at pre 4k resolution.

The water-cooled card looks fun, but the price and space needed to fit it would totally put me off. Water Cooled is supposed to take up less space? Looks like it takes a hectic of a lot of space. But I can see the attraction if you don't already have a loop in your system. It's more plug and play. But it's looks huge for WC.
Click to expand...
Well I still think you're a little misguided, but I'll happily agree to disagree. :) You've clearly come to your own conclusions and are happy with your decision. Life is all about the pursuit of happiness at the end of the day and I'm not here to rain on anyone's parade.
 
heartburnron said:
Well I still think you're a little misguided, but I'll happily agree to disagree. :) You've clearly come to your own conclusions and are happy with your decision. Life is all about the pursuit of happiness at the end of the day and I'm not here to rain on anyone's parade.
Click to expand...
Misguided is certainly one word for it, Lol. :D
 
Joxeon said:
Clock speed is only 1 part of the equation with IPC and latency.

A CPU running at 4ghz but with 50% more IPC will perform better in games than one running at 5ghz.
Click to expand...

I know that various factors affect the performance of a CPU, like even heat, cache etc.

But Intel CPUs are still faster at gaming. This is well demonstrated in reviews, plus at 4K CPUs don't matter as much is more the GPU power.

heartburnron said:
Well I still think you're a little misguided, but I'll happily agree to disagree. :) You've clearly come to your own conclusions and are happy with your decision. Life is all about the pursuit of happiness at the end of the day and I'm not here to rain on anyone's parade.
Click to expand...

Buddy, I'm all open ears, but struggling to see significant reasons as to why to get the AMD one over the other but, I might just get a full AMD build and run it in to experience it myself( obviously won't be my own main rig).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What was the toxic on here, £1700 or £1800? The extreme is £2400, so a £600 or £700 increase for a handful of fps more at best. :(
 
Bazooka301 said:
Yea £1800 for the toxic and a extra £600 just not worth the price difference i can get the same clocks as the more ££££ one
Click to expand...


£600 more so you can see core clocks go a bit higher and struggle to see the difference in framerate. :cry: The situation with gpus just gets more comical by the day. Might as well price them all at 5K and see if they sell the way things are going.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom