• 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 7900 XT(X) Owners Thread.

sHo0sH said:
Then you can't really go wrong at the price/performance with the 7900xtx, team it with a 7800x3d, 32gb of ddr5 and you'll have a system that will last a very long time.
It would only be ray tracing that would fall behind the 4080 but tbh it's never been something that has bothered me. The drop in FPS is not worth the miniscule difference in image quality (at least to me)
Click to expand...
Yes I was planning on AM5 platform and 32gb of ram. Going 7900xt will send me a little over budget. I was going 7600x or 7700x, because when I swap my 7900x, put that in his system
 
Lightnix said:
Fairly high. It's already included in rocm driver source apparently. It's likely to just be an overclocked model though so probably don't expect miracles but might push the price down on the existing 7900 XTX.
Click to expand...

Been on the trigger for a 7900xtx for awhile now that its sub 1k its quite tempting but if theres hope for a 7950xtx then i might just see how that one pans out.
 
I personally do not think there is any need for a 7950x and they would have to hit over 3.5ghz for it to get anywhere close to matching a 4090.

RDNA 3 is the first generation with MCDs and a relatively small GCD. I think it is clear that they have not nailed the implementation and in comparison to RDNA2 it is worse in areas such as FPS/W, FPS/Transistor and also FPS/(total die area). No real point trying to polish a failed architecture and they need to learn the lessons from this generation and improve upon it for RDNA4.

I have not looked at the 7600 architecture but I am guessing it is not an MCD+GCD design and is instead a single die and it looks like there are almost no architectural advantages to RDNA3 over RDNA2 if you consider that gpu.

It may not happen with RDNA4 but I would imagine the end goal is to have multiple small GCDs fed by multiple MCDs that are manufactured on a less expensive node. They have struggled to get the performance they want with feeding just a single GCD from the MCDs and the change to multiple GCDs is a much harder task to achieve and still retain decent performance. Lots of challenges ahead for AMD to get this to work.
 
JediFragger said:
Sample size of 1. Am sure their will be plenty interested.
Click to expand...

I agree, a lot of people love to have the most overclocked model they can. I was not a fan of the 6950x and thought the 6900x was a better buy at the lower price. Using 10-20% more power for a small percentage more performance is not what I am after but for a lot of people they will accept that trade off.

Personal preference.
 
Haz123 said:
I personally do not think there is any need for a 7950x and they would have to hit over 3.5ghz for it to get anywhere close to matching a 4090.

RDNA 3 is the first generation with MCDs and a relatively small GCD. I think it is clear that they have not nailed the implementation and in comparison to RDNA2 it is worse in areas such as FPS/W, FPS/Transistor and also FPS/(total die area). No real point trying to polish a failed architecture and they need to learn the lessons from this generation and improve upon it for RDNA4.

I have not looked at the 7600 architecture but I am guessing it is not an MCD+GCD design and is instead a single die and it looks like there are almost no architectural advantages to RDNA3 over RDNA2 if you consider that gpu.

It may not happen with RDNA4 but I would imagine the end goal is to have multiple small GCDs fed by multiple MCDs that are manufactured on a less expensive node. They have struggled to get the performance they want with feeding just a single GCD from the MCDs and the change to multiple GCDs is a much harder task to achieve and still retain decent performance. Lots of challenges ahead for AMD to get this to work.
Click to expand...

Reckon if the they do manage to sort out the niggly bits, RDNA4 should be an absolute monster in raw performance.
 
w00dy85 said:
How's your 7900xt coping with your Ultrawide, are you using high/max game settings?

I'm building my son a PC for Christmas and he wants an Ultrawide monitor and I was planning on going 1440 to.
Click to expand...

The lowest I'm usually seeing on UWQHD with a 7900 XT is about 75 FPS @ max settings average in the most demanding scenes (Cyberpunk 2077 and TLOU, no RT, no upscaling) - possibly CPU bottlenecked in the former when it drops to that FPS.

Generally this card seems to by happy pumping 85+ fps on average in the most demanding games @ ultra settings, though I've not tested it much on my UWQHD as I've been playing more at 4K60.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom