• 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 thread which sometimes talks about RDNA2

Status
Not open for further replies.
chris85oc said:
They ran 3070 benches with ultra settings (and RT on high) AA etc. The leaked twitter pic has multiple settings disabled, including AA ( same symbol as stereoscopic 3d which is disabled ) some settings on high not ultra etc. You can compare yourself by checking the symbols.

So they compared max settings on 3070 with AA ( high RT) with lower settings no AA on 6800. ‘Journalism’ clickbait.

Either way, people can do the math themselves if they want to, but easier to just copy paste wcc and spread misinformation.
Click to expand...

You maybe correct will see soon enough. Just going by what they said they tested. It's certainly interesting to see where these cards come out with RT on but tbh i am not to bothered as i am mainly buying for raster performance but wouldn't complain if the 6800xt is stronger in RT than first thought.
 
Joxeon said:
I think it's more likely down to the 6800 being faster than the RTX 3070 to begin with and not so much faster RT performance.

If it's 15% faster in rasterisation and 15% slower in RT then it will be on par etc.
Click to expand...
There are plenty of people out there that will claim the 3070 is faster because of Ray tracing. But tbh it is hard to crown a winner nowadays with so many more factors getting brought in.
 
Lokken86 said:
There are plenty of people out there that will claim the 3070 is faster because of Ray tracing. But tbh it is hard to crown a winner nowadays with so many more factors getting brought in.
Click to expand...
I agree... how many people are actually interested with RT? its nice to see how it looks like but i will always take more performance over nicer graphics
 
Joxeon said:
They likely handicapped the nvidia cards by using slow ram whereas the AMD cards are not effected as they had SAM.
Click to expand...

Yup I saw they used 16GB DDR4-3200MHz but still, something doesn't sit right to me, better cpu with IPC improvements that are meant to be 20% over previous zen 2 but results on zen 2 with 3080 and 3090 are better still. So not sure what's going on there either cpu is not really that much better or having SAM on with 3080 and 3090 causes slower results but SAM doesn't work on 3080 or 3090, so having it on may decrease results when using a none SAM able GPU ? God knows really I hate manufacturer benchmarks they all lie and twist things, Nvidia 2x faster than 2080.... yes right..:rolleyes:, waiting for AMD excuses why they don't run as fast too and how they twisted benchmarks by enabling something that makes a competitor product work worse on their motherboards and CPUs.. That wouldn't surprise me soon where platform makers that make GPUS or other hardware for their platforms make their own gear work better and cripple other manufacturer gear.

I also don't like how AMD sold these GPUS and CPUS , there is no reason Zen 2 can't use SAM too as the I.O chip on the cpus is exactly the same the only difference is the chiplets this time... So million dollar question will they soon say hey Zen 2 will work too with SAM or will they deliberately not enable it on Zen 2 and make everyone upgrade for a feature that only works on their GPUS. AMD are not playing so nice too if you read between the lines and getting a bit fed up of all the main computer manufactures games and silly sales tactics to not even having products to sell and the dribs and drabs end up on ebay for 2x the price, then don't even get me started on the retailers and their scalping games too, they are no better, when a lot of the cards had a MSRP same as Nvidia and they added £100-200 on top.. :rolleyes: It's just all got silly really.
 
Last edited:
FoxEye said:
Well atm a lot of the RT screenshots in side-by-side comparisons look worse (more unrealistic) than the non-RT picture.
They certainly have a long way to go to make RT a must-have.
Click to expand...
I hope that with RDNA2 on consoles games will start to use more RT features to enhance certain things in games.. shadows, lighting etc..
I doesn't have to be full raytraced everywhere to look nice..
 
Chaos666 said:
I agree... how many people are actually interested with RT? its nice to see how it looks like but i will always take more performance over nicer graphics
Click to expand...
I prefer high fps aswell and right now I play more VR stuff which doesn't currently use RT, instead it just needs to have as much performance headroom as possible. I'm hoping that the 6800s will be good for that but I don't think I could go far wrong spending £650 and it not perform. 16gb should be a nice cushion too.
 
Lokken86 said:
I prefer high fps aswell and right now I play more VR stuff which doesn't currently use RT, instead it just needs to have as much performance headroom as possible. I'm hoping that the 6800s will be good for that but I don't think I could go far wrong spending £650 and it not perform. 16gb should be a nice cushion too.
Click to expand...
I don't think we need that much vram... lets hope that gpu itself its good... prices are very decent for performance.. 2080ti was well overpriced for 1200..
now we will be able to get even more performance for half the price.. good times :)
 
TheRealDeal said:
Did you miss the part in the article where they stated this.




So they ran the same settings with a 3070 which is pretty much the same as a 2080ti in performance.

So they have 3070 and 2080ti results, the only thing in dispute is the 6800 results.
Click to expand...

Oi mate, them facts don't fit the amd-sucks narrative. Maybe next time keep quiet ay
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom