What do you think of the 4070Ti?

[brostradamus]

Strawman galore.
I get it, you cant argue with what im saying, so you argue with what Im not. Keep it up

This line of argument doesnt work ever. The cards are adequately priced when compared to close substitutes. So either you get one per your needs/wants or speculate on an eventual crash which may or may not materialize. I have the same issue arguing with bean counters at work.. historical trends only matter to the extent usable for future predictions. When arguing between present and past, present carries a much higher weightage and there's always a first time for things...
Asking Nvidia/amd to reduce prices is like someone selling their house cutrate to the homeless all in the name of rescuing real estate industry, doesn't ever happen. People will always benchmark prices to going rates not what a "mid-range" house was available in a "comparable" place in 2015.

Eventually, i think people want to know more about the 4070 ti on this thread and you would probably like to open a new comparison thread, for a more involved discussion

 

[ICDP]

I tried that on witcher 3 but with a dll mod from nexusmods on a 4090, dialed up everything, and my experience has been different. I don't think I would ever turn that off on the highest settings. I don't have msfs but i should be able to find that out by this weekend..
The experience on a 4070 ti might be different.

My trial was on a 4080 at 4K and in Witcher 3 it looked smoother but felt much more sluggish. So it was saying 90 FPS but feeling worse than the high 50ish I was getting with it off. I tried capping FPS at 60 only for it to get worse. I was effectively getting a solid 60 FPS but it felt like 30.

So the irony is the lower your normal FPS the worse it will feel because it adds extra lag. So on a lower end GPU where every extra FPS would be welcome, it makes the experience worse, not better. In fact it is better to just use DLSS to get extra FPS in my tests.

That’s just my experience but it matches with what HUB found in ther tests.

 

[ncncore]

I too ended up purchasing a 4070ti. This was my user case.

GPU was a 1080ti, I was hampered to med to high settings in the majority of games at 1440p and my monitor is 144hz capable of which I was starting to see mostly below 90 FPS. I wanted to upgrade at the 30XX series but wasn't willing to pay the absurd prices and had resided to holding on.

I allowed myself £900 to spend on the upgrade. I didn't want a second hand GPU either. It was effectively between the 7900XT and the 4070ti. The previous gen cards are all still either more expensive, not available or the performance is not equal.

To further add, my 750W PSU would have required an immediate upgrade of roughly £150 if I was to choose the 7900XT. Also a slight consideration was the continuing increase in energy costs. The 4070ti provides roughly equal perf at a lower power draw. I know you can undervolt the 7900XT but the same can be done for the 4070ti.

In the end I paid msrp, £799 for a palit 4070ti and sold the 1080ti last night for £200. This has given me a good starter for the rest of the upgrades.

My current played game of MW2 is now running a lot more smoothly at much higher graphics and FPS.

What I'm still not content with is the price. It was just too much but I personally wanted to upgrade my gaming experience and my options were limited. I don't have access to the MM so there were no reliabley good second hand GPUs available to me at the prices quoted in this thread. I was still going to have to spend around the same amount I spent to get an older gen GPU with less perf and more power draw.

A no brainer this was for me the best upgrade choice. If I had owned a 30XX series I would not have upgraded.

 

[Murphy]

Im not defending anything but common sense. I don't care about Jensen and his profit margins, all I care about is that the 4070ti is a better and cheaper product than the 7900xt. And to use your own argument, that's exactly what Lisa wants you to do, to defend a billion dollar company

You're comparing turds on the pavement and proclaiming one as the better turd, neither of them are cheap, like i said at most there's a £50 price gap that is probably going fluctuate on a weekly basis. So yes IMO you are defending a billion dollar company with 60% profit margins because in case you haven't noticed Nvidia is the 800-pound gorilla in the room, it dictates the price AMD charges whether directly or indirectly.

 

[kalniel]

It's not Star Citizen but with over 500 developers, 300 actors and 150,000 lines of dialogue, the early rumours suggesting that Starfield is a home run, it could be, possibly be the number 1 PC game for 2023 that's Sci-fi, original IP, an RPG, not a sequel or a re-launched/updated console game (i.e the last of us).

It'll be successful because they'll market it to death and they've built up a huge audience with Fallout and TES games. Size however isn't the reason - are you expecting it to be much more than skyrim/fallout in space? I'm not, and that's OK because I've enjoyed Bethesda games since Daggerfall, but it's definitely a warts and all enjoyment. There have been any number of other large space RPG games in recent years and they've been mostly mediocre.

Therefore, its going to be a real battle royal for Nvidia and AMD at every product level but especially the 4070ti because we the OCUK forum is going to be all over it, if its as good as being hinted for this play-testing it atm. Fallout was previously an Nvidia Gameworks title and Skyrim was a mess in the early days so i am not confident about the quality of the engine.

I agree with you about the quality of the engine, but it's going to be optimised to be playable on consoles so the PC shouldn't be overly onerous, just don't expect it to scale beautifully and there'll probably be weird performance glitches. It's not going to be something that either side hold up as an example of modern gaming.

 

[Bencher]

You're comparing turds on the pavement and proclaiming one as the better turd, neither of them are cheap, like i said at most there's a £50 price gap that is probably going fluctuate on a weekly basis. So yes IMO you are defending a billion dollar company with 60% profit margins because in case you haven't noticed Nvidia is the 800-pound gorilla in the room, it dictates the price AMD charges whether directly or indirectly.

No no, you are defending a billion dollar company, in case you havent noticed nvidia is the budget option in this case, it's amd that's charging you more money for a vastly inferior product.

PS1. What is actually wrong with defending a billion or a gazilion dollar company? Like what the actual heck? If they are right, they are right, does it matter how much money they have? Whether you are innocent or not has nothing to do with how much money you have, the "defending a billion dollar company" argument is nonsensical

 

[gpuerrilla]

How are they right?

They released first and overcharged. Why defend the undefendable unless you are deluded? People pointing out the greed and unnecessary hikes to be countered with 'oh because reasons and they are the best' can you not see the hill your dying on?

 

[Bencher]

How are they right?

They released first and overcharged. Why defend the undefendable unless you are deluded? People pointing out the greed and unnecessary hikes to be countered with 'oh because reasons and they are the best' can you not see the hill your dying on?

Sure, they released first and overcharged for the 4080 and the 4090. Then AMD released themselves and managed to outdo nvidia in terms of overcharging, at least when it comes to the 7900xt. But yeah, im sure nvidia is responsible for amd's pricing

And I guess nvidia is also responsible for amd's pricing on CPUS, amd was selling 6cores for as much money as Intel was selling their 14 core parts. Nvidias fault there as well. Yada yada

 

[markoboyo11]

No no, you are defending a billion dollar company, in case you havent noticed nvidia is the budget option in this case, it's amd that's charging you more money for a vastly inferior product.

PS1. What is actually wrong with defending a billion or a gazilion dollar company? Like what the actual heck? If they are right, they are right, does it matter how much money they have? Whether you are innocent or not has nothing to do with how much money you have, the "defending a billion dollar company" argument is nonsensical

"Vastly inferior product" honestly mate what planet are you on. Their pritty much the same, both a few pros and cons but really close otherwise.

 

[Bencher]

"Vastly inferior product" honestly mate what planet are you on. Their pritty much the same, both a few pros and cons but really close otherwise.

Same raster performance per dollar, up to 33% faster in RT, more and better features, up to 15-20% less power consumption, no weird issues with power draw at video playback and around 10-15% cheaper. Those are the facts. Now whether you consider that nothing or a lot is down to personal preference. I consider those facts above a major difference, but again, that's just my opinion

 

[markoboyo11]

They ain't facts its jibberish. it's got slower raster, faster rt but still useless, stupid pointless size, stupid pointless power connector, vastly less vram.
You can't claim same raster per dollar then also call it cheaper lol.
Anyone that cares about 10% less power at video playback is really scratching for positives.

 

[Cooper]

If I had owned a 30XX series I would not have upgraded.

There is no doubt a lot of the hate for these cards is coming from current 30xx series owners who have been denied a big upgrade in performance for only a 'reasonable' increase in MSRP over what they paid for their current cards.

The huge, greed driven increase in MSRP, way above what many feared, means an upgrade is off the table for many, and that is making them angry.

 

[Bencher]

They ain't facts its jibberish. it's got slower raster, faster rt but still useless, stupid pointless size, stupid pointless power connector, vastly less vram.
You can't claim same raster per dollar then also call it cheaper lol.

Why not? It does have similar raster per dollar and it's cheaper. What's wrong with stating facts?

Sure, let's pretend 33% faster RT performance is useless, still, doesn't explain why the 7900xt is more expensive while having way less RT performance - way more power consumption and a bunch of issues with video playback while not even offering better raster for the money.

Also, what's wrong with the power connector?

 

[markoboyo11]

Why not? It does have similar raster per dollar and it's cheaper. What's wrong with stating facts?

Sure, let's pretend 33% faster RT performance is useless, still, doesn't explain why the 7900xt is more expensive while having way less RT performance - way more power consumption and a bunch of issues with video playback while not even offering better raster for the money.

Also, what's wrong with the power connector?

It's completely pointless, honestly I can't fathom how obsessed you are with this. The cards are equal in different ways, its almost like you feel personally threatened by the amd card in some weird way.

 

[Bencher]

It's completely pointless, honestly I can't fathom how obsessed you are with this. The cards are equal in different ways, its almost like you feel personally threatened by the amd card in some weird way.

And I can say the same about you, but it doesn't matter, that's not a valid argument, it's called an ad hominem. It doesn't matter if and how much invested I or you are, it's completely irrelevant. Whether I am right or you are right has absolutely nothing to do with how invested I or you are.

It's an absolute fact that even if you don't care about absolutely nothing else but raster performance, the 7900xt doesn't deliver, cause it basically offers the same raster per dollar while consuming way more - costs more - and still has some driver issues. Then you add the extra features and RT in the equation and it's not even a contest anymore. The XTX is much better positioned against the 4080 than the XT is against the 4070ti, cause at least the XTX is faster in raster performance for less money, so if you really care about raster exclusively, the xtx isn't a bad option. The XT is though

 

[Trickle]

... showing the 3080 did turn out to be around 70% faster and kept the same price so was an excellent product.

At a sacrifice of 50% higher power draw. That's like having two jokers in your hand and playing them. You can't blow the power budget again on the next gen. And then there was the power spike issue beyond the 320W power draw.

I'm not saying the 3080 wasn't excellent and what the market (overall) wanted. Too many people here pre-ordered on day 1 at £700+ just before the mining boom and never got their card. Polls have shown power efficiency to be the 2nd lowest priority of participants after ray-tracing. So its not hard to see why the posters on this thread have reacted as they have. But the 4070ti has some strengths.

 

[LtMatt]

It's completely pointless, honestly I can't fathom how obsessed you are with this. The cards are equal in different ways, its almost like you feel personally threatened by the amd card in some weird way.

"Vastly inferior product" honestly mate what planet are you on. Their pritty much the same, both a few pros and cons but really close otherwise.

They ain't facts its jibberish. it's got slower raster, faster rt but still useless, stupid pointless size, stupid pointless power connector, vastly less vram.
You can't claim same raster per dollar then also call it cheaper lol.
Anyone that cares about 10% less power at video playback is really scratching for positives.

Welcome to the completely mad world of Bencher.

They look pretty equal in reviews too overall.

Spoiler

That's AIB overclocked 4070 TI vs stock, power limited 7900 XT MBA card. If you put an AIB 7900 XT in those tests, you're going to see better results for the AMD card.

 

[Darujhistan]

Are you already a fan? I need to catchup on the OCUK thread for it

It's not Star Citizen but with over 500 developers, 300 actors and 150,000 lines of dialogue, the early rumours suggesting that Starfield is a home run, it could be, possibly be the number 1 PC game for 2023 that's Sci-fi, original IP, an RPG, not a sequel or a re-launched/updated console game (i.e the last of us).

Therefore, its going to be a real battle royal for Nvidia and AMD at every product level but especially the 4070ti because we the OCUK forum is going to be all over it, if its as good as being hinted for this play-testing it atm. Fallout was previously an Nvidia Gameworks title and Skyrim was a mess in the early days so i am not confident about the quality of the engine.

If its not good then, this is a problem for AMD as the other potential candidate 'the day before', uses unreal engine 5 but its an Nvidia partnership title and they will probably gimp it so it works very well on Lovelace and nothing else.

That leaves Naughty Dog and 'The Last Of Us' On PC, it uses Naughty Dog's new PS5 3D engine and Nvidia has not managed to get them to 'kneel before zod' as it were so it might actually show us the 20% difference between the 4070ti and the 7900XT.....or not.

Tbh most people were not impressed with Starfield, that's the vibe I got. Underwhelming to say the least.

 

[TNA]

Welcome to the completely mad world of Bencher.

They look pretty equal in reviews too overall.

Spoiler

That's AIB overclocked 4070 TI vs stock, power limited 7900 XT MBA card. If you put an AIB 7900 XT in those tests, you're going to see better results for the AMD card.

True. I thought it was funny you and a couple of others going on and on about vram last gen over pretty much one game. But this guy is something else. The 4070 Ti is a turd mate, and will continue to be until the price comes down significantly, simple as that.

 

[Bencher]

Welcome to the completely mad world of Bencher.

They look pretty equal in reviews too overall.

Spoiler

That's AIB overclocked 4070 TI vs stock, power limited 7900 XT MBA card. If you put an AIB 7900 XT in those tests, you're going to see better results for the AMD card.

Pretty similar in performance, one is cheaper, has more features, lower power draw and no issues with video playback and similar shaenanigans with multimonitors etc. I wonder which one is the better product