AMD RX 6800XT AIB synthetic benchmarks: Pure rasterized faster than RTX 3080, RT on par with RTX 2080 Ti

[Dabombinable]

1 hour ago, Mark Kaine said:

They'd need to radically redesign the driver, as of now it's still ATi Catalyst with tons of stuff tacked on which makes it extremely convoluted - and at least half of the stuff simply doesn't work... and from the other stuff that does work half of it does 'barely' 

 

 

 

For a start they shouldn't even show options that aren't compatible and flat out don't work for a specific model. 

 

 

 

And then they need to improve performance / stability, I don't get why I get like 75% of frames compared to a comparable nvidia card, when the amd has technically *more* stuff (ram etc) and then being told 'well games are *optimized* for nvidia...' 

 

 

That just doesn't fly with a lot of peeps hence they rather buy 'overpriced' nvidia cards that 'just work'... (and they really do, issues with drivers are extremely rare and usually get fixed - actually - within days, personally I didn't have issues since a year or so, and that's mostly because I'm on a stable driver and there's like zero reason to update it...) 

 

 

PS: 'synthetical benchmarks' I feel that sums it about up re: AMD drivers 

 

These days an RX 580 does better than a GTX 1060 in most games, unlike at launch...the drivers do improve. The R9 390X/290X is also another good example.

[SFFDesigns]

3 minutes ago, Dabombinable said:

RX 580

not sure if it's just mine, but I've had some weird crashes with my old RX 580. Turning off performance metrics caused BSOD.

 

It's a card used for "mining" (not often tho, and not really in a mining farm) but it's unlikely that caused this, since the card worked fine otherwise

[Dabombinable]

11 minutes ago, Hymenopus_Coronatus said:

not sure if it's just mine, but I've had some weird crashes with my old RX 580. Turning off performance metrics caused BSOD.

 

It's a card used for "mining" (not often tho, and not really in a mining farm) but it's unlikely that caused this, since the card worked fine otherwise

2 of my friends have had ex mining RX 580 for 1-2 years now without problems, so it was probably just Windows being its usual self.

[leadeater]

1 hour ago, Mark Kaine said:

and at least half of the stuff simply doesn't work

What stuff doesn't work? Literally the only thing I ever go in to AMD drivers at all ever is to enable Crossfire after a driver update if i gets disabled.

[SFFDesigns]

1 hour ago, Dabombinable said:

2 of my friends have had ex mining RX 580 for 1-2 years now without problems, so it was probably just Windows being its usual self.

Yeah you may very well be right.

 

All I'm saying is that I haven't had any issues with new 3080 FE. I'm not gonna make any assumptions tho, since I didn't try again obviously (don't want to intentionally cause BSODs)

[thechinchinsong]

2 hours ago, Mark Kaine said:

They'd need to radically redesign the driver, as of now it's still ATi Catalyst with tons of stuff tacked on which makes it extremely convoluted - and at least half of the stuff simply doesn't work... and from the other stuff that does work half of it does 'barely' 

 

For a start they shouldn't even show options that aren't compatible and flat out don't work for a specific model. 

I can agree with that. Having a good user design is pretty critical for consumer impressions of your hardware.

2 hours ago, Mark Kaine said:

And then they need to improve performance / stability, I don't get why I get like 75% of frames compared to a comparable nvidia card, when the amd has technically *more* stuff (ram etc) and then being told 'well games are *optimized* for nvidia...' 

 

That just doesn't fly with a lot of peeps hence they rather buy 'overpriced' nvidia cards that 'just work'... (and they really do, issues with drivers are extremely rare and usually get fixed - actually - within days, personally I didn't have issues since a year or so, and that's mostly because I'm on a stable driver and there's like zero reason to update it...) 

The stability can definitely use an improvement, but I can't really follow your reasoning behind "more stuff" performer worse than less stuff. It's like comparing RAM in iphones vs Android or CPU cores in Intel vs AMD. You can't directly compare things like cores, processor units, and even memory (at least in terms of compression algorithms) between Nvidia and AMD since although they share the same name, their implementation and design might be different. Besides, there are price differences between the different cards to of course an rx-580 with 8gb VRAM is going to be worse than a RTX-2060 6GB.

[Mark Kaine]

3 hours ago, leadeater said:

What stuff doesn't work?

There was a whole section for 'image quality improvements' that did literally nothing for me, and it wasn't greyed out or anything, no error message either... Or when you change a fan curve and 'save' next time you open the program it's reset to defaults, and also otherwise buttons simply not working, or only after repeated tries, just very unresponsive overal. Even the overlay didn't reliably work, sometimes yes, sometimes no... 

 

 

Really the only positives I found when I was having a 5500xt for a week was it did not crash a single time (yay?) there were definitely some kind of 'soft crashes' tho were performance took a serious hit until I restarted the Radeon software, and the card was really pretty silent overall, tho fans seemed a bit erratic no matter what I tried, and... recording was a huge improvement over the rx580 I tried about a year ago (which was basically unusable, 10-30 fps in not so demanding games my 1060 has no issues getting 60 whatsoever) 

 

But overall still 10-20 fps under what I get with my 1060 and while recording worked (surprisingly?) it totally pales in comparison especially regarding the performance hit (again, about 10-20 fps difference at same settings) 

 

 

Tldr: a lot! 

 

[leadeater]

8 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

Or when you change a fan curve and 'save' next time you open the program it's reset to defaults

I've only seen that after a driver crash myself when running not actually stable OC, but I don't change the fan curves since I have full cover blocks but the core and mem settings revert back when it happens. Maybe it's just a fan curve thing and not the other OC settings?

 

Then again like I mentioned I have no desire to even try anything you are, for either brand. I just want to play the games, nothing else so absolutely everything implemented by both of them is wasted on me as it has and will go unused.

[Mark Kaine]

3 hours ago, Dabombinable said:

These days an RX 580 does better than a GTX 1060 in most games, unlike at launch...the drivers do improve. The R9 390X/290X is also another good example.

I had a 580 a year ago, not a single game I tested (at least about 10) had better or close the performance to my 1060...

 

And yes I did ddu, etc, tried a million amd drivers etc, nothing changed it, performance was just ultra poor...  25 fps in tomb raider, 15 (lol) fps in tekken, and so on... The most frustrating experience with trying to use a computer I had for sure... 

 

 

And yes I know there are videos on yt showing these games running with 'no issues' 

 

Which I have a hard time to believe, and even if it's true that just shows how messed up the amd situation is if the performance is all over the place like that... 

 

Like I just said the 5500xt was definitely an improvement, but still not there, in comparison to my 1060 and even a 1050ti runs more 'stable' tbh. (and yes I'm talking about 60fps, not about crashing lol, I don't mind if a card occasionally crashes when the performance is there, what I cannot accept is fluctuations in framerate where both amd cards, unfortunately, failed...) 

 

Ps: I actually got the 5500 because it was supposed to run MHW 10-15fps better... In reality it rarely reached 60 - very inconsistent if even...

 

 

7 minutes ago, leadeater said:

I've only seen that after a driver crash myself when running not actually stable OC, but I don't change the fan curves since I have full cover blocks but the core and mem settings revert back when it happens. Maybe it's just a fan curve thing and not the other OC settings?

 

Then again like I mentioned I have no desire to even try anything you are, for either brand. I just want to play the games, nothing else so absolutely everything implemented by both of them is wasted on me as it has and will go unused.

I didn't OC at all until the last day, where I got really curious... That worked actually also surprisingly well, gains were minimal however from what I tested - I was definitely pretty conservative since I've never oc an amd* card before but yeah I got maybe 1-5 fps improvements lol... Not worth it especially because consistency still wasn't there.

 

But generally I just wanted to test the card and tbh only 5fps improvements or something I'd kept it, but it just wasn't happening. 

 

Well, I have to say I really like how you can tinker things with nvidia drivers... It's very old fashioned ui wise, but the things just work (for example super sampling) and are explained very well too and often with no or only very small performance hits... 

 

 

AMD tries too much (and then as said a lot of it doesn't even work...) they should really focus on the basics, less flashy, more substance, it's really convoluted as hell and not really well thought out (things just seem very random) 

 

That's why I'm saying they need a complete redesign away from the Catalyst design language, not because it's bad but because they're in too deep, I don't think they can ever 'fix' it. 

 

Yes nvidia has also bugs, but it's really not that many and usually things just work... 

 

For example the same thing I got with the amd drivers were I need to restart the software happens with nvidia too. 

 

The difference is amd several times a day (almost hourly lol) and with nvidia it happens maybe once a week.... That's a huge difference (I notice because then the gfe overlay stops working, so kinda similar to what happened with the amd card...) 

 

 

*I did actually OC a ATi card for about 10 years... No issues... biggest mistake AMD did ever to not have this brand anymore, besides selling off mobile gpu part maybe (adreno lol) 

 

 

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

That's why I'm saying they need a complete redesign away from the Catalyst design language, not because it's bad but because they're in too deep, I don't think they can ever 'fix' it. 

I actually liked their previous UI design, wasn't too bad. The Old old one was also fine, much like Nvidias, but this current one I agree is all flash and no actual fuction, just I use it so little it doesn't bother me lol

[Mark Kaine]

10 minutes ago, leadeater said:

I actually liked their previous UI design, wasn't too bad. The Old old one was also fine, much like Nvidias, but this current one I agree is all flash and no actual fuction, just I use it so little it doesn't bother me lol

It's not that I want to use it but sometimes you kind of have to... 

 

It took me forever to actually get MHW running "stable" on my setup (3600, 1060) and playing around with settings really helped a lot with that, as did looking at Afterburner performance monitoring as that actually showed me what's even going on (high cpu usage in certain scenarios etc) 

In the end I'm now having it at absolute default settings, except 'adaptive performance' and a hefty overclock

 

Because after all Monster Hunter World is a game that totally hates any settings changes on the Nvidia side because of the way it's programmed, I guess (it's a very heavily modded mt frameworks engine) 

 

And also using a mod that strives to disable "crc" checks (called performance booster) which mostly affects cpu usage (makes the game run more stable however) 

 

Also no one really knows why there are even crc checks... It's not an 'anti cheat' or something because cheats are thriving lol (and Capcom doesn't do anything, they even restored native pc functions* recently...) 

 

*which is only for visual and audio mods however (and some other stuff they seemingly don't know about lol) 

 

 

It's really a bit weird, it's a game that can be easily modded, with at least similar potential to Skyrim but Capcom is just being weird and probably doesn't know how to deal with all this

 

 

 

 

[Rym]

On 10/23/2020 at 6:40 PM, ewitte said:

2.0 support for 2020 (some of this seems to be 1.0)

 

• Cyberpunk 2077
• Call of Duty: Black ops – Cold War
• Fortnite
• Death Stranding
• F1 2020
• Minecraft
• Bright Memory
• Mechwarrior V: Mercenaries
• Deliver Us The Moon
• Control
• Wolfenstein : Youngblood
• Anthem
• Metro Exodus
• 3DMark – Port Royal
• Battlefield V
• Shadow of the Tomb Raider
• Final Fantasy XV
• Monster Hunter: World

I see minecraft in there. That's a win for me!

[Mark Kaine]

9 hours ago, thechinchinsong said:

stability can definitely use an improvement, but I can't really follow your reasoning behind "more stuff" performer worse than less stuff.

I was specifically comparing 1060 and 5500 (yes I know it's not supposed to be "great") and in pretty much everything the 5500 was 'better', (specs were similar, except the amd has more ram and more 'flops' eh) 

on average like 10fps in benchmarks, including the one game I'm playing (MHW) 

 

And, well, yet again this was highly misleading and didn't work out on my setup, it performed significantly worse, definitely better than the 580 I had some time ago though, so there's that at least. 

 

 

[leadeater]

44 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

definitely better than the 580 I had some time ago though, so there's that at least. 

You sure, or just speaking about a specific game because there is actually barely a statistically significant difference between the RX 580 and RX 5500XT.

 

[Mark Kaine]

32 minutes ago, leadeater said:

You sure, or just speaking about a specific game because there is actually barely a statistically significant difference between the RX 580 and RX 5500XT.

 

Yeap, I tested a lot of games... Framerates where very abysmal, especially lots of random drops, I remember tomb raider (would randomly drop to 15fps, never reach 60fps) , tekken (framedrops even at lowest settings...) , monster hunter world ... none of these and other games would run at 60fps.  I thought it might have been a defect card, or weird settings (everything was at default tho in the Radeon settings) 

 

I also did some benchmarks, the 580 had actually better scores than the 1060 so I don't think it was defective, just frustrating all around. 

 

And I'm not over exaggerating this,tomb raider, tekken for example just wouldn't reach 60fps ever, more like 45 with random drops to ~30 lower ... Considering it was fine in synthetic benchmarks that doesn't really make sense but at that point I just said enough is enough, I did a lot of troubleshooting and literally nothing improved anything.

 

 

I get it a 580 isn't really more powerful than my 1060 but it wasn't even close - in any game I tried... Except VNs I guess (I don't like VNs tho lol) 

 

Thats actually an issue I have with amd too, they have a lot of cards in this price / performance bracket but none of them really beats the 1060, it does feel a bit weird and redundant, why not have a card at the same price that *clearly* beats a 1060 instead of being on par or worse? It's pretty odd imo. 

 

 

 

 

[leadeater]

55 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

tekken for example just wouldn't reach 60fps ever

Yea Tekken in general just doesn't run great. I also have it and well, it frame drops hard even on higher end hardware.

 

Haven't played the Tomb Raider games in a while but I don't remember too many problems.

 

I'm still running dual 290X's so that's like 1070Ti ish, sometime more and sometimes less.

 

55 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

Thats actually an issue I have with amd too, they have a lot of cards in this price / performance bracket but none of them really beats the 1060, it does feel a bit weird and redundant, why not have a card at the same price that *clearly* beats a 1060 instead of being on par or worse? It's pretty odd imo. 

Because it actually wouldn't lead to much higher global sales so aiming for par at a higher profit margin is just better for AMD. Doing the above would actually cost more leading to running a lower profit margin and lower investment in a division of AMD that is already severely lacking resources.

 

However still I've not really heard of these types of issues with RX 580's, they are known to be very rock solid and have been for a long time. They use to take a beating only in the games with specific things like Game Works or other things tailored to Nvidia architecture (they have much better memory compression so any game that requires high memory bandwidth suffers on AMD cards with lower raw bandwidth).

[Mark Kaine]

52 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Because it actually wouldn't lead to much higher global sales so aiming for par at a higher profit margin is just better for AMD. Doing the above would actually cost more leading to running a lower profit margin and lower investment in a division of AMD that is already severely lacking resources.

Ya, but that's actually a pretty shortsighted business strat, it's why they're behind nvidia so much in market share, people see this, they think why should I buy the more expensive product when I can get a 1060 and AMD doesn't even try... 

 

I think 1060 is one of the most sold cards because it just hits that sweet spot between price and performance and AMD doesn't really have anything to compete? 

[Mark Kaine]

55 minutes ago, leadeater said:

However still I've not really heard of these types of issues with RX 580's, they are known to be very rock solid and have been for a long time. They use to take a beating only in the games with specific things like Game Works or other things tailored to Nvidia architecture (they have much better memory compression so any game that requires high memory bandwidth suffers on AMD cards with lower raw bandwidth).

Yeah, I don't know either it really performed very poorly - it could have been PSU, or a plethora of unlikely reasons, it ran pretty hot, but not that hot either, around 75C... Thing is it ran fine in benchmarking? So really odd, still a horrible impression, after my last ATi card, the glorious x1950gt (or some such) I'm pretty sure that was a mid/low end card but it just worked and even came with easy to use overclock software, it was just a slider from 1-10 lol... It did work tho!

 

Anyways that's also why I mention the 5500xt, while it was overall also rather disappointing product it at least worked and performed somewhat within expectations. 

 

Hmm. Also I can run tekken at 1440p, maxed out - against the bears (the framerate killers!) with my setup... I think it's somehow cpu bound (not sure) but I agree otherwise it's pretty bad especially the online is bad... Same for soulcalibur, they needed to fire the people responsible years ago lol, oh well.

[Random_Person1234]

7 hours ago, Rym said:

I see minecraft in there. That's a win for me!

Remember, that's minecraft bedrock, not java.

[thechinchinsong]

7 hours ago, Mark Kaine said:

I was specifically comparing 1060 and 5500 (yes I know it's not supposed to be "great") and in pretty much everything the 5500 was 'better', (specs were similar, except the amd has more ram and more 'flops' eh) 

on average like 10fps in benchmarks, including the one game I'm playing (MHW) 

 

And, well, yet again this was highly misleading and didn't work out on my setup, it performed significantly worse, definitely better than the 580 I had some time ago though, so there's that at least. 

 

 

I mean thats why I said it's not really a good comparison when you look at things like RAM and 'flops'. They way that Nvidia and AMD implement things like stream processors, Memory, even the flop calculations/amount of work done per clock is different. It's easy to assume two products match up since they have similar or the same product descriptions, but one should look into it more. It's not misleading, its something done by every tech company in the world.

[leadeater]

5 hours ago, Mark Kaine said:

x1950gt (or some such) I'm pretty sure that was a mid/low end card but it just worked and even came with easy to use overclock software,

X1950 was actually a pretty high end GPU, only problem was there were like 50 variants of it lol. X1950 GT/Pro/XT/XTX & Crossfire Edition. Was the fastest ATI GPU at the time and only the Nvidia 7900 GTX was faster, until the 8800 GTX & Ultra came out.

[Mark Kaine]

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

X1950 was actually a pretty high end GPU, only problem was there were like 50 variants of it lol. X1950 GT/Pro/XT/XTX & Crossfire Edition. Was the fastest ATI GPU at the time and only the Nvidia 7900 GTX was faster, until the 8800 GTX & Ultra came out.

Oh, well it was really good, I just thought it must have been rather low end because I paid 200 and then saw the same card for 150 afterwards plus it had no fans whatsoever... Didn't bother me back then tho, and indeed it just worked without fans lol, never measured temps or anything, probably the pc was pretty toasty (was a oem dell where I just slapped in the card and more RAM).

[leadeater]

6 hours ago, Mark Kaine said:

Ya, but that's actually a pretty shortsighted business strat, it's why they're behind nvidia so much in market share, people see this, they think why should I buy the more expensive product when I can get a 1060 and AMD doesn't even try... 

But it's not short sighted, it literally wouldn't drive much more sales like you think it would. I mean just look at how long it actually took for things to change for AMD CPUs that were significantly cheaper and had great performance. They are behind Nvidia because they always have been and Nvidia were able to capitalize on their market position more than a decade ago, unless Nvidia has an Intel issue it's not going to change quickly, not at all.

 

Quite literally the only reason AMD is getting as much success as they are in the CPU market is the roadblocks Intel have been facing, this has nothing to do with discrediting how good AMD Zen CPUs are because they are excellent but a not stifled Intel would mean a very different situation to what we have now.

 

So there is little reason to release a GPU on to the market with a low profit margin in the hopes people will actually buy it over Nvidia, because they won't and haven't on mass in the past either, when you know Nvidia is highly capable of executing a new and better architecture and you cannot because you didn't get a good enough return to invest to compete.

 

Getting 5% to 15% more sales with half the profit margin certainly is not better business strategy, you'd be making more selling less at a higher profit margin.

[RejZoR]

So, tomorrow it is? The Big Navi launch? Can't wait

[Blademaster91]

7 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

So, tomorrow it is? The Big Navi launch? Can't wait

I'm more excited for Big Navi than cards from Nvidia that are going to be out of stock for months, although Nvidia has crushed whatever AMD is going to release by moving their 3070 launch to a day before the RX 6000 series launch.