AMD did NOT disappoint me

[Egg-Roll]

1 hour ago, Hymenopus_Coronatus said:

There will definitely be some games where AMD wins and Nvidia gets beat and vice versa. What I meant is that Nvidia will not likely become like AMD was, competing at the low end/midrange

They don't need to be, but it would be a nice change for green to chase red for a while. AMD has the power of pricing on their side whereas nVidia is like Intel, ignorant and expects full or near full price to be paid.

 

For example (since buying anything "new" is impossible), today I can get a 3700X for $100 less than a 10700K both with discounts, just like how I can get a RX 5700 XT for $500 vs $700 for a 2070 Super(currently no discounts), both of which are about 10-15% performance within each other (plus RT for green, among a few extra perks that don't really justify the $200 extra cost). That's why I think if AMD can pull even a small victory against nvidia in general they will win the market share for that year.

 

1 hour ago, Rohith_Kumar_Sp said:

Who made this chart? it's so DAMN confusing, please sort it by FPS.... 

@GabenJr

 

That's the issue you have with that chart? In the video Linus claims AMD blew away nvidia then goes and says nvidia blew away AMD with DLSS yet nvidia clearly matches AMD with DLSS enabled, and after second looking the 3080 is within margin of error without... I understand he said with it disabled, but if one is going to enable it then nvidia clearly wins as they will always enable it when possible... Even I don't have DLSS enabled because to me it's useless most of the time, so why bother even including it?

[GoldenLag]

47 minutes ago, greenhorn said:

but they happened on such small time scales that the PSUs wouldn't have problems with them.

you say that, but im asking specifically because there are transiense sensetive PSUs out there. 

[greenhorn]

Just now, GoldenLag said:

you say that, but im asking specifically because there are transiense sensetive PSUs out there. 

Yes, some of them are more sensitive than others. Nevertheless, I have been following Igor's Lab for quite some time now and I know that Igor has first hand industry experience, he definitely knows what he is talking about,so I tend to trust him. If you are looking at a particular PSU to use together with one of the cards, you can maybe find a review out there that addresses your concerns.

[GoldenLag]

1 minute ago, greenhorn said:

Yes, some of them are more sensitive than others. Nevertheless, I have been following Igor's Lab for quite some time now and I know that Igor has first hand industry experience, he definitely knows what he is talking about,so I tend to trust him. If you are looking at a particular PSU to use together with one of the cards, you can maybe find a review out there that addresses your concerns.

thats the thing tho, we have a vague notion of what PSUs are transient sensetive. LTT has a couple on hand they can try out. so instead of waiting a week for r/seasonic to pop up with multiple pre-fix focus fx not having a good time. would be nice to know close-ish to the release of the cards. 

[Senzelian]

35 minutes ago, Rohith_Kumar_Sp said:

Who made this chart? it's so DAMN confusing, please sort it by FPS.... 

@GabenJr

 

 

 

Cleaned it up!

 

(Don't take that srlsy...)
 

[SFFDesigns]

15 minutes ago, Egg-Roll said:

nVidia is like Intel, ignorant and expects full or near full price to be paid.

I don't think they are quite like intel. I think they are fully aware that they may need to drop prices if necessary, like they did with 3000 series (3080 margins are reportedly super low from what I heard)

[Egg-Roll]

1 hour ago, dizmo said:

Completely disagree. It's in a lot of new titles, so it absolutely should be considered. Especially seeing as it'll be another 2 years until we see a new graphics card come out. I don't foresee them closing the gap in a year. Cards come out every 2 years unless they're just little refreshes. 2022 will be a more interesting battle for sure, though.

 

Also, AMD and drivers...

Considering RT completely kills the fps in games it's too young until the games you play can hit at least 60fps, preferably 90, plus only 20 games currently support RTX natively, and currently sounds like SLI in that manner. Currently the only the 3080/3090 can push 60fps+ w/o DLSS in 1440p, and what's the point in buying a expensive gpu for RT in 1080 60+fps? I would love to see a updated RTX benchmark in 1440p, but imo that should wait till Cyberpunk 2077, but I still hold on my words RT is useless, at least till 60+ is manageable, and who would buy a $700+ card for Minecraft? So no I don't consider that game at all.

 

True, forgot about 2 years lol, so 2022 is the date to remember, still will be interesting.

 

Yea AMD drivers need some work, lots of work... Apparently they are better on *nix, but I never tested it. At least their drivers+addons (in the past) never decided to fuck off when playing a game on me unlike shadowplay/experience

 

1 hour ago, Hymenopus_Coronatus said:

I don't think they are quite like intel. I think they are fully aware that they may need to drop prices if necessary, like they did with 3000 series (3080 margins are reportedly super low from what I heard)

Nah, if they wanted to drop prices they would have with the 2070 Super, else I wouldn't have bought the 5700 XT (I was seriously debating about it, I just couldn't justify it in the end esp with 10% off open box reference card for water cooling). The 3000 series profits right now are low or non existing due to low order numbers, their profits will go up in the coming months as they get more from Uncle Sammy.

[AlTech]

3 hours ago, porina said:

Maybe varies with countries, most in UK never saw the 3080 in stock at launch. I did have 3070 in my basket but lost it when website died.

Funnily enough there are 3080s back in stock now in the UK but nowhere near MSRP.

3 hours ago, porina said:

 

Anyway, is the tldw (in general, I skimmed the video) pretty much confirming the rumours, 6800XT is ball park comparable to a 3080 for gaming if you exclude RT, DLSS and SAM. Drop back up to about a tier if you have RT. Need to look at more written reviews for detail, and so many variables to consider now...

It depends on the specific games you test. Some games it's a landslide AMD win, others the reverse is true, but most are indeed are a tossup at 4K with 1440p and 1080p being where AMD is winning a lot.

[GoldenLag]

31 minutes ago, Hymenopus_Coronatus said:

3080 margins are reportedly super low from what I heard

on the AIB side it is rumoured to be the case. how accurate that is anyones guess. but that doesnt mean Nvidia is taking a hit. 

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

1 hour ago, Egg-Roll said:

That's the issue you have with that chart? In the video Linus claims ---bla bla bla----- 

you are making things up, i have no problem with the actual review, my issue is with the graph, it's a mess, who even graphs that way ? people seeing the reviews are gonna for from top to bottom and them compare where the card they want to see the performance lies on chart

[porina]

10 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

Funnily enough there are 3080s back in stock now in the UK but nowhere near MSRP.

Got some examples? I had a quick look at the more reputable sellers like Scan and Novatech, not the faintest whiff of a GPU available there.

 

10 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

It depends on the specific games you test. Some games it's a landslide AMD win, others the reverse is true, but most are indeed are a tossup at 4K with 1440p and 1080p being where AMD is winning a lot.

I only just looked at the techpowerup review, as it is written and they test a lot of games. In their overall averages, the 3080 is still slightly ahead.

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6800-xt/30.html

I really don't think it really matters if one side is better or worse overall in specific titles, and the difference in the average is so small it doesn't really matter. We're looking at a few % which is not going to make or break the card. Hence my overall impression remains unchanged that, on average, the 6800XT is for practical purposes in the same gaming class as 3080. If you didn't have a different reason to pick either side, they'll perform close enough it doesn't matter.

 

[GoldenLag]

10 minutes ago, Rohith_Kumar_Sp said:

you are making things up, i have no problem with the actual review, my issue is with the graph, it's a mess, who even graphs that way ? people seeing the reviews are gonna for from top to bottom and them compare where the card they want to see the performance lies on chart

the graph are indeed, what shall we call it........ Unorthodox. its hard to get a good look at how each card compare at a glance. and since that is why the graph is there, it should at least fulfill that function, and it sorta looses that. at that point just give me the numbers, no graph needed. 

[AlTech]

7 minutes ago, porina said:

Got some examples? I had a quick look at the more reputable sellers like Scan and Novatech, not the faintest whiff of a GPU available there.

Main one I've seen is Currys.

 

They had some on sale earlier this week. I checked just now and they have at least 5 different models in stock ranging from £720 all the way to £930.

 

Afaik they're out of stock of all 3070 models they carry.

Quote

 

I only just looked at the techpowerup review, as it is written and they test a lot of games. In their overall averages, the 3080 is still slightly ahead.

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6800-xt/30.html

I really don't think it really matters if one side is better or worse overall in specific titles, and the difference in the average is so small it doesn't really matter. We're looking at a few % which is not going to make or break the card.

AC Valhalla and a couple others were around 40% faster on 6800XT than 3080 at 1440p according to Hardware Unboxed.

Quote

Hence my overall impression remains unchanged that, on average, the 6800XT is for practical purposes in the same gaming class as 3080. If you didn't have a different reason to pick either side, they'll perform close enough it doesn't matter.

 

1080p and 1440p favor the 6800XT. 4K is anybody's gues who would win in a game between the two.

[papajo]

5 hours ago, GabenJr said:

After nearly a decade struggling under Nvidia’s GeForce GPUs, AMD’s Radeon is finally back on top – Assuming AMD’s marketing was true. But is there enough here to recommend?

 

 

 

I think one potential issue that SAM didnt show any performance increase at all was your test bench. 

 

Yes the CPU can address the entire memory of the 6800xt (16 GB vram) but if your RAM is only 16 GB (2*8GB) then that doesnt leave much of a space especially since some gets to be reserved by windows, you should run 32GB of RAM and see if there is any difference in respect to SAM. 

 

 

Also what is it about the relive hate... the image looks much more defined than the x264. e.g the fence and frankly EVERYTHING in the scene.. (e.g 9:28 on the video) 

 

Or the dlss.. hate towards amd...

 

 They are absolutely right you buy a PC graphics GPU exactly to get better image quality aside from performance than e.g consoles otherwise lets just become console peasants and introduce checkerboard schemes and upscaling like consoles do and it is relatively good yea... but it is not the real deal and that's what PC "master race" is all about  +Dlss is supported only in some titles you cant just turn on dllss on any game you want either. 

[porina]

4 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

Main one I've seen is Currys.

 

They had some on sale earlier this week. I checked just now and they have at least 5 different models in stock ranging from £720 all the way to £930.

They may be listed on their site, but have you tried to buy one? It says "not available for delivery" when I click through on the first few Asus cards. Also not available if I put in my postcode, so maybe there are some elsewhere, but this is still far from available.

 

4 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

AC Valhalla and a couple others were around 40% faster on 6800XT than 3080 at 1440p according to Hardware Unboxed.

1080p and 1440p favor the 6800XT. 4K is anybody's gues who would win in a game between the two.

I haven't seen HWU review yet, but what you write is NOT what I saw based on others. I'm also giving AMD the advantage here by disregarding RT games where they lag much more behind.

[AlTech]

1 minute ago, porina said:

They may be listed on their site, but have you tried to buy one? It says "not available for delivery" when I click through on the first few Asus cards. Also not available if I put in my postcode, so maybe there are some elsewhere, but this is still far from available.

They might be in specific stores collection only.

 

Defo not widely available tho. And I'm not expecting new AMD or Nvidia cards in 2021 in the UK above MSRP let alone at all in 2021 because of a situation we're no longer allowed to talk about.

[SFFDesigns]

38 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

but that doesnt mean Nvidia is taking a hit. 

Yeah they definitely aren't, their margins are just much lower than 20 series for example

[porina]

2 minutes ago, porina said:

I haven't seen HWU review yet

https://www.techspot.com/review/2144-amd-radeon-6800-xt/

6800XT relative to 3080: on average 6% faster at 1080p, 3% faster at 1440p, 5% slower at 4k. 18 game average.

 

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6800-xt/35.html

3080 relative to 6800XT: on average 6% faster at 1080p, 4% faster at 1440p, 6% faster at 4k. 23 game average, no RT.

 

That still doesn't change my position, they're near enough the same it doesn't matter. I'll leave it to others to figure out why the differences here, is it the game mix, or other differences in the test systems or configuration.

[Emily Young]

35 minutes ago, Rohith_Kumar_Sp said:

you are making things up, i have no problem with the actual review, my issue is with the graph, it's a mess, who even graphs that way ? people seeing the reviews are gonna for from top to bottom and them compare where the card they want to see the performance lies on chart

The problem with sorting by FPS is that the positions in the stack can change constantly, and when we used to do that, people complained quite loudly about it. If I'd had my time back for this video, I would have done this order:

• 6800 XT SAM
• 6800 XT
• 3080
• 6800 SAM
• 6800
• 3070

Including SAM results was probably the thing that caused the most clutter, but I didn't want to go through a second round of graphs with SAM on vs off.

[Egg-Roll]

1 hour ago, Rohith_Kumar_Sp said:

i have no problem with the actual review, my issue is with the graph, it's a mess, who even graphs that way ? people seeing the reviews are gonna for from top to bottom and them compare where the card they want to see the performance lies on chart

So you have no issue with Linus making false claims? Because that is what he did, if at best the 6800 XT is equal or a little slower than the 3080 at stock, it doesn't destroy it as Linus mentioned in the video. "nvidia stands no chance against amd"

 

As for the chart they did AMD, AMD+SAM, nvidia, nvidia+DLSS. It looks like a mess and truth be told they should have done AMD,nvidia,AMD+SAM,nvidia+DLSS. I actually have little issues with the chart, but the far out claims Linus has made about AMD.

[Emily Young]

1 minute ago, Egg-Roll said:

So you have no issue with Linus making false claims? Because that is what he did, if at best the 6800 XT is equal or a little slower than the 3080 at stock, it doesn't destroy it as Linus mentioned in the video. "nvidia stands no chance against amd"

... Does context mean nothing to you? It was in reference to Shadow of the Tomb Raider's 1440p raster performance, not an overall statement.

 

25 minutes ago, papajo said:

I think one potential issue that SAM didnt show any performance increase at all was your test bench. 

 

Yes the CPU can address the entire memory of the 6800xt (16 GB vram) but if your RAM is only 16 GB (2*8GB) then that doesnt leave much of a space especially since some gets to be reserved by windows, you should run 32GB of RAM and see if there is any difference in respect to SAM.

I don't think amount of main system memory is a bottleneck here - SAM made plenty of difference in multiple benchmarks, just not in MSFS. AFAIK, addressing 16GB of VRAM doesn't mean assigning 16GB of system RAM to mirror it. Thinking AGP aperture size - You could run with less main memory than the card has and still be fine. They're not directly related (as I understand it, some system RAM is used to cache the address registers, but not the data itself).

 

Re ReLive... You're entitled to your opinion I guess? It looks like a blocky mess with especially bad fringing on the neon signs to me.

 

Re DLSS... The point is that with AMD's ray tracing performance being what it is, not having it kills any hope of running eg. Minecraft RTX on AMD with reasonable frame rates.

[Egg-Roll]

1 hour ago, GabenJr said:

... Does context mean nothing to you? It was in reference to Shadow of the Tomb Raider's 1440p raster performance, not an overall statement.

Even then it doesn't destroy nvidia, but is its equal. Or is your chart lying to me? The only time the 6800 XT destroys nvidia is comparing it to the 3070. Equally I wouldn't call the 6800 destroying the 3070 either as the performance gains aren't very high, esp for the price difference between the 2.

 

AMD based on your chart has a very mild advantage using the SAM setup against 3080, hardly justifiable to make such claims as he did in the video. If the 6800 XT was $100-150 less than the 3080 sure, but it's not, therefore it can't destroy something that is basically its equal esp if the AIBs make the overall market pricing less of a gap than the original $50.

[dizmo]

33 minutes ago, Egg-Roll said:

Considering RT completely kills the fps in games it's too young until the games you play can hit at least 60fps, preferably 90, plus only 20 games currently support RTX natively, and currently sounds like SLI in that manner. Currently the only the 3080/3090 can push 60fps+ w/o DLSS in 1440p, and what's the point in buying a expensive gpu for RT in 1080 60+fps? I would love to see a updated RTX benchmark in 1440p, but imo that should wait till Cyberpunk 2077, but I still hold on my words RT is useless, at least till 60+ is manageable, and who would buy a $700+ card for Minecraft? So no I don't consider that game at all.

 

True, forgot about 2 years lol, so 2022 is the date to remember, still will be interesting.

 

Yea AMD drivers need some work, lots of work... Apparently they are better on *nix, but I never tested it. At least their drivers+addons (in the past) never decided to fuck off when playing a game on me unlike shadowplay/experience

I mean it takes a hit for sure, but it's not nearly as demanding as it was even a generation ago. Not everyone is aiming for the highest of framerates, some people still go for polish and ambience over pure speed.

 

I think they're just "better" on Linux (I assume that's what you meant?) because the others don't really bother optimizing for it. So it's not necessarily that their drivers are good, just better than someone that doesn't put in any effort. Apparently their software still has a lot of odd quirks and bugs. It's sad, really, that it's been this way for so many years and they just haven't bothered putting in the work to fix it. Guess that's what happens when you don't make nearly as much money as the other players.

 

I guess you weren't one of the many unlucky 5700 owners

[Egg-Roll]

1 hour ago, dizmo said:

I mean it takes a hit for sure, but it's not nearly as demanding as it was even a generation ago. Not everyone is aiming for the highest of framerates, some people still go for polish and ambience over pure speed.

 

I think they're just "better" on Linux (I assume that's what you meant?) because the others don't really bother optimizing for it. So it's not necessarily that their drivers are good, just better than someone that doesn't put in any effort. Apparently their software still has a lot of odd quirks and bugs. It's sad, really, that it's been this way for so many years and they just haven't bothered putting in the work to fix it. Guess that's what happens when you don't make nearly as much money as the other players.

 

I guess you weren't one of the many unlucky 5700 owners

Yea the 2000 series was horrid and was more of an adopter tax/demo card , I'm looking forward to the 4000 series cards before I take RT seriously. Games can be played at 30fps, if one can live at that then sure RT all the way, I can't, anymore.

 

Yup what I meant, but it does make sense since AMD drivers are opensource (I think/in a way) and the fact it's a nix system too with a good community behind it. Maybe now with equal level of competition to nvidia they will have more money to hopefully develop better drivers, at least one can hope. I have had a few hickups back in the 270 days but nothing game breaking or issues that would make me to never buy them again. I still like nvidia (more), but if I can game w/o issues for less and equal performance, I'll always choose that over greed I mean green.

 

I genuinely didn't know about those issues till just now Never had a issue with MSI AB, tho I've not played on it yet, I've only folded on it. Equally I don't have a need to tamper with the stock settings. I guess I have more incentive to actually play on the thing now to see if I run into those issues. Hopefully most or all of those issues are now fixed.

[papajo]

1 hour ago, GabenJr said:

AFAIK, addressing 16GB of VRAM doesn't mean assigning 16GB of system RAM to mirror it

It's not  a matter of mirroring as it is a matter of processing this is how the pipeline works (and that's a reason while to an extend faster RAM yields higher FPS rates) 

 

https://composter.com.ua/documents/ECN_Resizable_BAR.pdf

 

On the 2nd paragraph. 

 

Quote

2. Benefits as a Result of the Changes The Resizable BAR Capability allows system software to allocate all resources in systems where the total amount of resources requesting allocation plus the amount of installed system memory is larger than the supported address space. Currently, resources are either: a) simply not allocated and left out of the system, or b) forced to report a smaller aperture in order to be allocated, but that aperture size in not optimal in all uses of the product. This change allows the system to be configured with optimal resource settings.

 

In fact in order to ensure optimal results for SAM I would suggest not only increasing the capacity of RAM but also disabling the hard drive swap folder to ensure windows doesnt do anything stupid like allocating game related resources there.