UPDATE: NVIDIA backtracks - Hardware Unboxed blacklisted from receiving GeForce FE review samples over “focus on rasterization over ray-tracing”

[Mark Kaine]

4 hours ago, Egg-Roll said:

I would love more variety

there's really no reason to make excuses, though, I think. it wouldn't cost more to have a better variety of games, I think it would even be warranted to review these cards properly, quality generally went downhill hard of all those "tech channels" this year, it seems tired, and not creative at all... yes I understand there's an audience but that doesn't mean I shouldn't be critical and ask for improvements. 

 

4 hours ago, Egg-Roll said:

That was a 2 second search

heh, I actually found this video long ago, I appreciate the effort of the maker but it's not really conclusive - iirc it's also unclear if they used the hi res texture pack or not...  still not bad, better than nothing - I would have loved to see things pushed more tho haha. 

 

4 hours ago, Moonzy said:

HUB used to include mhw in their old GPU videos iirc, that's why I subbed to them

interesting... I mean I get it's an "old" game by now and also not as popular as it *should*be, people always just seemed to play when there were new events and armors or monsters, understandable, but a bit sad also, a game design failure in a way, though Capcom obviously wanted it like that instead of more long time engagement of players... 

 

I still think - it would be a nice show case for new hardware however, from discussion with friends and also reading around, a lot of people have issues getting the game running properly and it's always grounds of discussion therfore.

 

It does run well with the right measures and settings though, which makes it rather interesting imo, it also scales well, I got it pretty playable on a 2200G even (at low settings obviously) 

 

4 hours ago, Moonzy said:

it's shitly coded to say the least

well I disagree about that obviously, didn't we figure out last time that it uses a lot of cores almost equally (don't 100% recall)? I always had the impression it's programmed really nicely with tons of options and scalability etc - there's definitely some issues like the blurry aa solutions, which is annoying... but overall it runs great for what it is, i love the seemless stages etc... 

 

4 hours ago, Moonzy said:

it's not a good benchmark, there's no good way to benchmark it

AT Lunastra supernova or bust IMO!!!   

 

[CosmicV]

Hi, I think I may have posted in the wrong place.. I won't paste a repeat of it here but will add a link to it instead.

 

it's just some thoughts on the whole nVidia fiasco and my own imagined letter to nVidia (that I wrote mainly to blow off some steam after I found out what happened with HUB).

 

 

I'm just one gamer and know that I don't actually speak for the gaming community,

 

but if the gaming community were to send nVidia a letter I wonder what that might look like.

 

[leadeater]

 

Just went live so watching it now myself.

[Nex6]

12 hours ago, leadeater said:

How am I not being reasonable, Nvidia can send out as many samples as they wish and 100% have the capability to do so. They particularly do have this capability even more so now that they are a retailer for their own products and have global supply chain shipping for that.

 

How is it you somehow think review samples are limited? They are only limited in by way of how many Nvidia wishes to send out. If Nvidia wants to send out 100% of their entire stock as review samples they could do that, they won't but they could.

 

What is unreasonable is implying that there is an infinite number of reviewers, in particular that Nvidia would actually consider to work with. How many reviewers do you actually think there are globally? A tiny fraction compared to global stock, it's so small it's inconsequential. Having the required staffing resources to support these reviewers is a much bigger factor than the number of graphics cards and ability to ship them to those reviewers.

 

 

You only think it was not fair because you value RT higher than many other people do and as I stated so few people actually buy solely on the basis of RT right now and even when weighing it in to the purchase decision it is little more than "generally how good is it". So tell me how did you not get a sense of the performance increase of RT during the Hardware Unboxed review? You were shown data of a game and could see how much improvement there was. Now I understand you wanted to see more games but your assumption there was that the percentage improvement from the last generation might be different on different games, which could very well be the case or it may not.

 

The problem is it comes back to how much time a reviewer has, Hardware Unboxed chooses to test a larger number of games than many other reviewers to get a stronger more statically significant average performance across the sample size. So if there isn't any signs that there is a great difference between games for this improvement and their audience does not significantly value the RT performance of products yet this is the content that will always be cut when time constrained.

 

It is not fair of you to demand that a reviewer do more than what is possible in the given time and to demand something that so few care about as much as you do. If you want to see a more RT focused review then you can go find one, Hardware Unboxed is not obligated to tailor their review to you and they will monitor their audience to see what the trends are and cater to that.

 

Like i said they can only decide on what they wish to market and push, that does not actually make them selling point. Nvidia could paint their cards green and push that in their marketing but that in no way makes it a selling point of the product, not unless the buyer likes green and that only makes it a positive selling point to that person. Unless the majority of customers buy cards happen to all like the colour green then it is not a selling point of the product no matter how much money Nvidia puts in to marketing the fact that it is green.

 

Correct, the only two that I already gave you. What you were talking about and probably still are is a sponsorship video which is not a review. Please do not start confusing sponsored content and sponsorship deals with product reviews, this is already happening and causes real problems.

 

Some companies would very much love to control the narrative and presentation around their products and have already started taking measures to do just that and such behavior has no place in product reviews.

 

That is the risk companies agree to when it comes to reviews, it could be negative. Companies do not have an inherent right to positive reviews of their product from reviewers, only fairness. What value would reviews have if all of them were always positive? How does that help the consumer? 

Ray tracing is literally in the name of the product.

 

No excuse for 5% of day 1 review.

[D13H4RD]

52 minutes ago, Nex6 said:

Ray tracing is literally in the name of the product.

 

No excuse for 5% of day 1 review.

For what it’s worth, RTX isn’t just for ray-tracing. 

 

Even though that’s its primary thing (RTX), RTX is an entire platform, notably comprising of not just real-time ray-tracing but also other features that leverage on machine-learning to work, stuff like DLSS and RTX Voice (now absorbed in Broadcast).

 

And, funnily enough, also includes improved rasterization, as RT in its current implementations require strong rasterization performance to begin with. Fully ray-traced modern titles would be on the way in the next decade probably.

[Taf the Ghost]

7 hours ago, D13H4RD said:

For what it's worth, ray-tracing isn't a fundamentally new concept. It's been used for quite a few years in rendering, notably for films that incorporate CGI. It's just that the process of RT is computationally taxing, so much so that to render a fully ray-traced scene is measured in seconds per frame. 

 

NVIDIA's just the first to roll out consumer graphics cards that include dedicated hardware to help accelerate calculations for RT with Turing. Not entirely sure if they rolled out their own API for, but a majority of the RTsupported games use DXR for their RT. Considering that RT is often described as the "holy grail" of computer graphics, I'd wager that the adoption of real-time RT for video games was inevitable. Someone just had to lay down the first patch on the path towards it. 

Microsoft is the ones that spearheaded bringing DXR to reality. They wanted it for Consoles. Nvidia basically rushed out their implementation because MS had decided it was time to start the long process. Ray Tracing has been "the future" since the 90s. It's just really expensive to do in a general compute sense, so you need dedicated hardware for it. Thus the chicken & egg problem.

 

The industry has basically been stuck needing someone to move first. That was MS. They built out the software structure. The big announcement was I believe March 2018, 6 months before Nvidia launched the 2000 series. 

[D13H4RD]

5 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

Microsoft is the ones that spearheaded bringing DXR to reality. They wanted it for Consoles. Nvidia basically rushed out their implementation because MS had decided it was time to start the long process. Ray Tracing has been "the future" since the 90s. It's just really expensive to do in a general compute sense, so you need dedicated hardware for it. Thus the chicken & egg problem.

 

The industry has basically been stuck needing someone to move first. That was MS. They built out the software structure. The big announcement was I believe March 2018, 6 months before Nvidia launched the 2000 series. 

Pretty much. Microsoft rolled out the software/APIs for ray-tracing to be implemented. All that was needed was hardware that can leverage it without crippling performance to a severe extent.

[leadeater]

1 hour ago, Nex6 said:

Ray tracing is literally in the name of the product.

 

No excuse for 5% of day 1 review.

Yea going to go with a big no there, this is the exact same point as before but instead of Nvidia's marketing points it's now somehow the name of the product that dictates how it should be reviewed? That's a no on that one too.

 

Percentage of content is irrelevant to whether or not you got the required information to make an informed purchase discussion as a consumer. Was there data in the review that pertained to DLSS and RT, yes. Were you told that for more information if you want it then it will follow soon, yes. Did you have other alternative reviews you could have turned to to get the information you were after, also yes.

 

There is no excuse for you putting your expectations above that of everyone else, if the majority put more weight in to rasterization then rasterization shall be emphasized. You have options, if you do not like Hardware Unboxed then turn to someone else. I and many others appreciate that they do very large sample sizes which helps to give a much more accurate picture of how products perform and whether or not outlier titles where performance above the normal average is skewing the results. For detailed information I go to Gamers Nexus, who focus on fewer games and go in to specific details and analysis. I get different things from different reviewers, I do not expect them to all do the same thing.

 

Nvidia could call their product what ever they like, has nothing to do with the review process.

 

Nvidia made a big deal out of VR and the USB-C connector on a previous new generation of cards and had developed specific technology to improve performance in VR titles, guess how much people cared about that? So why are you not also complaining that is is not tested, Nvidia went through all that effort to develop that technology and VR was the future of gaming so why is this not being tested? Because nobody cared and it gained little traction and the selection of VR games is small and it's very hard to benchmark VR games, it was not a lack of marketing by Nvidia because they had a huge dedicated section to VR in multiple press conferences.

 

Nvidia can yell in to the void as much as they like about how important they think something is, we do not have to care. Review content and methodology will change when consumers ask for it and there actually has been wider uptake in the industry, not when a company says so.

[Taf the Ghost]

1 minute ago, D13H4RD said:

Pretty much. Microsoft rolled out the software/APIs for ray-tracing to be implemented. All that was needed was hardware that can leverage it without crippling performance to a severe extent.

Well, it was a bit more like "We're doing this, AMD, we want this in the next console GPU". Call up Nvidia, "yo, we're doing this".

[D13H4RD]

1 minute ago, Taf the Ghost said:

Well, it was a bit more like "We're doing this, AMD, we want this in the next console GPU". Call up Nvidia, "yo, we're doing this".

It’d also make a headline grabbing point with Turing, so I can sorta see why. 

 

Too bad Turing also took a huge L.

[Taf the Ghost]

Just now, D13H4RD said:

It’d also make a headline grabbing point with Turing, so I can sorta see why. 

 

Too bad Turing also took a huge L.

From a view of the patents, it looks a bit more like AMD had far more lead time. RT hardware designs have been around for a while and all of the GPU companies would have something in their portfolio. It's always looked like Nvidia rushed it out with Turing, basically taking the next iteration of Volta and throwing the RT functionality in there. Which could have been done as a single decision in 2016. It's basically rendered "RTX" has a tech demo if you aren't running the down-res DLSS function and the developers put in a lot of time.

 

RT tech makes for great screenshots, but it's really not ready for prime time. AMD's approach has seemed far more effective for the long term, but there isn't that much silicon dedicated to it. However, we don't have extensive testing or technical documentation yet on it, so it remains to be seen if the impression holds out. But, with it in consoles, the GPU Devs will have time to work out what they can do on the first generation of RT hardware. The next console generation should bring significantly more power in that direction, but we're looking at close to 2030 before we start really seeing full hardware-based lighting approaches.

[Egg-Roll]

1 hour ago, Nex6 said:

Ray tracing is literally in the name of the product.

 

No excuse for 5% of day 1 review.

Yes, because everyone buying a RTX GPU is doing so only for RT.

No, very few buy GPUs for their "RT performance" or should I say lack thereof. If they wanted to name the cards after a competent feature they should have called their cards DLSS 3060 Ti etc... Tho that wouldn't sound as catchy.

 

6 hours ago, Mark Kaine said:

there's really no reason to make excuses, though, I think. it wouldn't cost more to have a better variety of games, I think it would even be warranted to review these cards properly, quality generally went downhill hard of all those "tech channels" this year, it seems tired, and not creative at all... yes I understand there's an audience but that doesn't mean I shouldn't be critical and ask for improvements. 

GNs content has stayed relatively the same and informative, imo LTTs content has gone down esp towards AMDs 6000 series.

 

It's not the cost of games that makes it expensive and potentially unprofitable. It's the man hours required, you have to record the FPS of every game make charts etc. If each game takes 1 person 10-15 minutes to get the numbers then another 15 minutes to make the chart and input it into the video, that's 30 minutes a game, more games more cost, labor is the most expensive part at least for LTT, for other channels like Jay and GN their crew would become overloaded to do such things.

 

Not to mention I've already criticized LTT for moving too damn fast in their videos with charts already, which means if they add more games they have to go faster or cut other tests. LTT is trying to keep within the 10-15 minute mark where as GN and others typically don't care.

 

Edit:

  

2 hours ago, leadeater said:

Just went live so watching it now myself.

Day 1 review = garbage. Thought so

It does make sense, you have LTT Jay GN and others all fighting for the limelight.

[leadeater]

25 minutes ago, Egg-Roll said:

Day 1 review = garbage. Thought so

Yea that surprised me how poorly those videos perform compared to their follow up content. To me it actually makes sense and matches up as to why I watch their videos. I always go back for their 36 - 56 game test follow up videos and the extra analysis like DLSS image quality, not just performance. I don't specifically care when I actually watch the video, but that is the case for all of the reviews to be honest. I am not a day one buyer, not even month one.

 

I wait for the GN board/VRM analysis videos, AIB reviews and OC content to find out which board has the highest allowed board power and whether or not custom firmware exists for them to raise it more. Stuff like that. I only want to buy the best possible card, not just a good card or anything that happens to be in stock that is "good enough".

 

Never have I ever known which card I am going to be buying on the first day of release.

[Taf the Ghost]

32 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Yea that surprised me how poorly those videos perform compared to their follow up content. To me it actually makes sense and matches up as to why I watch their videos. I always go back for their 36 - 56 game test follow up videos and the extra analysis like DLSS image quality, not just performance. I don't specifically care when I actually watch the video, but that is the case for all of the reviews to be honest. I am not a day one buyer, not even month one.

 

I wait for the GN board/VRM analysis videos, AIB reviews and OC content to find out which board has the highest allowed board power and whether or not custom firmware exists for them to raise it more. Stuff like that. I only want to buy the best possible card, not just a good card or anything that happens to be in stock that is "good enough".

 

Never have I ever known which card I am going to be buying on the first day of release.

Some of the popular monitor reviews are doing better than the Day 1 launch reviews. That's partially just a matter of eyeballs. When everyone releases the same content, it favors the already "biggest" creators.

[D13H4RD]

38 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Yea that surprised me how poorly those videos perform compared to their follow up content. To me it actually makes sense and matches up as to why I watch their videos. I always go back for their 36 - 56 game test follow up videos and the extra analysis like DLSS image quality, not just performance. I don't specifically care when I actually watch the video, but that is the case for all of the reviews to be honest. I am not a day one buyer, not even month one.

 

I wait for the GN board/VRM analysis videos, AIB reviews and OC content to find out which board has the highest allowed board power and whether or not custom firmware exists for them to raise it more. Stuff like that. I only want to buy the best possible card, not just a good card or anything that happens to be in stock that is "good enough".

 

Never have I ever known which card I am going to be buying on the first day of release.

I don't find that particularly surprising. Linus and Jayz do better not just because they're more popular but they also have a much more "condensed" version that explains the product in a nutshell. It gets the basic outlook done and out of the way without diving much deep into metrics for the sake of video length.

 

Viewers of HWUnboxed and Gamers Nexus generally like to have more detailed and technical stuff, and is why HUB's detailed technical dives and monitor reviews tend to receive more views in general. HWUnboxed in particular has an advantage as they're one of the very few "larger-than-avg" TechTuber who does these sorts of technical dives and monitor reviews.

[Taf the Ghost]

6 minutes ago, D13H4RD said:

I don't find that particularly surprising. Linus and Jayz do better not just because they're more popular but they also have a much more "condensed" version that explains the product in a nutshell. It gets the basic outlook done and out of the way without diving much deep into metrics for the sake of video length.

 

Viewers of HWUnboxed and Gamers Nexus generally like to have more detailed and technical stuff, and is why HUB's detailed technical dives and monitor reviews tend to receive more views in general. HWUnboxed in particular has an advantage as they're one of the very few "larger-than-avg" TechTuber who does these sorts of technical dives and monitor reviews.

The funny bit about the monitor stuff is since there really isn't that much in the way of consistent technical reviews around, especially on YT, it's been this great synergy for HUB. GPU buyers also need monitors occasionally, so it feeds into itself. HUB also, because of the affiliate data, has a really detailed insight on where the Enthusiast trends are going. The progression to 1440p/HFR gaming is well underway, which has also informed HUB's GPU testing.

[WkdPaul]

58 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Yea that surprised me how poorly those videos perform compared to their follow up content. To me it actually makes sense and matches up as to why I watch their videos. I always go back for their 36 - 56 game test follow up videos and the extra analysis like DLSS image quality, not just performance. I don't specifically care when I actually watch the video, but that is the case for all of the reviews to be honest. I am not a day one buyer, not even month one.

 

I wait for the GN board/VRM analysis videos, AIB reviews and OC content to find out which board has the highest allowed board power and whether or not custom firmware exists for them to raise it more. Stuff like that. I only want to buy the best possible card, not just a good card or anything that happens to be in stock that is "good enough".

 

Never have I ever known which card I am going to be buying on the first day of release.

 

I always prefer the data driven reviews, like GN and HUB, not that condensed reviews don't have value, but there's so much of it out there that I feel like it's down to the host / type of "energy" you want rather than anything else when it comes to that (not offence to the LMG team, or the other guys out there). And them having split videos kinda makes sense when you take that into account (IMO).

 

 

10 hours ago, GDRRiley said:

ah yes total pushing it.

Pretty sure his reply was sarcasm ... right?

[pas008]

2 hours ago, Taf the Ghost said:

Microsoft is the ones that spearheaded bringing DXR to reality. They wanted it for Consoles. Nvidia basically rushed out their implementation because MS had decided it was time to start the long process. Ray Tracing has been "the future" since the 90s. It's just really expensive to do in a general compute sense, so you need dedicated hardware for it. Thus the chicken & egg problem.

 

The industry has basically been stuck needing someone to move first. That was MS. They built out the software structure. The big announcement was I believe March 2018, 6 months before Nvidia launched the 2000 series. 

Didn't Intel push for it with larrabee and amd and nvidia pushed it out?

 

[mariushm]

An obvious solution could possibly be for some of the bigger youtubers to "unionize".  

Make a group of some sort and pay some monthly fee like 20-50$ or maybe even more a month into a pool.

 

* Make some kind of policy where you say we don't review this product unless ALL interested youtubers in the group receive a unit.  For example, not everyone in the group may want to review a "computer case" for example let's say if hardware canucks joins the group, but if two-three youtube channels specialize in reviews of cases, group can ask all 3 if they want to review the case and then reply "as part of a union, we can only review this case if the other members of the union interested also get a review sample" 

 

* Refuse to publish reviews of  nvidia model of graphics card when the third party manufacturer models of same card are under embargo and you're not allowed to publish review of third party manufacturer card for N days (sometimes as little as 2-3 days delay) ....  put your foot down, it's not something that helps customer, it only helps nvidia get more time in the spotlight. 

 

* use some of the funds to purchase hardware and have some kind of "library" system where some members of the "union" could loan hardware for comparative reviews and shit. Yeah, would be a bit hard to ship between canada and australia or even canada - us but it's something to think about. 

 

 

edit:  this was meant to be a reply to some post on a page around 8...10 , hit post and realized it's 18 pages. oh well...

 

[Nex6]

2 hours ago, leadeater said:

Yea going to go with a big no there, this is the exact same point as before but instead of Nvidia's marketing points it's now somehow the name of the product that dictates how it should be reviewed? That's a no on that one too.

 

Percentage of content is irrelevant to whether or not you got the required information to make an informed purchase discussion as a consumer. Was there data in the review that pertained to DLSS and RT, yes. Were you told that for more information if you want it then it will follow soon, yes. Did you have other alternative reviews you could have turned to to get the information you were after, also yes.

 

There is no excuse for you putting your expectations above that of everyone else, if the majority put more weight in to rasterization then rasterization shall be emphasized. You have options, if you do not like Hardware Unboxed then turn to someone else. I and many others appreciate that they do very large sample sizes which helps to give a much more accurate picture of how products perform and whether or not outlier titles where performance above the normal average is skewing the results. For detailed information I go to Gamers Nexus, who focus on fewer games and go in to specific details and analysis. I get different things from different reviewers, I do not expect them to all do the same thing.

 

Nvidia could call their product what ever they like, has nothing to do with the review process.

 

Nvidia made a big deal out of VR and the USB-C connector on a previous new generation of cards and had developed specific technology to improve performance in VR titles, guess how much people cared about that? So why are you not also complaining that is is not tested, Nvidia went through all that effort to develop that technology and VR was the future of gaming so why is this not being tested? Because nobody cared and it gained little traction and the selection of VR games is small and it's very hard to benchmark VR games, it was not a lack of marketing by Nvidia because they had a huge dedicated section to VR in multiple press conferences.

 

Nvidia can yell in to the void as much as they like about how important they think something is, we do not have to care. Review content and methodology will change when consumers ask for it and there actually has been wider uptake in the industry, not when a company says so.

Well, it doesn't matter if you put a big no or a small no, it doesn't add anything to strength of your argumentation. I checked through your arguments again and it looks to me like you are just saying no all the time. There's nothing for me to argue about, we could just go yes no yes no yes no like two kids for 3 weeks. Not my style. So I will thank you for presenting your opinion and leave it at that.

 

If anyone else wants to tackle my points, please do. Still looking for some good arguments and I'm sure some of you do have good arguments. So far I got one and a half good point from the first person who responded and no good points from the second.

[WkdPaul]

3 minutes ago, Nex6 said:

If anyone else wants to tackle my points, please do. Still looking for some good arguments and I'm sure some of you do have good arguments. So far I got one and a half good point from the first person who responded and no good points from the second.

Still looking from good arguments from your pov ... "Ray tracing is literally in the name of the product. No excuse for 5% of day 1 review." isn't a good argument, if one at all.

 

It's pretty dismissive to reply "yeah, no" to a few 100+ words replies. If you're not interested in discussing, then there's no need to reply.

[leadeater]

14 minutes ago, Nex6 said:

If anyone else wants to tackle my points, please do. Still looking for some good arguments and I'm sure some of you do have good arguments. So far I got one and a half good point from the first person who responded and no good points from the second.

Well my first reply to you did have good points, you are just being particularly unreceptive to counter view points to your own which just drives the no responses back towards yourself when you persist back with the very same things.

 

I consider my first reply to you well reasoned and much of it is echoed by the greater YouTube reviewer community itself. You not agreeing does not make them not good points.

 

So you can disagree with me if you like but I take particular objection to you declaring that my points are not good, are not reasoned and not well thought out.

[Egg-Roll]

2 hours ago, leadeater said:

Yea that surprised me how poorly those videos perform compared to their follow up content. To me it actually makes sense and matches up as to why I watch their videos. I always go back for their 36 - 56 game test follow up videos and the extra analysis like DLSS image quality, not just performance. I don't specifically care when I actually watch the video, but that is the case for all of the reviews to be honest. I am not a day one buyer, not even month one.

 

I wait for the GN board/VRM analysis videos, AIB reviews and OC content to find out which board has the highest allowed board power and whether or not custom firmware exists for them to raise it more. Stuff like that. I only want to buy the best possible card, not just a good card or anything that happens to be in stock that is "good enough".

 

Never have I ever known which card I am going to be buying on the first day of release.

I'm never the first to jump on a card either, that is a worst idea than per-ordering a game imo because you can't simply get updates for the card if it's a hardware issue

What was it the 3070 that had the issue because some of the companies got cheap?

 

Personally I'll always ignore DLSS because if I want to play in 1080 and own a 1440 or better monitor, I would just buy the 1080 instead or invest in a better card if possible. Beyond that knowing what the card can do in various games imo is far better than its "average power draw", by all means give lows, averages and spikes so we can make good choices but a bar chart would suffice with that not a chart displaying 2 minutes of work that can confuse people.

 

For me like I've stated in the past if AMD can be had for cheaper with similar performance if that is the route I want to go for the build that will be the route I go. Tho last years 5700 XT was the first time AMD actually meet those requirements for me in a new build, and the 6000 series are no different to that as well imo once stock returns to normal.

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, Egg-Roll said:

6000 series are no different to that as well imo once stock returns to normal.

Also slowly dying of old age here waiting for that haha. I'll likely get serious about buying a GPU late Jan to Feb probably, I pray things are better buy then. Also I hope the clock limits on the core and memory are removed by then too. I'll be water cooling my card(s) and I find it odd even the 6900 XT also has those restrictions, maybe AIB 6900 XT won't but none of them are out yet. Would rather buy an unrestricted 6800 XT though.

[Egg-Roll]

4 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Also slowly dying of old age here waiting for that haha. I'll likely get serious about buying a GPU late Jan to Feb probably, I pray things are better buy then. Also I hope the clock limits on the core and memory are removed by then too. I'll be water cooling my card(s) and I find it odd even the 6900 XT also has those restrictions, maybe AIB 6900 XT won't but none of them are out yet. Would rather buy an unrestricted 6800 XT though.

Yea, I'm sad I jumped on the 5700 XT, but equally happy I did as well lol It's good enough for me and should do a decent amount better in gaming over my 1070, plus the price I couldn't argue with.

 

I think the reason behind the restrictions could be due to them already pushing their cards to the limits as it's atypical for AMD to have things locked.