Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

6800XT or rtx 3080

Consider they are price similarly in my country atleast. Which one is better? for 1440p gaming.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want Ray Tracing capability, go with the RTX 3080, its a much better choice than the 6800XT. Also, be sure to have a good power supply from Tier B or higher on the PSU Tier List due to Amphere's transient power draw/spikes. 

PSU Tier List  || Graphics Card Tier List 

 

Resonance Cascade Specifications: 

 

CPU: Intel i9-10980XE 18C/36T  ||  CPU Cooler: Noctua NH-D15 Air Cooler ||  RAM: Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 64GB(8x8GB) DDR4-3600 CL18  ||  Mobo: MSI X299 Gaming Pro Carbon AC  ||  SSD: Samsung 970 EVO  1TB M.2-2280 Boot Drive/Some Games)  ||  HDD:2X Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB(Game Drive)  ||  GPU: MSI RTX 2080 GAMING X TRIO  ||  PSU: EVGA P2 1600W  ||  Case: Corsair 900D  ||  Mouse: Logitech G502 Hero SE RGB  ||  Keyboard: Logitech G513 Carbon RGB with GX Blue Clicky Switches  ||  Mouse Pad: MAINGEAR ASSIST XL ||  MonitorMSI MAG271CQR 144HZ 27" 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather have 16GB of VRAM over DLSS or RT. I've seen videos where FS2020 uses about 24GB of system RAM and 10GB of VRAM when cruising around a dense spot on the planet at 4K. On my System I've seen FS2020 use 7GB of VRAM at 1080p and 22GB of system memory flying over spots like LA or Seattle. 

 

I've seen DLSS in person, I don't think it's really that impressive. It's an obvious visual downgrade over native res, and only exists because RT is simply too computationally expensive to run at native res, unless it's 1080P on a 3080. 

Fun Rig - AMD Ryzen 5 3600  |  MSI B550 Tomahawk  |  32GB G.SKILL 3600 CL16 4x8GB |  PowerColor Red Devil 5700XT  | Creative Sound Blaster Z  |  WD Black SN850 500GB NVMe  |  WD Black SN750 2TB NVMe  |  WD Blue 1TB SATA SSD  |  Corsair RM850x  |  Corsair 4000D  |  LG 27GL650F-B  |

 

Work Rig - AMD Ryzen 7 3700X  |  ASUS X570-P Prime  |  32GB G.SKILL 3200 CL16 4x8GB |  ASUS GTX 1660 Super  |  WD Black SN750 500GB NVMe  |  WD Blue 500GB SATA  |  Samsung 860 Evo 500GB SATA  |  Corsair TX650  |  Corsair 4000D  |  Dell S2721DGF  |

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Action_Johnson said:

I'd rather have 16GB of VRAM over DLSS or RT. I've seen videos where FS2020 uses about 24GB of system RAM and 10GB of VRAM when cruising around a dense spot on the planet at 4K. On my System I've seen FS2020 use 7GB of VRAM at 1080p and 22GB of system memory flying over spots like LA or Seattle. 

 

I've seen DLSS in person, I don't think it's really that impressive. It's an obvious visual downgrade over native res, and only exists because RT is simply too computationally expensive to run at native res, unless it's 1080P on a 3080. 

I’d choose the 3080 over the 6800XT if they are similar prices. Even though the 3080 only has 10GB of VRAM, it is GDDR6X which is faster than GDDR6. Whether 10 GB is enough or not remains to be seen. The two cards offer very similar performance but if you include RT and DLSS, the 3080 comes out on top. 

CPU - i9 9900K | CPU Cooler - Noctua NH-D15 | Motherboard MSI Z390 Carbon Pro Gaming | Graphics Card - Red Devil 6800 XT

Link to post
Share on other sites

Depend on OP's preference, IF RT is important, go for the RTX 3080. But, if rasterization is more important than RT, then the RX 6800 XT which is pretty fast for regular non-RT games. I went with an RX card because, while I appreciate that RT is the future, present gen cards from nVidia (let alone AMD) are still not good enough to do games at high framerates at native res (like 4K or perhaps 1440P) without the need for DLSS.

 

Plus, as someone at guru3D had said, DLSS is planned obsolescence, there'll come a time when GPU's are powerful enough that DLSS isn't needed. Also, for RT to run well at higher res, nVidia MUST give the game the DLSS treatment, what if an RT that (that may not be popular or a AAA title) that you like isn't worthy of the DLSS treatment (or so nVidia believe)?

 

Don't get me wrong, the future is RT, but I'm gonna wait another iteration or two of both nVidia and AMD cards, then see IF they're powerful enough to handle RT at native high res with good framerates, then I'd probably throw in my lot with RT.

Rig 1: AMD AM4 R9 3900X (12C/24T) | Gigabyte X570 Aorus Xtreme | 2x 8GB Patriot Viper RGB 3600CL17 | Sapphire Nitro+ RX 6900 XT | 256GB Sabrent Rocket NVMe PCIe M.2 (OS) | 4TB Samsung 860 EVO SSD + 2TB Samsung 860 QVO SSD + 6TB WD Black HDD | CoolerMaster H500M | Corsair HX1000 Platinum | Leopold FC660C + Logitech G703 | iFi Micro iDSD Black Label | LG SL8YG soundbar | C49HG90DME 49" 32:9 144Hz Freesync 2 | 64bit Win10 Pro

Rig 2: Intel i7 3960X (6C/12T) | Asus R4E | 16GB Corsair Dom Plat 2133mhz | PowerColor RX VEGA 64 Red Devil | iOppo HA-1 | Philips HTL9100 soundbar | Caselabs M8 | Corsair HX-1050 | Leopold FC660C + Logitech G502 | Samsung Acer XR341CK 21:9 75Hz Freesync | 64bit Win10 Pro

HTPC Rig: Intel i7 4770K (4C/8T) | MSI Z87 G45 Gaming | 16GB RipJawsZ 1600mhz | Leadtek GTX 1080 Hurricane OC | Tt View 31 | Enermax 1500 MAX Revo | Logitech G613 + G603 | Panasonic 65" UHD TV | 64bit Win10 Pro

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They perform pretty similar, but I'd go 3080 for NVENC. Recording videos is pretty cool, if you care about that. 

RYZEN 5 3600 @ 4.2 GHz AUTO | GIGABYTE 3070 VISION OC @ 0.930 V 1965 Hz CORE 7100 MEMORY | 16GB CORSAIR VENGEANCE LPX 3200 DDR4 | MSI B350M MORTAR | 250GB SAMSUNG EVO 860 | 4TB TOSHIBA X 300 | 1TB TOSHIBA SSHD | 120GB KINGSTON SSD | WINDOWS 10 PRO 1809 FOREVER™ | INWIN 301| CORSAIR RM650I | MSI MAG274QRF @120 Hz 2560x1440 ADAPTIVE SYNC | LOGITECH Z906 | DELL KB216T | LOGITECH M185 | SONY DUALSHOCK 4

 

LENOVO IDEAPAD 510 | i5 7200U | 8GB DDR4 | NVIDIA GEFORCE 940MX | 2TB TOSHIBA L200 | WIN 🔟 LITE 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It comes down to what you can find.  If you can find either they are both great cards.

 

If your truly had the MSRP choice I really dont see an argument for the 6800XT.  Framerates are comparable with the 6800XT winning out mostly at 1080p and a tiny bit at 1440p (might as well be a wash) and 4k going to the 3080.

 

More importantly, DLSS (which is just great now), NVENC (fantastic), RTX voice (this one is really minor but can help an untuned condenser mic sound a little better, for aspiring streamers), and of course ray tracing trouncing the 6800XT version of RT, I really dont see how at comparable prices (50$ savings is not that significant in this price bracket) there is even a competition.  If they had infinite 3080 and 6800 XT available, I couldnt imagine picking up a 6800XT unless I was all in on the SAM, which is maybe a (the only?) legit reason at this point.

 

I appreciate that AMD is normally the price/performance king, but a 50 dollar savings on a flagship GPU isnt worth losing that feature set to me.  There is nothing wrong with the 6800XT at all.  It just doesnt have enough going for it to make someone skimp for it.  550-600$ vs 700$?  Sure, I am on board, that is the bargain deal.  But 650 vs 700 for a card that is so close to tied (depending on which rez you pick...but they are all still within spitting distance) and has so fewer features?  There is just no "sell" for the 6800XT.  Unless there is literally no way to scrape together another 50 bucks.

 

 

 

 

El Zoido:  Custom loop - 9900k + RTX 3090 / 32 gb 3000mHz RAM / 4k 120hz IPS / z390 Aorus Master / 2tb 970 evo+ 

 

The Box:  3900x + RTX 3080 /  32 gb 3000mHz RAM / 1440p 144hz IPS / B550 MSI mortar / 2tb WDblack Gen4

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also there is an oversimplification, unfortunately, that "if you want RTX, go green, if you want rasterization, go red" which is just faulty reasoning.  They perform very similar in rasterization.  Take out all features, and the 6800XT is a good buy at 1080p/1440p and the 3080 a better buy at 4k.  

 

The more apt phrasing is "if you care about rasterization, you truly cant go wrong since they are 50 bucks difference and perform the same in rasterization, and if you care about RTX, well you dont really have 2 options" 

 

 

El Zoido:  Custom loop - 9900k + RTX 3090 / 32 gb 3000mHz RAM / 4k 120hz IPS / z390 Aorus Master / 2tb 970 evo+ 

 

The Box:  3900x + RTX 3080 /  32 gb 3000mHz RAM / 1440p 144hz IPS / B550 MSI mortar / 2tb WDblack Gen4

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GamerDude said:

Depend on OP's preference, IF RT is important, go for the RTX 3080. But, if rasterization is more important than RT, then the RX 6800 XT which is pretty fast for regular non-RT games. I went with an RX card because, while I appreciate that RT is the future, present gen cards from nVidia (let alone AMD) are still not good enough to do games at high framerates at native res (like 4K or perhaps 1440P) without the need for DLSS.

 

Plus, as someone at guru3D had said, DLSS is planned obsolescence, there'll come a time when GPU's are powerful enough that DLSS isn't needed. Also, for RT to run well at higher res, nVidia MUST give the game the DLSS treatment, what if an RT that (that may not be popular or a AAA title) that you like isn't worthy of the DLSS treatment (or so nVidia believe)?

 

Don't get me wrong, the future is RT, but I'm gonna wait another iteration or two of both nVidia and AMD cards, then see IF they're powerful enough to handle RT at native high res with good framerates, then I'd probably throw in my lot with RT.

I sold my 3070 and bought a 6800 for the same reason - I was disappointed with the RT performance of the 3070 because enabling it in games just tanks the FPS most of the time. 
But I imagine the 3080 has enough power to make RT worthwhile which is why I would choose it over the 6800XT.

CPU - i9 9900K | CPU Cooler - Noctua NH-D15 | Motherboard MSI Z390 Carbon Pro Gaming | Graphics Card - Red Devil 6800 XT

Link to post
Share on other sites

The one you can find cheaper 

 

  

14 hours ago, Action_Johnson said:

I'd rather have 16GB of VRAM over DLSS or RT. I've seen videos where FS2020 uses about 24GB of system RAM and 10GB of VRAM when cruising around a dense spot on the planet at 4K. On my System I've seen FS2020 use 7GB of VRAM at 1080p and 22GB of system memory flying over spots like LA or Seattle. 

 

I've seen DLSS in person, I don't think it's really that impressive. It's an obvious visual downgrade over native res, and only exists because RT is simply too computationally expensive to run at native res, unless it's 1080P on a 3080. 

This is also true and the 6800 XT in general is faster in rasterization  (so in the way 99% of the games are realistically going to be played) under some games/settings the 6800 XT is faster even compared to a 3090 but just on a few occasions. 

 

+ It has a type C (virtual link) port in case you would like to try out some VR (and it really buffles me why Nvidia does not have such a port even on the most expensive products) 

 

But as I said buy the cheaper one if the difference is only a small 2 digit number then buy the AMD one. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you like more vram better, then def go 6800

Is it plugged in?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The RTX 3080's 10gb of vram is by all means 100% sufficient for 1440p gaming, VRAM hasn't much weight as it seems to be honest.

 

Like stated I'd go with the 3080 since DLSS and RT... the 6800XT is on pair rasterization wise so why not get the extra nVidia goodies.

Workstation Rig:
CPU:  Intel Core i9 9900K @5.0ghz  |~| Cooling: beQuiet! Dark Rock 4 |~|  MOBO: Asus Z390M ROG Maximus XI GENE |~| RAM: 32gb 3333mhz CL15 G.Skill Trident Z RGB |~| GPU: nVidia TITAN V  |~| PSU: beQuiet! Dark Power Pro 11 80Plus Platinum  |~| Boot: Intel 660p 2TB NVMe |~| Storage: 2X4TB HDD 7200rpm Seagate Iron Wolf + 2X2TB SSD SanDisk Ultra |~| Case: Cooler Master Case Pro 3 |~| Display: Acer Predator X34 3440x1440p100hz |~| OS: Windows 10 Pro.
 
Personal Use Rig:
CPU: Intel Core i9 9900 @4.75ghz |~| Cooling: beQuiet! Shadow Rock Slim |~| MOBO: Gigabyte Z390M Gaming mATX|~| RAM: 16gb DDR4 3400mhzCL15 Viper Steel |~| GPU: nVidia Founders Edition RTX 2080 Ti |~| PSU: beQuiet! Straight Power 11 80Plus Gold  |~|  Boot:  Intel 660p 2TB NVMe |~| Storage: 2x2TB SanDisk SSD Ultra 3D |~| Case: Cooler Master Case Pro 3 |~| Display: Viotek GN34CB 3440x1440p100hz |~| OS: Windows 10 Pro.


HTPC / "Console of the house":

CPU: Intel Core i7 8700 @4.45ghz |~| Cooling: Cooler Master Hyper 212X |~| MOBO: Gigabyte Z370M D3H mATX|~| RAM: 16gb DDR4 3333mhzCL16 G.Skill Trident Z |~| GPU: nVidia Founders Edition GTX 1080 Ti |~| PSU: Corsair TX650M 80Plus Gold |~| Boot:  SSD WD Green M.2 2280 240GB |~| Storage: 1x3TB HDD 7200rpm Seagate Barracuda + SanDisk Ultra 3D 1TB |~| Case: Fractal Design Meshify C Mini |~| Display: Toshiba UL7A 4K/60hz |~| OS: Windows 10 Pro.
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Action_Johnson said:

I've seen videos where FS2020 uses about 24GB of system RAM and 10GB of VRAM when cruising around a dense spot on the planet at 4K.

Nah that's not true (on the 3080 at least). 4K @ Ultra, RTX 3080 FE. Never seen above 9 GBs usage ever, and that was in the worst case scenario. 

 

24GBs of RAM though, yeah that's true. 

 

I'd say, 3080 if you want the features, 6800 XT if you don't.

 

 

Realistically, get whatever card you can actually buy

Current System: Ryzen 7 3700X, Noctua NH L12 Ghost S1 Edition, 32GB DDR4 @ 3200MHz, MAG B550i Gaming Edge, 1TB WD SN550 NVME, SF750, RTX 3080 Founders Edition, Louqe Ghost S1

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a dilemma, I got a 3080, for me DLSS and RT seems the better buy vs more VRAM, although I think these levels are too tight on the nvidia cards, I think it will be about enough for almost every game in the next few years at least.

 

I am replacing a 11 gig 1080ti, and the only game I own that stresses the limit is FF15.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've done extensive testing of VRAM utilization, and what I found is that no game currently on the market will use more than about 9GB VRAM at 4K max details. You also have to consider that many newer games at 4K max details will run into performance issues before they reach full VRAM utilization by a game.

 

Don't look at the VRAM usage as many games will saturate the VRAM as a way to "buffer" with resources that may be needed later. This is not indicative of what the actual needed VRAM is.

16GB VRAM is awesome... if you have a the memory bandwidth to utilize it. As it stands, the VRAM bandwidth on the RTX 3080 is nearly 50% faster than an RX 6800 XT. It's because of this fact alone that I believe the RTX 3080 will last longer than the RX 6000 cards; your performance will be unacceptable long before you ever reach the 16GB VRAM threshold.


TL;DR the RTX 3080 is the better buy, IMO.

CPU: Ryzen 7 3700x || GPU: RTX 3080 Founders Edition || Memory: 48GB Corsair 3000mhz DDR4 (22GB PrimoCache) || Motherboard: MSI B450 Tomahawk || SSD1: 500 GB Samsung 850 EVO M.2 (OS drive) || SSD2: 500 GB Samsung 860 EVO SATA (Cache Drive via PrimoCache) || Spinning Disks: 3 x 4TB Western Digital Blue HDD (RAID 0) || Monitor: LG CX 55" OLED TV || Sound: Schiit Stack (Modi 2/Magni 3) - Sennheiser HD 598, HiFiMan HE 400i || Keyboard: Logitech G810 || Mouse: Logitech G502 || PSU: EVGA 750-watt Gold
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, MadPistol said:

It's because of this fact alone that I believe the RTX 3080 will last longer than the RX 6000 cards; your performance will be unacceptable long before you ever reach the 16GB VRAM threshold.

Totally agreed.  This is one of the big things I keep trying to get people to realize.  VRAM at a quantity 2x or more than you will ever use is useless if you try and game in 4k max settings (or 8k) and get 7 FPS.  Any game that would actually demand 16 or 24gb VRAM right now would be absolutely unplayable on any of the hardware available.  Unless you are comfy with 10 fps gaming or less.   

 

It is just a mismatch of resources, like getting an overclocked 10900k to play games at 4k60fps (much like most of that VRAM you paid for, the 10900k's CPU horsepower is mostly unused; better to use the money for something else in the system and get a better matched CPU).

 

Now if you are using it for big 3d projects on the side, that is a whole different ball game.  But most are having this convo about gaming only

El Zoido:  Custom loop - 9900k + RTX 3090 / 32 gb 3000mHz RAM / 4k 120hz IPS / z390 Aorus Master / 2tb 970 evo+ 

 

The Box:  3900x + RTX 3080 /  32 gb 3000mHz RAM / 1440p 144hz IPS / B550 MSI mortar / 2tb WDblack Gen4

Link to post
Share on other sites

i was wondering the same the other day and so i watched A TON of videos on youtube reviewing those two cards...you should do the same.

my conclusion was RTX 3080 is better.

| CPU: Core i7-8700K @ 4.89ghz - 1.21v  Motherboard: Asus ROG STRIX Z370-E GAMING  CPU Cooler: Corsair H100i V2 |
| GPU: MSI GTX 1080Ti Gaming X Trio 2ghz OC  RAM: 32GB T-Force Delta RGB 3066mhz |
| Displays: Acer Predator XB270HU 1440p Gsync 144hz IPS Gaming monitor | Oculus Rift S

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, MadPistol said:

I've done extensive testing of VRAM utilization, and what I found is that no game currently on the market will use more than about 9GB VRAM at 4K max details.

You should test with a VR headset tho 😉

 

That said, you are right about pancake games, none of them require more than even 8GB at 4K to run well.

Also pancake games should be rendered on a high refresh 1440p desktop monitor for best results anyways.

| CPU: Core i7-8700K @ 4.89ghz - 1.21v  Motherboard: Asus ROG STRIX Z370-E GAMING  CPU Cooler: Corsair H100i V2 |
| GPU: MSI GTX 1080Ti Gaming X Trio 2ghz OC  RAM: 32GB T-Force Delta RGB 3066mhz |
| Displays: Acer Predator XB270HU 1440p Gsync 144hz IPS Gaming monitor | Oculus Rift S

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/22/2021 at 7:47 PM, Hymenopus_Coronatus said:

Nah that's not true (on the 3080 at least). 4K @ Ultra, RTX 3080 FE. Never seen above 9 GBs usage ever, and that was in the worst case scenario. 

Has it occurred to you that you did not see above 9GBs of usage because you dont have any more to spare (it has 10G total)? obviously it is not going to max out the buffer because it then wont have any space to spare in case something new is going to be written to it. 

 

My dad's pc has 8GB of ram (windows 10) and uses about 3GB of it when nothing is loaded other than the basics.

My PC has 32GB of ram and uses about 6-8GB when nothing is loaded other than the basics 

 

Here you can see it uses about 12.5GB for example. 

 

 

But ok to be fair most the VRAM used is for elements that are buffered meaning you wont necessarily need them right now (e.g stuff on the background or stuff the game engine predicts you gonna see if you keep on a certain direction e.g a city/buildings or what not) 

 

It's always better to have more VRAM though for futureproofness upcoming titles surely are going to use more VRAM because they are going to have better textures or more elemtns (e.g NPCs ) etc 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, papajo said:

Has it occurred to you that you did not see above 9GBs of usage because you dont have any more to spare (it has 10G total)?

I would believe that, but I tried 4K 150 render scaling, and the usage went up to 9.5, so it wasn't the max it could go

 

23 minutes ago, papajo said:

Here you can see it uses about 12.5GB for example. 

 

That's allocation, not usage. Usage is measure through sim dev tools.

 

7 hours ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

You should test with a VR headset tho 😉

I've tried the Oculus Quest, no issues either. 

Current System: Ryzen 7 3700X, Noctua NH L12 Ghost S1 Edition, 32GB DDR4 @ 3200MHz, MAG B550i Gaming Edge, 1TB WD SN550 NVME, SF750, RTX 3080 Founders Edition, Louqe Ghost S1

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Hymenopus_Coronatus said:

That's allocation, not usage. Usage is measure through sim dev tools.

What do you mean by that it is the same thing. the game allocated 12.5GB of vram ram (which means it loaded elements worth of 12.5GB unto the vram) 

 

you cant see more than 10G because you dont have more than 10G the game isnt going to load the vram more than its physical capacity it would crash in such a case... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, papajo said:

What do you mean by that it is the same thing. the game allocated 12.5GB of vram ram (which means it loaded elements worth of 12.5GB unto the vram) 

 

No, that is incorrect. Tools like afterburner report 9 GBs allocated. Sim devtools report actual usage of 5 GBs

Current System: Ryzen 7 3700X, Noctua NH L12 Ghost S1 Edition, 32GB DDR4 @ 3200MHz, MAG B550i Gaming Edge, 1TB WD SN550 NVME, SF750, RTX 3080 Founders Edition, Louqe Ghost S1

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Hymenopus_Coronatus said:

No, that is incorrect. Tools like afterburner report 9 GBs allocated. Sim devtools report actual usage of 5 GBs

I don't play this game and I am not aware about the sim devtools you are mentioning so I can not speak about what it exactly means by this figure (e.g it could mean the unpacked size of data

 

What I am sure though is that tools like afterburner are not known to show incorrect usage. 

 

but just to be 100% sure of how much Vram is utilized then just open GPU-z and go to the sensors tab and check there under "memory used" 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, papajo said:

What I am sure though is that tools like afterburner are not known to show incorrect usage. 

 

They do not show incorrect usage. They show allocation. 

 

The sim's developer tools show actual usage, the simulator allocates more than it actually uses

Current System: Ryzen 7 3700X, Noctua NH L12 Ghost S1 Edition, 32GB DDR4 @ 3200MHz, MAG B550i Gaming Edge, 1TB WD SN550 NVME, SF750, RTX 3080 Founders Edition, Louqe Ghost S1

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×