7900 xtx Vs 4080

[Liamwasbezet]

So in doing my research on a 7900xtx I got a bit scared of still all the complaints over drivers, windows Bering corrupted, bad thermal and bad power consumption. 

So I went and had a look and found on “Cex” who sells second hand components with warranty. And found a Gigabyte GeForce RTX 4080 for 1000 euros. 

And the problem is I don’t know what is smart 

I’m planning to build a new build with an AMD Ryzen 5 7600x

. 

 

 

[StephanTW]

40 minutes ago, Liamwasbezet said:

So in doing my research on a 7900xtx I got a bit scared of still all the complaints over drivers, windows Bering corrupted, bad thermal and bad power consumption. 

As 7900 XTX owner i can tell you, my windows never got corrupted, but the advice still stands to make sure windows is done updating prior to installing drivers.
Bad thermals was only ever the reference cards, all the AIB custom setups are fine.
Bad power consumption seems to be a bit of a mixed bag atm, mine is pulling 80W when idling but heard others say it was at a normal power lvl, now this idle power consumption being high really only matters if you spent a lot of time just browsing or not gaming.
Personally love my 7900 XTX as I don't care for ray tracing, that being said, if you care and you trust the seller and its warranty id go for the 4080, seeing as at 1000 its, at least compared to my area, cheaper than the 7900xtx

 

[xAcid9]

1 hour ago, Liamwasbezet said:

Gigabyte GeForce RTX 4080

Gigabyte  

 

 

[PriitM]

6 hours ago, Liamwasbezet said:

So in doing my research on a 7900xtx I got a bit scared of still all the complaints over drivers, windows Bering corrupted, bad thermal and bad power consumption. 

So I went and had a look and found on “Cex” who sells second hand components with warranty. And found a Gigabyte GeForce RTX 4080 for 1000 euros. 

And the problem is I don’t know what is smart 

I’m planning to build a new build with an AMD Ryzen 5 7600x

. 

 

 

7900XTX. Did regular DDU + disable windows update while installing. Only use the drivers, no UI elements. UI has always caused the most headaches with weird profiles or over writes.
Nitro+ has not given me any problems than I can definitively put on the card or drivers.

[SorryBella]

4 hours ago, xAcid9 said:

Gigabyte  

 

 

Yeah and the pain is: a lot of the XTX AIBs on the cheap end is amazing. Big vouch for Nitro line as @PriitM mentioned, and the XFX Merc line is a really good one too. Asrock Taichi is a good shout but theyre absurdly expensive.

[Winterlight]

4080 is better. Especially in ray tracing and DLSS 3.0 that is free FPS 

Raw GPU power dosen't metter that much as been in 3-4 year ago. Now AI power is more important especially in new games. DLSS 3.0 basically must if want run ray tracing + ultra settings. AMD give more VRAM but 4080 already have 16 Gb that is no problem until we not get next gen console and new games for that console. Next gen console not happen very soon anyway. 16 Gb VRAM will be fine for at least next 3-4 year.

[PriitM]

33 minutes ago, Winterlight said:

4080 is better. Especially in ray tracing and DLSS 3.0 that is free FPS 

Raw GPU power dosen't metter that much as been in 3-4 year ago. Now AI power is more important especially in new games. DLSS 3.0 basically must if want run ray tracing + ultra settings. AMD give more VRAM but 4080 already have 16 Gb that is no problem until we not get next gen console and new games for that console. Next gen console not happen very soon anyway. 16 Gb VRAM will be fine for at least next 3-4 year.

True. Nvidia has an edge on new tech. But thats also a double edged sword. Nvidia has the monopoly on the new tech, to dictate how it will pan out. Nvidia may just decide one day that RTX30 or 40 series will not work with newer AI "features". And you are forced to upgrade. Also, those AI "features" use up silicon on the die for those AI features. Pushing other required functions on the CPU. THATS the "bottleneck" people are so worried about.
RTX20 is already getting shadow phased out from newer RT and DLSS versions.

[Xkillerpn]

 

[Winterlight]

13 minutes ago, PriitM said:

RTX20 is already getting shadow phased out from newer RT and DLSS versions.

2xxx is pretty old already that is normal that it slowly go out of support. 2xxx series simple not have enough AI power to run latest DLSS 3.0

 

[starsmine]

1 hour ago, Winterlight said:

4080 is better. Especially in ray tracing and DLSS 3.0 that is free FPS 

Raw GPU power dosen't metter that much as been in 3-4 year ago. Now AI power is more important especially in new games. DLSS 3.0 basically must if want run ray tracing + ultra settings. AMD give more VRAM but 4080 already have 16 Gb that is no problem until we not get next gen console and new games for that console. Next gen console not happen very soon anyway. 16 Gb VRAM will be fine for at least next 3-4 year.

DLSS 3.0 is NOT free fps. It nukes your input latency making the game FEEL like its running at much less fps, it just looks smoother(kinda it adds artificats), it does not play smoother. 

DLSS 2.0 with reflex on is better

[Winterlight]

10 minutes ago, starsmine said:

DLSS 3.0 is NOT free fps. It nukes your input latency making the game FEEL like its running at much less fps, it just looks smoother(kinda it adds artificats), it does not play smoother. 

DLSS 2.0 with reflex on is better.
 

Who care about latency epsecially on single player games.
Artefact happen olny than you not have enough GPU power run for at least 40-60 FPS without DLSS 3.0
It's not magic that can boost your 10-15 FPS game too 60 FPS without any artefact.

[starsmine]

7 minutes ago, Winterlight said:

Who care about latency epsecially on single player games. Artefact happen only than you set setings to high like 4K on 4060.
DLSS 3.0 is worthless if your GPU can't run at least 30 FPS without and even that is not perfect best result than you can achieve at lerast 60 FPS without DLSS 3.0 It's not magic that can boost your 10-15 FPS to playble 40-60 FPS You still need raw power to achieve that playble FPS without DLSS 3.0

No one cares if you increase frame rate from 130 fps to 170 fps when your INPUT latency goes from 35ms to 45ms, and now feels like a game running sub 100fps. You just made the experience WORSE. 

No one cares to do these boosts to their FPS when they never drop below 60fps anyways, its when a game drops below 60 that people look for ways to increase fps. which again, dlss 3.0 is even WORSE at. 

like WOHOO


Instead of playing at 72 fps. Now I can play at 112 fps but have it FEEL like its running at 42fps. 
SUCH A WIN. 
And now the game looks worse on top of that, it just looks smoother. 

Just run dlss 2.0 with reflex on. DLSS 3.0 is not good. 

[Winterlight]

9 minutes ago, starsmine said:

No one cares to do these boosts to their FPS when they never drop below 60fps anyways, its when a game drops below 60 that people look for ways to increase fps. which again, dlss 3.0 is even WORSE at. 

60 FPS playble but it not best experience that you achieve at 120 FPS
I have 4070 Ti and for example Hogwarts Legacy run very bad without DLSS 3.0 below 100 FPS you can play but is not smooth as with DLSS 3.0 ON.
60 FPS vs 120 FPS diference is massive of couse if you have at least 120 Hz monitor otherwise you won't see diference.

Above 120 FPS you won't see anymore that huge diference as from 60 to 120 FPS jump.

If you can run game 60 FPS DLSS 3.0 just make your game run perfect smooth that double your FPS to 120
Than you switch from 120 FPS to 60 FPS you feels that game is massive lag.

[starsmine]

12 minutes ago, Winterlight said:

60 FPS playble but it not best experience that you achieve at 120 FPS
I have 4070 Ti and for example Hogwarts Legacy run very bad without DLSS 3.0 below 100 FPS you can play but is not smooth as with DLSS 3.0 ON.
60 FPS vs 120 FPS diference is massive of couse if you have at least 120 Hz monitor otherwise you won't see diference.

If you are trying to BOOST playability, turn off dlss 3.0 and just keep 2.0 with reflex on.
2.0 with reflex on is more playable. 

3.0 only HURTS playability by spiking input latency (there is a reason it will never turn on with reflex off)

Here I cropped it for you


DLSS 3.0 literally makes it LESS playable. In EVERY case. 
Sometimes the delta in latency between 3.0 and 2.0 is smaller, often times its larger.

And again, I have to reiterate, Frame gen makes it look worse. you lose graphical fidelity and add graphical artifacts to GAIN visual smoothness. As in, NOT gameplay smoothness, but visual smoothness. 

you know what else you can do to accomplish that? lower the settings. 

Instead of hawking dlss 3.0, just lower your damn settings. Boom, now visual smoothness went up AND gameplay smoothness went up. at the cost of some graphical fidelity, but at least you are not getting temporal artifacts. 

[PriitM]

This armchair measuring contest we see here is EXACTLY what Nvidia sales people want to see: people arguing among themselves which is better. Nvidia will then have no need to actually build or design something good, just let the people make excuses on "poor performance" or arguments for "good performance"

 

Unless you know what makes the whole system work, taking sides is a fruitless exercise. Theres additional problems now with direct access memory protocols between memory, CPU and GPU. So many points of failure. Casual observer only has resultant FPS to judge whats "good or not". But 99% of users cant tell what causes the "bottleneck".

Stable performance is always required, shiny features something nice to have. You cant live without one, can you tell which one it is?

[starsmine]

Anyways, OP, 7900xtx is the better value then the 4080 at the current moment. 

Its 1000 dollars vs the 1200 for the 4080 and are pretty much the same performance-wise(with the 7900xtx taking the edge when not counting dlss 3.0)

[Liamwasbezet]

22 minutes ago, starsmine said:

Anyways, OP, 7900xtx is the better value then the 4080 at the current moment. 

Its 1000 dollars vs the 1200 for the 4080 and are pretty much the same performance-wise(with the 7900xtx taking the edge when not counting dlss 3.0)

And if i compare it with the 7900xt to the 4070 ti ? only about the same cost here and same performance. 

And i know Im gonna start a whole new dabate, but would it be worth to swap to nvidia just for the software side?
like im not too smart with and how i see it amd is better if you tinker with it alot but i've no idea what do do then.

[starsmine]

2 minutes ago, Liamwasbezet said:

And if i compare it with the 7900xt to the 4070 ti ? only about the same cost here and same performance. 

And i know Im gonna start a whole new dabate, but would it be worth to swap to nvidia just for the software side?
like im not too smart with and how i see it amd is better if you tinker with it alot but i've no idea what do do then.

7900xt is 800(price dropped already) and while the 4070ti can be found at 800, usually its 900. 

the 7900xt is much faster then the 4070ti. (10%),

its not like the 4080 and 7900xtx where its pretty much a wash in terms of performance. 

What software are you looking at in terms of nvidia?
 

[Liamwasbezet]

25 minutes ago, starsmine said:

7900xt is 800(price dropped already) and while the 4070ti can be found at 800, usually its 900. 

the 7900xt is much faster then the 4070ti. (10%),

its not like the 4080 and 7900xtx where its pretty much a wash in terms of performance. 

What software are you looking at in terms of nvidia?
 

Honestly idk, i've used some geforce experience, but thats about it. I do not really use ray tracing.
 

I just want the smoothest experince and i will be upgrading from an nvidea gpu, and I have no experience with an amd gpu

[maestro_it]

I was in your situation last week, undecided between 7900xtx vs 4080. I checked many reviews and forums, as you said they mention the driver issues sometimes, extra power on idle/multimonitor and playing videos, and currently it also has issues with running VR headsets. in addition that Nvidia supports the Nvidia Broadcast app which uses the power of the Nvidia cores to remove noise and cam background from online meetings, which I use a lot.

 

As I don't play games ALL the time, power is important to me, and the driver issues with the AMD GPU's is not something new: as when I got my 2070 Super 3 years ago I was also undecided whether to get it or the 5700XT (which was the competitor at that time), it also had many driver issues (AMD still didn't learn to make stable drivers in 3 years ?!?)

 

The 4080 is more expensive but I currently still prefer Nvidia over AMD.

[Strobel]

Moved from 3070 Ti to 7900 XT and not any issues, 835 for the ASUS TUF model vs 1300 for a 4080, ROFL, jog on.

 

[Neutraliz]

7900XTX owner here, doesn't regret my decision whatsoever.
Doesn't have any issues regarding drivers.
Didn't corrupt the system. 
Thermals are ok. (Powercolor Hellbound)

To be absolutly clear, I really hate the GPU market we're in today. AMD Radeon or NVIDIA Geforce, none are clearly better. (Intel ARC just had 1 generation, for now, they are kinda neutral)
The 7900XTX isn't great for the price, at least in EU. None of the current generation of GPUs are. But it's better than NVIDIA's BS pricing and outrageous anti-consummers moves, not to mention the obvious VRAM limitations that a lot of people still seems surprised about... And I'm also a GTX 1080 owner !

For once, I decided to buy not by what made sens only to me, but what I prefere (ish) to see in the general market. It's a vote for the slightly less worst case more than anything else.
 
But nope, I'm done with NVIDIA, until they finally get back to reality. 

NVIDIA is the worst compagny, the cancer of our commun passion that is pc hardware, by far today. And their fanboys are only making it worse for everyone. 

At least Intel eventually woke up to AMD's competition and get their sh#t sorted and stopped the BS.

NVIDIA can't.   

[WallacEngineering]

Like @StephanTW, I also own a Radeon RX 7900-XTX (Power Color Red Devil Edition) (see build log thread in signature for complete details).

 

To be honest you can't really go wrong with either the XTX or the RTX 4080. Unlike the RTX 4070/Ti, at least the 4080 comes with 16GB of VRAM making it much easier to recommend. Both cards are extremely powerful flagship-tier cards capable of 4K Ultra Gaming at good frame rates (around 90 FPS), the RTX 4090 is something BEYOND a flagship tier.

 

Like @StephanTW, I don't have too many complaints with the drivers, AMD cards run very well these days and the quality of their drivers isn't that far off Nvidia these days. AMD also has the benefit of a far superior UI, combining overclocking, recording, and fan tuning along with AMDs version of "GeForce Experience" all baked right into the base driver software, no third-party apps required.

 

But, as @maestro_it says, AMDs drivers aren't perfect still and they still lag just that little bit behind Nvidia in stability. But its not as bad as he makes it sound. I had the 5700-XT myself before upgrading to this 7900-XTX. Overall, been very satisfied with the AMD experience over the years but I DO have game crashes about once a week on average. Of course it depends on the game and some games never crash at all. Its not a big deal anyway, open the game back up and continue on, like it never happened, but AMD drivers do mature with new products over time, in a year or so I imagine the vast majority of crashing will be gone for the RX 7000 series.

 

I got lucky with my card, I found my Red Devil XTX for $900, at the time the reference card was still $1000 and the cheapest AIB on sale from NewEgg was $979.99 with the Red Devil going for $1099.99 as one of the best AIB cards available. This was because someone with too much money bought it, and then sold it to me with Micro Center Receipt in hand so I could have the warranty.

 

Overall the AMD experience is just fine and the positives and negatives of AMD VS Nvidia remain the same as they have been for years: Nvidia practices Anti-Consumerism and attempts to scam you out of every cent they possibly can. With the RTX 4060/Ti/16GB releases, they have PROVEN their ability to scam their customers, charging outrageous prices for what is in reality 50-class cards according to die size and BUS width. BUT, Nvidia IS more stable and if you need Cuda Acceleration or the absolute best Ray-Tracing performance, then Nvidia is your only option and that is why they remain the tyrant that they are.

 

Meanwhile, AMD absolutely crushes Nvidia at Price-to-performance ratio in exchange for a little instability occasionally and while the XTX actually BEATS the RTX 4080 in standard RASTER performance by 2-4%, it looses in Ray-Tracing by 10-15% overall. The other benefit to AMD is more VRAM, but the 16GB of the RTX 4080 is enough.

 

All in all its a tough call, but if you can get them for the exact same price then well I say go RTX 4080 just because its a bit more stable with a bit better Ray Tracing and if that costs literally NOTHING, then why not? Otherwise, if its more than a $100 difference, the XTX is probably the better call.

 

In MY case it was a no-brainer. While I picked up the XTX Red Devil for $900 with no taxes, the cheapest RTX 4080 I saw was $1219.99 plus tax. With taxes, that would have made the 4080 a full $400 more expensive than what I spent.

[Firepower]

Yeah I'm thinking of switching to Team Red myself. The Nvidia GPUs have had problems in the recent generations, like how they bricked when playing New World, and it seems that the issues haven't actually been addressed. 

[StephanTW]

2 hours ago, Firepower said:

like how they bricked when playing New World

thought this was all due to poor solder joint? tbf i still had my r9 290's when that happened and didnt really pay attention to it