best good (new) entry level GPU?

[Penpilot]

best i can see it comes down to 2 GPUs, the rx6600 and A750 while the a750 smokes the Radeon in terms of perf it has its intel problems, which still persist in some titles. while the 2 have roughly the same price across north america and europe, if you had to recommend one to a average person on the New Builds and Planning forum, which would you pick and why

[venomtail]

Depending on the market/country you're in, there's still an overabundance of 6700XT-6800 AMD cards that run near 7600XT prices. If I can I'll recommend these cards whilst the stars are aligned. I'm always in favour or spending just that bit more and have the GPU last years longer.

[Salted Spinach]

18 hours ago, Penpilot said:

...which would you pick and why

The one that performs reliably

Especially if need GPU acceleration outside of games

 

Consider something better that is used? Expect a good number of new listings of used cards at the year end when people upgrade their cards.

 

Not that I have any experience buying used myself. I never compromise on purchase protection on big ticket items.

 

You might have to forgo that in order to get as much perf out of your low budget, although for new listings of used cards they have lower odds of being duds and higher odds of the card still being under warranty.

 

Thats all the insight I can offer. I am not in Europe or the US. Good luck

[Penpilot]

3 hours ago, Salted Spinach said:

The one that performs reliably

Especially if need GPU acceleration outside of games

 amd performs consistently in games but is on average slower so does that consistency matter? and intel has a lot more features, AV1 encode/decode (better than rdna 3 and almost on par with lovelace) and other computational stuff for out of game use i don't remember.

 

3 hours ago, Salted Spinach said:

Consider something better that is used? Expect a good number of new listings of used cards at the year end when people upgrade their cards.

some countries don't have a used market worth using (scams)

[Salted Spinach]

5 hours ago, Penpilot said:

 amd performs consistently in games but is on average slower so does that consistency matter?

The 6600X will run all your games and at the performance level as expected of its performance class. You wont encounter a game or application that flat out wont run.

 

I cant say the same of the A750 although it will perform better in some games. Risk/reward, your call.

 

5 hours ago, Penpilot said:

and intel has a lot more features, AV1 encode/decode (better than rdna 3 and almost on par with lovelace) and other computational stuff for out of game use i don't remember.

What features you use outside of games and how well you think they perform, is your call as well.

 

5 hours ago, Penpilot said:

some countries don't have a used market worth using (scams)

Ok

 

You asked for opinions and I have said my piece. Performance FOMO vs fear of issues. Pick your poison

[Bagzie]

12 hours ago, Penpilot said:

 amd performs consistently in games but is on average slower so does that consistency matter? and intel has a lot more features, AV1 encode/decode (better than rdna 3 and almost on par with lovelace) and other computational stuff for out of game use i don't remember.

 

some countries don't have a used market worth using (scams)

Does consistency matter? Yes it does......

 

Also how is the AV1 decode and encoder better than rdna 3? Did you just make that up?

 

I understand you want to praise Intel but there GPU's are still for the most part a terrible option compared to the competition.

 

I would pick an AMD GPU over intel any day of the week and twice on Sundays.

[Penpilot]

15 hours ago, Bagzie said:

Also how is the AV1 decode and encoder better than rdna 3? Did you just make that up

no as far as i know (rdna 3 launch with the 7900s) intel(alchemist) is better than amd(rdna3) and nvidia(lovelace) is slightly better than arc 

 

15 hours ago, Bagzie said:

understand you want to praise Intel but there GPU's are still for the most part a terrible option compared to the competition.

 

i don't want to praise intel, i am trying to discuss the competition and how are they still a bad option? apart from like a grand total of 20 titles the other ones run as per normal especially since on average a750>rx6600 but the perf delta on a game to game is greater on arc

 

15 hours ago, Bagzie said:

I would pick an AMD GPU over intel any day of the week and twice on Sundays.

why? most games just work in intel gpus without users noticing any particular arc based problems and don't even remember they are using a intel gpu(user reviews) and more modern testing shows by GN and hardware unboxed showed intel just works for normal usage and games(mostly) that AMD and nvidia aren't perfect either, even if intel has overall more issues

 

15 hours ago, Bagzie said:

Does consistency matter? Yes it does......

respectfully, no shit sherlock, i was asking in the context of the perf delta between the 2 gpus. you won't want a rtx 3050 instead of a750 just because the rtx is more consistent would you (since your info seems outdated maybe YOU would take the rtx)

[toasty99]

None. If you want a new GPU, spend $500.

 

Anything less is used market currently. 

 

It's not 2023 and you can't get great cards like a 6700xt for cheap anymore new.

[Bagzie]

5 hours ago, Penpilot said:

no as far as i know (rdna 3 launch with the 7900s) intel(alchemist) is better than amd(rdna3) and nvidia(lovelace) is slightly better than arc 

 

i don't want to praise intel, i am trying to discuss the competition and how are they still a bad option? apart from like a grand total of 20 titles the other ones run as per normal especially since on average a750>rx6600 but the perf delta on a game to game is greater on arc

 

why? most games just work in intel gpus without users noticing any particular arc based problems and don't even remember they are using a intel gpu(user reviews) and more modern testing shows by GN and hardware unboxed showed intel just works for normal usage and games(mostly) that AMD and nvidia aren't perfect either, even if intel has overall more issues

 

respectfully, no shit sherlock, i was asking in the context of the perf delta between the 2 gpus. you won't want a rtx 3050 instead of a750 just because the rtx is more consistent would you (since your info seems outdated maybe YOU would take the rtx)

Let's have a look shall we....

 

God of war ragnarok where the A770 gets 32.7 fps at 1080p compared to the 6600 at 45 fps.

 

Wukong where the a770 gets 63fps on 1080p medium compared to a 6600'a 80fps.

 

Assasins creed mirage where it gets 2fps less than the supposedly slower 6600 whilst consuming about 50% more power.

 

People have given intel alot of slack because they are new to the market but the reality is that a 6600 is just a better GPU , you won't have to worry about games running like crap on release because AMD is generally quite solid with there launch drivers.

 

Intel is a mixed back of performing well in some titles and dog shit in others.

 

People that are not hardware enthusiasts and just want to play games on launch with there mates buy nvidia and amd , maybe intel will catch up but it's not there yet.

 

 

[starsmine]

44 minutes ago, Bagzie said:

Let's have a look shall we....

 

God of war ragnarok where the A770 gets 32.7 fps at 1080p compared to the 6600 at 45 fps.

 

Wukong where the a770 gets 63fps on 1080p medium compared to a 6600'a 80fps.

 

Assasins creed mirage where it gets 2fps less than the supposedly slower 6600 whilst consuming about 50% more power.

 

People have given intel alot of slack because they are new to the market but the reality is that a 6600 is just a better GPU , you won't have to worry about games running like crap on release because AMD is generally quite solid with there launch drivers.

 

Intel is a mixed back of performing well in some titles and dog shit in others.

 

People that are not hardware enthusiasts and just want to play games on launch with there mates buy nvidia and amd , maybe intel will catch up but it's not there yet.

 

 

with what driver? that disparity seems unusually large. 

[Bagzie]

1 hour ago, starsmine said:

with what driver? that disparity seems unusually large. 

The drivers that where available when techspot tested the games.

 

People like to play games when they come out not a month later when a driver fixes the issues.

[starsmine]

25 minutes ago, Bagzie said:

The drivers that where available when techspot tested the games.

 

People like to play games when they come out not a month later when a driver fixes the issues.

the launch window is only when you have the most simultaneous players. It is not infact, when most people play the game. 

[Bagzie]

5 hours ago, starsmine said:

the launch window is only when you have the most simultaneous players. It is not infact, when most people play the game. 

Right but I want the option to play on release , Granted it was a while back but I remember a friend of mine super hyped about starfield and the game was unplayable for him for months with his A770.

 

 

[Penpilot]

7 hours ago, Bagzie said:

a friend of mine super hyped about starfield and the game was unplayable for him for months with his A770.

i didn't quite keeping up with starfield but wasn't that the case for literally everyone with that tier of a card?

 

 

15 hours ago, Bagzie said:

Let's have a look shall we....

3 games is not a look, its a sample size of relatively nothing in it. hardware unboxed, gn and toms hardware have more recent testing and show that intel has shit power efficiency but good price to perf with a750>rx 6600 and a770=6600xt

 

the techspot review i think you are referencing-

We Tested 250 Games on an Intel Arc GPU: How Did It Go? | TechSpot

 

 

15 hours ago, Bagzie said:

maybe intel will catch up but it's not there yet.

ofc its not there yet, intel needs to make up years of optimizations from both the gpu driver and game dev end but the point is that is it close enough? amd and nvidia aren't perfect either. and people still bought amd even though amds drivers weren't good then. I think the situation is somewhat similar

 

20 hours ago, toasty99 said:

If you want a new GPU, spend $500.

the 6800xt is $430 and the 6750xt is $300?

[toasty99]

On 10/7/2024 at 4:37 AM, Penpilot said:

i didn't quite keeping up with starfield but wasn't that the case for literally everyone with that tier of a card?

 

 

3 games is not a look, its a sample size of relatively nothing in it. hardware unboxed, gn and toms hardware have more recent testing and show that intel has shit power efficiency but good price to perf with a750>rx 6600 and a770=6600xt

 

the techspot review i think you are referencing-

We Tested 250 Games on an Intel Arc GPU: How Did It Go? | TechSpot

 

 

ofc its not there yet, intel needs to make up years of optimizations from both the gpu driver and game dev end but the point is that is it close enough? amd and nvidia aren't perfect either. and people still bought amd even though amds drivers weren't good then. I think the situation is somewhat similar

 

the 6800xt is $430 and the 6750xt is $300?

You'd be better off getting both those cards used, buying a generation old GPU new for $75-100 more than it goes for used is kinda silly.

 

The 7800xt at about $500 (sale price of $450 we are starting to see) is the first logical new GPU. Anything cheaper than that you're just gonna save so much going used and if you're on that right a budget you need to maximize your savings.