@@ggagarin9 Less overpriced. It is objectively better price/performance than any of these 3 GPUs. We live in bizarre times where the $1600 GPU is the best deal.
@@ggagarin9 considering it's nvidias halo product it's not. amd can't compete so there is no competition which means nvidia can make it's price much more expensive.
you are right BUT Intel cannot deliver much cheaper, they lost 500 million last year already (just the GPU part of the company) so they just want marketshare at the moment. the 3060 is similar in pricing and performance as the arc series so the price are on the same level. just get the facts dude
@@PrefoX Intel top end GPU A770 hardware wise has potential best case performance on the level of 3060ti-3070 while being a first gen product with higher manufacturing costs and more memory than them. The only reason it is competing with 3060 are the unoptimized drivers. So it is not exactly a fair comparison. Also 3060ti,3070 came before the mining craze and they had really reasonable prices and Intel hardware still has greatly undercut them price wise. So it is possible.
The XT pricing is likely set to push people to the XTX. It's a classic marketing move. Only a hundred dollars more and it's that much better! What a good deal!
Haha true the Crypto boom inflated gpu marketing departments greed. Unfortunately now they out price the affordable consumer market which resulted in less sales and revenue.
@@Tarets I wasn't seriously talking about the origin of the phrase, I was just appreciating and jiving with the rdr scene being a literal metaphor. Tbh what did you even mean by 'no its not'?
Yeah, isn't that even more expensive than the 6950XT which was the flagship video card? What percentage of AMD GPU sales did the 6950XT account for? Clearly AMD strongly believes that number to be 100%.
@@picolete no the 4080 was meant to fool people into thinking they were paying for xx80 class card when really they were buying a 4060. The 4090 is the true xx80 class card now
@@jwhi419 that's true, I don't know how people are not seeing this. My 5700xt cost me 400 euros in april 2020. The 5700xt has on par or even better rasterization performance than rtx 3060 which costs 420 euros or more right now. So right now, for the same price I can get the same or worse performance with the 3060 than a 3 year old 5700xt. That's insane. The prices shifted and are continuing to shift so the days of normal gpu pricing is gone. The pandemic was just an excuse to charge up the prices.
You can't really expect them to offer lower prices vs last gen tho, they should have priced 7900XT at 749 or something and the 7900XTX at best could have been 949
And if you could walk into the grocery store and get all your food for free, it'd be an absolute win too. These companies are here to make money, and I wouldn't doubt selling these cards at the price they are for the position they're in, they're already undercutting themselves by a large margin.
It is included! Please check out the digital foundry article for more details. It's just not realistic to fit everything into a video of reasonable length
@@Giorgiio69 i bought a 6900 xt and im fine with it hope the new cards have some optimization fixes later on I prefer to by late in the generation when the cards start to drop in price.
@@Giorgiio69 I've been wanting to upgrade my now 13 year old PC for 5 years now and when i thought it was time Covid and crypto happened. And with the US constantly stirring trouble for China, I doubt it's going to get better.
It really was, but doing benchmarks without raytracing on the ultra high end seems pointless. All the cards have enough rasterization performance for anything anyone needs. It's like when you optimize a game, you should always aim to optimize the worse case performance, not the parts that already run fine. And this is what it feels like with these GPU's, there is no point optimising for raster performance when that is already fast enough, we need faster raytracing so that games can start to more fully take advantage of it.
@@SirDragonClaw except in 5 years they won't be giving enough rasterization performance because that always gets worse every single year. The rasterization performance means you won't have to upgrade anytime soon.
@@DarkPhychic I’m referring to the power consumption charts (joules per frame) starting @22:30. Nvidia on average using only 2/3 the power consumption of what AMD is using.
AMD what are you doing? Power Consumption in Video Playback and Multimonitor: RX 7900 XTX = 88W ! twice the previous generation RX 6900 XT = 44W ! Four times that of the competition RTX 4080 = 20W (data from review: Techpowerup)
The GPU market is just disappointing all over. There's nothing in the new market that doesn't feel like a rip off, I can't believe I'm saying it but I might just hang to my 5700XT for another generation or wait and see if enough people can hold the line and they are forced to slash prices.
Things are going to be much more interesting once they release the 7700/7600/4070/4060, the price and performance of thier mid range is whats going to make or break this generation for me.
@@robosergTV Cheapest I can see one is £1800, It's simply not a price I'm willing to pay for a gpu. Anyone buying at these prices is just allowing Nvidia and AMD to create new floor and ceiling based on crypto & covid shortage pricing of the last few years, you're average buyer needs to hold the line or next gen will be even worse. Don't get me wrong, I get it, if I had easy disposable money like that i'd probably drop the £1800 too, but that's the price of a full high end system a few years ago for just one component so i'll just keep holding until I feel like I'm getting more value for money.
If you think they're going to slash prices idk what to tell you. They'll just withhold inventory to create false scarcity. They'd rather eat the cost of not selling their GPU than cut the percentage of profitability that crypto had allowed them to exploit.
In my opinion the 7900XT is the 6800XT successor, which was to cheap (compared to the 6900XT). But instead of making the 7900XTX cheaper, the "7800XT" has become more expensive.
Quite honestly, AMD and Nvidia should stop confusing the consumer, and for AMD's sake, they should name their X800 products to match Nvidia's X080 products. Why couldn't they just have 7900XTX as 7800XT and 7900XT as 7700XT and lower the 7900XTX price by $100, and 7900XT by $200. It would have made much more sense to do that.
same, got a 3070 gigabyte for 120usd after trading in my 2070 super, its actually really good for my system as im actually cpu bound in some games with my 5600x
It's all about how the different parts work together. I'm slightly CPU bottlenecked with Ryzen 3600 and Gigabyte RTX 3070. Of course I would like to be able to run consistent 144 fps on 1440p, but it's just not possible with this setup in newer games. But I'm very satisfied for now!
I got a Gigabyte 3070 OC for £550 in Nov 2020 and then was able to sell my previous Zotac 2070 for nearly £400 during the price rise madness. I got lucky on that occasion, but that's what a gen on gen "upgrade cost" should entail, and you can still mostly do that with a CPU (just got a 13600k for £330, sold my 9700k for £200). Now I'd get about £380 for my 3070 used and would have to pay at least £1000 for a 4070ti when they launch.
3070 would be a great card if only it had 12gb. honestly 8gb absolutely kills it. i was waiting for this to release too, but i found a 6900xt at a killer price (same as a 3070, bit more than a 6700xt) and i couldn't pass it up. i made the right move.
@@EarthIsFlat456 Yup, I upgraded this gen because 2000&3000 didn't seem like a worthwhile upgrade for the 1000. If only prices were better, this would be a no brainer upgrade.
True, makes me feel happy that my 6900XT still has plenty of life ahead of it, but on the other hand it is pretty sad to see that only the 4090 delivers actual "upgrade worthy" performance
Nah you are wrong, prices did go up but performance jump is 2 generational ahead in Nvidia specially, as for AMD what makes it difficult is the recent discounts of 6950 XT and other cards making value of new ones look bad.... Now Nvidia have strong point here which is the fact that the performance jump they had make it idiotic not to use Ray Tracing on them as even in 4K they can have CPU bottleneck add to that DLSS being superior to FSR I think Nvidia have strong point here to make
So basically in a nutshell, you'd be foolish to get the XT version of the RX 7900. Either you shell out the extra 100 bones or don't bother (which, imo, if you can't go 100 more after considering 900 then you're not in a position to buy either one).
@@JerryFlowersIII I don't think it is the case. I think they still needed a good value propostition for rdna 2 cards and now that they sold a lot of those thanks to holiday deals, they may bring their lower tier cards sooner than nvidia or even lower the price of the 7900xt.
Honestly the heating caused by these gpu are the real concern and over time electricity cost 2x so not only you are buying a expensive card now you have to pay more for cooling and electricity cost how this is modernity I mean gpu should be more efficient
Missed the GTX 1060 (6GB) days when it released as $250 & has performnce of GTX 980 (4GB) for half the price Is it me or every major comapny now charge more for less? Apple, Samsung, Nvidia, AMD, Intel, Sony, Asus, MSI..etc Meh, I'll keep my RX 6800XT & it will serve me well until next gen cards (late 2024)
Have you heard of inflation? We pay 2x for milk and 3x for bread over here. Imagine 2x for Same gpu. Be lucky the price increase is only around the inflation rate
@@zeus1117honestly they increase the price during crypto boom and people still buy their overpriced card starting from rtx 20 series now they know people will pay any price so they are overpricing it however due to that their sales has been declined if they continue with overpricing they will run out of business because majority of gamers use mid tier cards . 4090 will still sell more because it’s a workshop card not particularly for gaming so people still gonna buy it for editing rendering but 4080 and other amd flagship not gonna sell well
The efficiency numbers are the biggest dissapointment for me. When you factor the cost at the wall over 2-3 years it makes the price differential moot...and i say this as a 6800xt owner who was hopuing for AMD to make major strides in this regard(given the lesser cooler). MEH, I'll be sticking to my 6800xt this gen i think...
Yeah, that was the biggest shocker to me too. Nvidias cards were laughed at for how big the coolers are but they're actually way efficient and the coolers are a bit over kill, specifically for 4080. AMD looks to be the opposite. The reference cooler looks great and a good size but it might be pulling more wattage than the cooler can disperse.
@@JerryFlowersIII no, it's just an issue that will be sorted shortly. AMD is aware of it and stated they will issue a fix for the idle power fluctuations.
lol, you can't be THAT concerned with your electricity prices if you're looking to upgrade from a 6800 XT to a 7900 XTX only 2 years after the card came out.
@@emiloguechoons9030 yes I did. The performance is skewed due to an issue with the standard profile. This includes increased power consumption on certain monitors over others as well as higher than expected power levels vs GPU state. Using Radeon software to set the auto undervolt results in a significant drop in power and an increase in performance scores.
RT is a marketing point invented by Nvidia, to sell Nvidia cards. Find me more than 5 games where RT offers any sort of meaningful visual advantage over traditional lighting
Who cares for RT? Its far from beeing a standard in gaming. Those cards barely handle nativ 4k gaming... so even the "next"-gen 4K didnt make it for most gamers.
AMD swings…and misses! Wow, all their big talk bout RDNA3 and this is what we get, 😕 And for fucks sake AMD, stop changing how you name your cards, just use 760, 770, 780, 790 or something similar and then add one X after if it’s an upgraded version and use this EVERY generation. I’ve been very happy with my Ryzen 7 5900X proc and when I was looking to buy it was very clear exactly where it was in hierarchy
Unfortunately, the RT performance is still too weak in comparison. When we talk about pre-TOP cards, 200-300USD doesn't make that substantial difference. Also keep in mind that Nvidia cards perform much better in professional app, it makes sense if we talk about 1000$ cards.
No it doesn't, the Geforce RTX cards have most of the compute disabled compared to their Quadro/A series or whatever they'll be calling their professional cards this gen. I think the original Titan & 780ti were the last Geforce flagship that had parity with it's professional counterpart.
@@robr640 The Quadro compute thing has been in the past for a long time now... The A series is for VRam and energy efficiency, plus CAD performance. Most 3d render engines run on CUDA and most professional apps are optimized for CUDA. The only exception to what you are talking about is CAD, which is only one of many many CUDA optimized professional workflows. The other use case for A series is virtualization and data centres, but no freelancer/small business is buying a datacenter. No gamer needs 24 gb of ram at these performance levels, but that ram will be eaten up gleefully by video editing, texture painting, rendering and AI processing. All of which are incredibly fast on a 90 series Nvidia GPU.
This offering from AMD is really poor. To expensive compared to Nvidia Lack of performance in RT undermines it's value at this (enthusiast) segment. Sadly it seems that it's better to put another $200 for 4080, which is a terrible priced product. 7900xtx -$849 7900xt - $649 This would make those cards reasonable.
I think that the reason for the horrible XT pricing is that it's using defective XTX die. The die is pretty small, around 300 mm2, meaning that there are very few defective dies to make XT cards. AMD will just have very few XT dies and it serves them better to push people to the XTX. It depends on what is the defect density on the TSMC 5 nm node, but I wouldn't be surprised if AMD are getting 4 or 5 XTX dies for every XT die or even better yields.
I would be curious to see sales numbers on each card, because the XT is in stock everywhere, while the XTX is sold out everywhere, and if there are 5x as many XTX cards, that would actually be kind of surprising.
@klooger28 I am also curious to see numbers. But all reviews show that the XT with this price is meant to push people to buy the XTX, just like the 4080 is pushing people to buy the 4090. I would be surprised if it's not at least 2-3:1 . All that is available where I live are expensive AIB XTX or XT.
No, you don't understand. This is a chiplet MCM. They can put a blank die for the 6th CU, it just needs to have something there so the heat spreader pressure is uniform all the way across the chip. It's not defective, the XT is perfect, that's why chiplets are good. And, all the reviewers are TOTALLY GETTING IT WRONG. AMD isn't shipping ANY XTX's. They make far, far more profit (8% more) by shipping XT. So out of 200,000 cards they probably have 198,000 XT's and 2,000 XTX's. With 30 CUs you can make $5k selling XTX, or $5.4k selling XT's, an 8% premium for selling XT only !!
It's a subjective matter for those who think that rtx tech is a must buy ... i personally don't care about it at all ... in the same way that nvidia Physx was a also lost and left to dust on a shelf :/
Ray tracing is stupid anyway, it doesn’t improve the graphics a whole lot compared to (well done) rasterization, for the performance hit you take. I have a 3080, and I still don’t use ray tracing. Moreover, there’s so much noise and artifact bullshit in every game (that I’ve tried) that it’s just too distracting.
The raytracing performance is just not good enough. I was really hoping they'd bring some bigger improvements there considering how big of a role its starting to play in high fidelity titles. And the heavier the RT effects the further ahead Nvidia is. You can't convince me someone is looking to buy top end cards and then NOT looking to utilize the most transformative visual settings.
They have had some 'big improvements' compared to the 68xx & 69xx class cards, 40-60%. The disappointment only comes in when comparing them to Nvidia, who have a generational head start in RT.
@@Dr.D00p They are about 50% faster raster and 50% faster RT than 6900 XT. Meaning the RT hasn't improved at all. The card is just 50% more capable. They didn't do anything to make RT proportionately better like with NVidia.
You people are full of BS! You talk about rt, but you don't know how it works! For you this ray tracing nonsense means nothing. Btw, rt doesn't make games look better, just different. In some cases even worse, like CP 2077 blurry reflections!
6700 XT from ebay is gonna be about as good as you'll get for a very long time unfortunately, but that's still a good price to performance. the 6800 xt is even better, but more money.
4080 makes sense here because anyway if I use the RX 7900XTX for next 6 years I will end up paying 100-150 Dollars in extra electricity bill for the extra watt it uses. I mean 4080 has better RT and DLSS, it even outperforms RX 7900xtx in many games, so yeah looks like RX 4080 looks better for now. If AMD can lower the Price of XTX by 200 dollars then people will consider it.
@@KoTerrors Yeah, that's a wild take. I'm even more surprised someone that wants a top end series GPU would consider using it for 6 years... lol, good luck with that. In 6 years your card will barely keep up with the BOTTOM tier of the latest generation. 4 years I could certainly see, which would allow you to skip a generation.
@@Pyroteq If you're willing to play games at lower resolutions such as 1080p instead of consuming every single marketing trend regarding gaming resolutions etc, then your graphics card can absolutely last more for 6 years
Good performance, but I hope the RX 6700/800XTs are better priced than the 7900XT. I wouldn't want to spend more than £500 on a GPU personally. The recent RX 6700 (non-XT) for £300 was a decent deal.
The moral of the story is, AMD planned to pull an NVIDIA with pricing but was forced to lower the XTX price to seem more attractive vs what it could deliver to (the 4080) but left the XT variant as is to stimulate 6000 series sales. There really is no point in buying the XT at its current price.
It's obvious, along with them also renaming the 7900XT to a 7900XTX and the 7800XT to a 7900XT, to try and fool customers into believing they are getting a higher tier card for their cash, than they really are. Both Nvidia and AMD have done nothing but pull a bunch of dirty tactics, this GPU gen.
I don't understand why everyone was expecting any different. Follow history in the last few years and you will see that they both place their respective products on the same price bracket. The same happens on the cpu side. Only when the company is falling behind is when they do some changes just to gain market share and then fall back to charge as most as possible.
People were expecting different because AMD has fallen behind and because the 4080 has such a bad cost/performance compared to 4090 that the window was wide open for AMD to strike.
So again AMD are 2 years behind nVidia in RT performance, I thought they might have gained some ground in performance but sadly not, they have just moved backwards relatively in terms of power efficiency, so much for AMD's claims of class leading efficiency.
Yep, from what I'm reading from the data of several 7900XT reviews, Nvidia and Ada Lovelace have RDNA 3 and the 7900XT in their pocket when it comes to performance/watt, kind of reminiscent of the 1080ti vs RX480/580 days... the only difference being that Nvidia's top card is now 450W TDP instead of 250W, and we're now talking about 4 figure pricing instead of $699 vs $229!
The RT is on par with Nvidia 3090ti, and the rasterization is ahead of the 4080. The 7900xtx is a solid card, ray Tracing is highly gimmicky once you get past high setting anyway.
I don't know, why the 7900 consumes some more energy, but it seems to be an idle problem with some monitors. The competition got those idle problems as well to complete the picture. When it comes to ray tracing, AMD might refine their drivers over the time once again. The hint to that are the compute units, which unify dedicated function blocks. This architecture fits AMD's clever "inline ray tracing", which they introduced in DXR 1.1. This leaves much more room for future ray tracing development, instead of burning in fixed functions like nvidia does. Another thing i hope for the future is FPGA function blocks in GPUs. AMD plans to integrate XDNA into their next Ryzen CPUs. But i rather would lile to seem them in their GPUs.
@@rickjames9866 RT is not a gimmick. It is the future you cannot avoid. Most AAA graphic demanding games are already designed on top of RT lightning scheme. It's only gonna be even more and more relevant as the upscaling technology like DLSS and FSR evolving. The fact that AMD put so much money and effort in order to try to match NVIDIA RT performance said it all. So is 7900XTX a good card yes. Good enough for RT? Probably yes in most cases for today. However, it does not mean that RT is a gimmick just because AMD can't match NVIDIA performance.
@@GM-kj5xw RT isn’t the future of anything. Rasterization will always be the centrepiece, this what is your bread and butter. RT is a graphical option like AA or shadows. At this level of performance I personally would not care all that much. The 7900xtx is close to the 4090 in raw performance which is a solid trade off. The RT being at the level of 3090ti isn’t a deal breaker. If the 4090 can keep RT at high, then just push the RT to medium on the 7900xtx and you will have the same or similar performance. You won’t even notice a difference between medium, high and ultra RT settings. The big issue for me is the cost. The 7900xt costs 300 too much and the xtx is 100 too much
These GPU results against the 6900 XT is pretty unimpressive tbh. The cards we have now are amazing for 1440P high refresh and can easily achieve 4K60 for non competitive games. Plus with FSR 2 and DLSS getting picked up by devs more and more it just makes upgrading somewhat pointless if you're on the current gen stuff
That’s a good point, if you plan on playing competitive games at 1440p/120+ and a few story games at 4K/60 then last gen GPUs are perfectly fine for a few more years. There’s no real reason to make the jump unless you’re trying to push 4K/120 which not a lot of gamers are doing.
3060ti on a 1440p, 120hz monitor is such a sweet spot for me. Multiplayer or fast paced game? Locked 120, as long as I tone back some settings and/or use DLSS for more demanding titles. Single player campaign with good RTX implementation? Locked 60 with high+ settings, just adjust DLSS value.
As disappointing as these results are, I think there's an upside here, and that's how 4K gaming has basically been solved at this point, so long as you aren't ray tracing. If RX7900XT can do 200fps in Hitman 3, then it stands to reason that a fairly cheap graphics card like a 7600 should be able to play nearly anything at 4k.
Yeah it looks like either AMD or Nvidia top end card can do native 4k comfortable now, especially with raster, they're not quite there with ray tracing performance, especially AMD but for a lot of gamers, that doesn't matter. Will be interesting to see how much better performance gets and how well they undervolt.
Low key think the Intel A770 is a solid pick for budget conscious gamers after your previous video covering it (assuming Intel doesn't just drop support for it almost immediately). I was impressed with how capable it was especially with ray tracing and for the money and the 16 gb of ram it's hard to complain too much. Not terribly impressed with these new AMD cards sadly.
Well it depends on the prices , in my country i bought an rtx 3070 for about 500$ while the arc 770 is about 570 $ , idk anyone in their right mind who would buy it over a 3070 for more money ( granted we don't have official retailers of any kind , so pricing is really inconsistent semetimes ) But yeah at msrp the arc cards seem like a good offer
@@aweskr latest drivers improved drastically performance in games A770 suffered like CS GO, GTA, Dota 2, League and other famous titles, they making progress faster than expected, it's now comparable to its competition in these titles
the problem for AMD is that since it is priced 1000 dollars people who are going to buy this will not gonna care as much about price to performance and care more about just raw performance and if it has all the bells and whistles
If you want the best then you are buying a 4090. The 7900xtx is not a great deal but it is a better value than the 4080 so amd better hope people spending 1000 dollars care somewhat about value. As for the bells and whistles, again if you care about that you are more interested in nvidia. I really want to go team red but amd isn't making it the easy decision.
@@shepergames3734 It actually is a pretty good deal though. The only highish end cards (even with today's pricing) that are better price to performance is the 6800 and 6800XT. The 7900XTX beats everything else.
@TrueDPS it's 1000 dollars and doesn't ray trace well. It's a better value than a 4080 but so is everything. It's 35 percent or so better than their last Gen top of the line chip but it is priced at 1000 dollars and for that money I feel I should expect top notch software support like nvidia has with Cuda and based on epos vox the av1 encoder doesn't seem to perform quite to nvidia's implementation so the status quo remains unchanged. I might still go with one just because the 4090 cooler is ridiculous but this card requires one to swallow more than a few grains of salt
Nvidia's confidence of being the powerhouse king is why such arrogance in pricing is seen here. I would actually love to see an Intel gpu come out, perhaps not being the most powerful, but release with a cost that puts both companies to shame. Also, Intel has proven that with proper drivers, it's 1st generation hardware can push RT as good or even better than Nvidia in some vs. tests. Not a bad outing for a relatively new kid on the gpu block.
Pricing is rubbish this gen but at least we get good reductions on the previous AMD cards. The 6700, 6800 and 6900xt are the cards to get. I game on a LG CX at 4K. Only need up to 120 fps to hit the VRR limit. AMD 6000 series cards are good enough for now. Ray tracing isn't worth the hit in FPS to me on any cards including Nvidia. 4090 is in a class of it's own but very expensive.
Having watched a few videos, this aint it. That XT model should have been a 6800XT at $650 and the 6900 XTX at $900. Once the AIB's add $200-300 for sag protectors and RGB you might as well get a 4090.
I don't think AMD should have bothered with 2 cards. They're just way to close in price and performance. Feels more like they're trying to squeeze people into buying the slightly more expensive card.
Yes, if you look at the MSRP. But if you want to buy in Germany. You need to decide if you want to spend 26-30% more for the XTX Version. Or go with the XT for 7% over MSRP. If you want to buy a XTX here, buy a 4080 instead, its the better Deal for this Price Tag.
Sadly, exactly what I expected. AMD is fine offering *slightly* better price to performance ratio. Nothing more nothing less. The bar with the RTX 4080 was really low and AMD managed to just limp over it. Truly a disappointing launch. Also shoutout to the AMD fanboys who predicated for the 7th time in a row AMD would clean house with Nvidia, only to bring an alright product to the market. Both companies treat us like shit, get real.
I'm still *hoping that Radeon, will release an '10 year anniversary RX-7990 GPU' on April 14Th 2023 !* ( Because the HD-7990, released on April 14th 2013 )
Except this time around, by the looks of things, an eventual 'RX 7990XTX GHz Edition' will be a +400W TDP card, that will still clearly lose vs the 4090, while costing $1250!
AMD really missed this open goal of an opportunity to kick Nvidia's arse. Looks like greed trumps everything. The slim price advantage AMD has is obliterated the moment the AIB cards come out, at a time when 4080 prices look to becoming down.
AMD never really had a chance. Nvidia has 88% of the market for good reason. They're way ahead. This was about the best anyone could have reasonably hoped for from AMD.
So somewhat better performance than the 4080 overall for a slightly lower price. If the 4080 itself wasn't such a terrible value the XTX would be great but now I dunno. And now the XT is priced stupidly. Waiting for sales or a refresh I guess.
I would buy a 7900XT at $700. I paid a good bit more than that not that long ago for a FTW3 Ultra 3080 12GB. It's at least the FTW3 in RT, and walks all over it in rasterization. If it was $600-$650 they would sell so fast, there wouldn't be any available, and they would just get price hiked anyway. $800-$850 for the XTX would make it a go to card for many enthusiasts.
Was going to upgrade my 10 year old PC this year with the exception of my 1070 which I got about 5 years ago. Will probably wait out. I can still play God of War and Spider man at 1080/1440 60fps with medium to high settings which I’m perfectly happy with.
Same, my OC'd 2600K + 1070 can still run modern games surprisingly well at 1200p so I'll probably upgrade next year instead, when the platform and GPU prices have hopefully stabilized
As always the answer to this question is unfortunately NO, they can not. For some reason AMD are not nearly as capable in the GPU market as they are in the CPU market, and its a real shame.
@@Safetytrousers nah, they got ALL the consoles. So they won’t be bankrupt at all… they just won’t have PC market share. With a popular cross platform like COD2 war zone, 70% are on consoles. In terms of ps4, ps5, xbo, xbx, xbss, xbsx, AMD has a solid footing to not get bankrupt by not being number 1 in pc hardware sales.
I have a "meh" feeling about 7900 XTX. I think driver optimization + slight price reduction will save it. Otherwise I see no reason not to go with 4080 at this point, sadly.
Expect hefty price cuts in the new year for both teams I suspect. Nvidia's already shown that this performance tier can't support $1.2k pricing and I don't think $1k is going to tempt people either.
I'm thinking that, both AMD and Nvidia can't afford to build up too much stock if they are not selling and I have a feeling that none of these new gen cards are going to sell that well in the current market and at those price point and yes AMD are a better value option but that isn't saying much when both are crazy high on the price point. Personally, I wouldn't recommend any of the new gen cards from either AMD or Nvidia, the last gen cards look like a better option until we see some major price cuts on the new cards.
Question: With Ray Tracing being the future of gaming graphics, if the XTX is considered priced fairly at $999, but the 4080 beats it in Ray Tracing and DLSS is more available, then is the 4080 really overpriced? If the 4080 is overpriced and should be $999, then does that mean the XTX is overpriced?
You're paying 200 bucks more for better raytracing performance and frame generation wich can dramatically improve performance, those are features that AMD is not offering sadly.
They dropped the ball on this one. They need the market share, but are never willing to go the extra mile to get it. It is too expensive for what it is. Considering the advantages of the 4080 in RT, upscaling and media/productivity, it is no better value than one of those, perhaps worse.
Skipping this generation of gpu's. Completely insane prices compared to the previous gen. You can't justify these prices with 'inflation, cost of production etc' - even accounting for that these prices are still obscene. I'll stick with my £649 3080FE
My thoughts summed up: 7900 XTX: RT Performance = 3090/3090ti Rasterization Performance = 10% to 15% faster than RTX 4080 (with some outliers). 7900 XT: RT Performance = 3080/3080ti level Rasterization Performance = 5% to 10% slower than RTX 4080. The 7900 XT will be a decent 4070Ti competitor and probably win 90% of the time in rasterization considering how close it gets to the 4080. The Radeon 7000 series is a massive improvement over the Radeon 6000 series in all the areas that matter. It's a mixed bag against the RTX 4000 series however. Overall I think the 7900 XTX offers a good value proposition, not amazing but at $999 I rather get that over a $1,199 RTX 4080, not to mention the 7900 XTX will actually fit in many ITX builds whereas the RTX 4080 will not. ITX builders will flock to AMD as the best nVidia GPU that can probably be used will be the RTX 4070 Ti which will definitely fall short compared to the 7900 XTX (25% to 35% slower rasterization with similar RT performance)
AMD must be looking at how Apple prices their lineup to get people in the mindset of well just a little more money to get the better model. Before you know it you went in expecting to spend $400 and walked out spending $1000.
The story for nextgen cards for me is none existent from both AMD and Nvidia. Far to expensive they need to be below £600 MSRP to even be considered, ideally £200-£400 for some serious consideration.
Great review. Did you notice the same issue with the 1% lows as the other youtube reviewers? This use to be a strong point for AMD but seems to be a big issue for the 7900 series.
Great review! I was really hoping for a stronger showing from AMD - disappointing on virtually every front. I'm definitely not interested in either of these cards.
People were disappointed with the 6000 series initially as well. Look what happened… Guess we all forget this is new gpu tech, on top of beyond immature drivers
Maybe you and I are looking for different things, but how is the XTX not impressive? For it's price point comparatively it's a good offer. I'm definitely getting one at least, been holding onto my 1080 for too long.
Irony here is, that this isn't a video for promotion of XTX. It's a promotional video for RTX 4080😉 All the while people were cursing NVIDIA for price performance ratio of 4080. But now AMD has proved that it was priced right🤦
The RTX 3080 FE was £650, which was the RRP and is what I paid. I paid £750 (RRP) of my RTX 2080. I'm not paying NVIDIA's new pricing, though nor am I paying £900 for a 4070-class card (nor £1000 for a 4080-class card).
The XT prices are ridiculous given the performance compared to the XTX. Unless AMD cut the price down I don't see them being worth consideration, why wouldn't you go for the XTX for just £100 more and the performance boost.
@@Ben-ry1py What are you smoking? It beats the 4080 at 4k, demolishes it at 1440p, the 1% lows are categorically better, often beating the 4090, the useless raytracing is usably fast and it supports the new generation of high refresh monitors coming out.
@@PineyJustice AMD are demonstrably behind in software features and RT. They have been losing marketshare, and Nvidia have so much more mindshare. Nvidia have been selling more cards the last few months even though AMD have been slaying them in prices to performance. They didn't do enough to swing any of that in their favor IMO, and the $400 ebay 6800 XT I'll be getting in the mail today destroys all of these cards in price to performance. I've been rooting for AMD and buying their products for many years now, but to see this as a big win is not accurate IMO. I'm more than happy with my choice to buy a used card in this stupid market.
@@TruckermanJS Yeah Epos is where you go if you want production, non-scientific workload benchmarks. None of the other rags really bother with it except LTT, which might give it a passing mention on occasion.
7900xtx should be at max $950 while the 7900xt should be at max $800 .. AMD is missing a big chance to stick it to Nvidia, but I guess Greed has affected them as well !!!
If NVIDIA drop the price of the 4080 to like $1050 AMD are screwed imo similar performance but anywhere from 15% to 50% less performance in RT and FSR not being available on alot of titles.
@@iang3902 Then AMD will also cut the prices to be competitive. The fact is, even $1050 is too expensive for the 4080 and AMD is pricing its gpus as high as it can to both undercut Nvidia and still remain overpriced for more profit. This gen is a total scam right now.
@@edvinjohnson4136 That would be nice if they go into a price war , but I assume NVIDIA will let amd have a slight undercut because the 30% difference in RT performance kinda justifys it and if you take into account the 50w extra power draw on the 7900xtx the 4080 is actually cheaper over the time you own it anyways.
@@iang3902 fair point. still, If people want the best bang for the buck, the 3000 series is a much better choice right now. besides dlss 3, which is not that great right now tbh, the 3000 cards have most of the useful features the 4000 cards have at much better prices. if the 4080 gets down to $800-$900, It would make more sense. until then, 3000 all the way.
I buy nvidia for top of the line innovation in RT and DLSS. And with this in mind the 4080 is still the better buy. I got a 4090 and it’s a much better buy
Doing benchmarks without raytracing on the ultra high end seems pointless. All the cards have enough rasterization performance for anything anyone needs. It's like when you optimize a game, you should always aim to optimize the worse case performance, not the parts that already run fine. And this is what it feels like with these GPU's, there is no point optimising for raster performance when that is already fast enough, we need faster raytracing so that games can start to more fully take advantage of it.
So, take away is that the 4080 is $400 too expensive, the XTX is $200 too expensive and the XT is $250 too expensive. Hard to recommend any of them at the price they are now, particularly the 4080 and the XT. Also, the RT performance appears to be better than their presentation slide which is a big plus.
Nope, as that would then put the price of both the XTX and 4080 at $800. If they where the same price, then I guarantee hardly anyone at all would buy a XTX over a 4080, due to the 4080 having better RT performance, better productivity performance, better support and better features like DLSS. With these results, you are now basically talking about the price of the XTX having to be at least 10-15% below that of the 4080, for it to even stand a chance of moving off of shelves. If it was more like $850 for the 4080, $750 for the XTX and $600 for the XT, then there's no doubt that all 3 of them would be flying off shelves. However, both companies have typically got greedy, which is the norm these days. TBH, if Nvidia dropped the 4080's MSRP by $100 to $1,100 within the next few days/weeks, then both the XTX and XT would be screwed as they would look far more "meh" in value, in comparison. AMD would then no doubt have to follow suit and reduce their prices. Hopefully this scenario may come to fruition, especially if both companies GPU's don't sell very well. That could mean both companies getting into a spiraling price reduction war, which ofc will eventually benefit us all.
idk if showing rasterization performance for a game compatible with RT is interesting for 1k$ gpu, like i hope people dropping this amount of money in a graphics card will at least play at ultra max settings
Times like these make you glad DF exist. We really need an authority on the matter, like Rich and the guys, to be able to speak up on what is essentially price gouging practices. After seeing some of the ARC benchmarks, I'm confident that competition from Intel will apply pressure on the current GPU duopoly.
No one cares about who thinks what about the prices. The demand is high so prices go up. Whole previous generation nvidia GPUs were unobtainable at MSRP, meaning the prices were too low. Sales are what matters, not what youtubers say.
Though I agree that GPU prices are too high, I find the price to performance ratio that reviewers and others often use to be a bit..unrealistic. A great metric to bring up. Useful as part of a decision process. But I can't think of a single product in life that is priced mathematically proportionate to a price of a similar product based off performance. Other than goods that are bought and sold by quantity, like the weight of construction material or food/ingredients for example. It seems to be a point that people harp on a bit too much in the gaming sphere. Unless you have multiple GPUs side by side in your home of the same generation, comparing over a few percentage points of performance (well I suppose not a few in this case) is really just bringing about more stress in your life, along with compounding the FOMO that manufacturers bank on to get us to buy products. Point is, if you can spend $900 on a GPU to play CoD on, you can spend $1000. If you don't want to then you buy the cheaper one. I'm not buying either. But expecting a company to price a product in such a mathematically "correct" way is unrealistic for both parties.
There's nothing evil in matching the prices with the demand. It's literally the definition of making a business. You'll get your price cut once the market of people with deeper pockets is saturated.
@@Tarets what "demand"? ... crypto miners, scalpers, covid, shipping crisis, chip shortage ... pretty much every bubble you can point to has burst (yeah, you can point to Russia/Ukraine ... resulting in runaway inflation, but at the same time they are not allowed to sell to Russia... and i doubt Ukraine is buying many GPUs right now, which means an entire region that is not buying product) .... demand is down across the board. Nvidia holding onto pricing generated from burst bubbles resulted in RTX 4080 cards that no one is buying. They will point to inflation, but that is 20% not 200%, they will point to TSMC who upped their prices, but that is $20 per GPU/CPU ... not hundreds! Shipping container prices from China are back down to pre-covid pricing... i don't see how they can keep this pretense up for much longer. Same with the new AMD CPUs, they didn't sell because AM5 boards + DDR5 ram just isn't a good deal at the moment. Oh and... not to mention that they only priced the RTX 40 cards so high because they are sitting on mountains of unsold RTX 30 GPUs they still need to get rid off... which are also too expensive... none of this makes any sense if you just say "supply and demand". I'm thinking they just hope for the next Crypto craze to start soon... and we gamers that just want some hardware for our HOBBY, now look at a situation where we have to "buy the dip" before the next bulls***t starts. ... like China / Taiwan / TSMC is what everyone is expecting to go down next to F it all up and then we can be happy if we get a GPU for 1000€
Worst GPU gen ever, let's hope AMD and Nvidia get their shit together and deliver an even remotely good price/performance product next gen. Adjust to XT U$550, XTX U$700, 4080 U$800 and then we all would be happy consumers.
I think this is the first time I've seen DF give a more favourable review of an AMD product than Hardware Unboxed. Results are much the same, but takeaways have a very different tone. Aren't we lucky to have multiple sources of information?
At a grand I still dont care about this round of AMD, rather get a 6000 and save a bunch of money for the same features and temps, but lower power consumption.They put more effort into a port no one can use for resolutions that don't hit those marks anyway instead of a richer and well defined feature set.
[TLDR?: Someone, please tell AMD that the race toward raster performance has already ended. A brand new race has begun!] Despite all the people crying about Nvidia price-performance, they are actually targeting performance where they believe it matters most - a future where ray tracing(and AI) is commonly used. Ironically, while it's cheaper than the competition, I don't see many people rushing out to buy AMD's $1000 card for the sake of its raster performance, either. Last-gen cards ALREADY check that box, at much cheaper prices. While I still believe Nvidia dropped the ball with pricing, I thoroughly believe their vision for the future of games is on point. Price cuts will come, and lower-end cards will launch, but the architectural vision for these round of GPUs is already set in stone. So, beteen these two makers, AMD is actually in the more precarious position, especially as next-gen games begin saturate the market. The 7900-XTX is the kind* of card AMD needed... 2 generations ago, when raster performance was the be-all-end-all of real-time rendering. A new race has started, and AMD is barely in it!
The tragedy is that Nvidia priced their GPUs so high that people start considering that the 7900 XTX is fairly priced at $1000. The msrp pricing for both the AMD 7900 XTX and the Nvidia RTX 4080 should not exceed $699. It is so worrying that consumers and reviewers don't call this out and vote with their wallet to completely ruin the launch of those cards to teach these companies a lesson about bad pricing. Also what's even more worrying is that AMD went with a chiplet design to save money and still decided to price the 7900 XTX at $1000. I don't like the GPU market share that Nvidia has, and I do root for competitors such as AMD or Intel to catch up market share-wise and technology-wise, but AMD being the underdog should make it even more clear that they should have priced their GPUs correctly.
The funny thing is, Nvidia could still make more profit selling the 4080 at $899 than it did on the 3080 at $699 even when factoring in the massive price hikes at TSMC, Samsung, etc. And AMD's MCM design is even cheaper, allowing them to sell the 7900 XTX at ~$749 while maintaining the same profit margin as the overpriced 6900 XT. The 7900XT should be a 7800XT at $599 imo.
