You can get the 6700 XT for exactly the same price as the cheapest few 3060 Ti models in my region, so obviously AMD is the better buy with that extra VRAM especially
USA is not the whole world. In many regions the 6700 XT is pitched as a rival to rtx 3070 pricing itbto 450 usd and 3060 Ti at 400. Yes many might say adding 50 isd more and buying 6700 xt is a better choice. But I ve been using 3060 Ti ans I am completely satisfied specially at 1080p. Also many might say RT and DLSS is not the way 2 play games. I use em and they make games look and play that extra special. So no issues with 3060 Ti at least till 2025.
The results are what I expected but I'm more surprised by the price of each in different regions. I was considering buying a used 3060ti when I saw a 6700XT (also used) for cheaper (300USD vs 280USD). Both of them are still under each assembler warranty and where bought around the same time. When buying a new one however the 6700XT was considerably more expensive.
@Yosef9438 nope, they belonged to employees or were workstations for the same retailers that sells them. They tested the card right in front of my eyes and you couldn't even notice a difference from a brand new one. They are even still under assembler warranty.
@@Yosef9438 In fact, I bought a 6700XT and they ran out of stock so they gave me a 3070 for the same price which had a full year of assembler warranty.
i bought MSI mech 2x Rx 6700 xt for 225$, used only for gaming, and best part is it's still came with the box, and some kind of card tested it and yes the performance felt as new
Nope warranty does not apply to used graphics cards...Not 1 company will honor it and they will want a svan or invoice of the original purchase to even start an RMA
It should be noted that most AIB (board partners) for the 6700XT (and to some degree the 3060Ti) will have higher average running clocks than the reference model they used here. The part in this video seems to average 2510-2520MHz under load, while most AIB versions of the 6700XT will average around max boost or above in the 2580-2600Mhz range. *EDIT* Just watched the Daniel Owens video where he does the same test and HIS reference model runs at 2580+ under load.
yes! you know what's wierd - NVIDIA cards seem to have this odd 'micro stutter' like all the time - you can see it when you watch a player character travel in one direction and look at the sides (the flowers going by, or a fence going by, etc) - AMD GPUs do not have this, it's an odd super-small micro-stutter occurrence and it does not show up in "1% Lows" or anything like that... so odd lol
@@Munenushiyeah, I’ve noticed it with my gtx 1650 a lot actually, I was playing a car sim and there was these little stuttering moments where I was driving one time and then suddenly it stutters for like a millisecond but noticeable and keeps going
What's the deal about Witcher 3? the next gen patch broke the game performance, it runs with half the fps than the old game with visuals that doesn't match that huge performance lost at ALL. For me it doesn't even look better than 2017s Assassin's Creed Origins.
@@halcyon-arThe Witcher 3 is the Game Of The Year and it has RPG genre, many people who love RPG would consider to play The Witcher 3. Also its the pinnacle of 2015 so you can see how much perfomance the gpu give on 2015 games. My list of game to benchmark always included Rockstar Game (since its amazingly optimize), Game Of The Year, some High Perfomance but optimize (Resident evil 4 remake, Cyberpunk 2077 etc) and some Badly Oprimize (You know it right?)
Even when the fps is close, the frame timing is waaaay smoother, also the extra vram gonna be needed for new titles, it's running cooler, drawing less power, and you can actually get them cheaper than this. It's no competition.
Not everyone is in the US. In Canada, the price difference even in the used market means the 3060ti is a better buy. I'm not spending $600 on a mid range GPU, screw that.
@@insertnamehere4419 I'm not in the US. I'm in the UK, where the pricing ratios are similar, same goes for Europe. Sorry to hear it doesn't work out for Canadians.
@@theplayerofus319nvidia cards offer better performance and features then amd cards,if you are looking the best possible performance go for nvidia.However,if you are on a budget then amd is recommended
@@Ewarriorrr I don't even care about 10 fps less or more I just want to play Asa games smoothly no diff it has been a childhood dream of mine which is finally fulfilled now(I don't know why I told this story don't ask why)
Sucks AMD made the rx6800m a rx6700xt based card. Should've been at least a rx6800 desktop gpu with a 175w TDP. Heck even the 3070m can beat the rx6800m and that one is a glorified 3060ti when its tweaked. 3070ti (3070 desktop) will be even faster.
I have both, but some games like horizon zero dawn, alan wake 2 just looks way better in the nvidia card in the same settings due to nvidia dlaa anti aliasing... On 6700xt grass textures are a shimmery mess..in generel same games looks better in the nvidia card... Thats the thing i think no one is talking about
@@mihirsavla3233 For amd. Amd cards usually gets better in years. And they complain about driver issues but in reality all I see is amd is making their cards much more powerful with drivers in time. Like the old Rx580. When it was first released it was considered a little lower than the nvidia's gtx 1060. But in 4-5 years, I've even seen on some steam games Rx580 or gtx 1070 for minimum card recommendation. For the countries which both cards at same price I'd recommend 6700xt. If amd is cheaper, definately 6700xt. But if it's more expensive than as you wish.
@@Mohammad_C137nah buddy they been fine for a long time now. Been using 6700xt without single crash for like 6 months. Only problems i ever had were when i messed with voltage or clock speed.
@@topisalonen8813I wish it was like this for me. I have to fix drivers every time i boot the pc because adrenalin software says it's not compatible with current drivers (i have the newest) but compatibility checker says it is.
@@samserious1337Depend on, Rdna 3 feel like a refresh instead of game changing. Also if AMD could price Rx 7700 Xt at reasonable price it could be the next sweet spot of GPU, and also there is a chance for rx 6700 Xt to decrease its price.
rumors say 7700 will be like 6750xt, so overcloked 6700 xt. 7700 xt will be closer to 6800 non xt just with 12gb vram. unless amd makes fsr 3 only on 7000 series , this gen is skip.
When I see these videos, I am occasionally reminded there might be a percentage of people who don't care which graphics card is better for x price, or if they choose AMD or NVIDIA , or the benchmarks, they just buy one and that's it.
probably someone with a simple mind and hassle-free personality. Don't forget the fact that those people "might" have a lot of budget but then again they would not buy both of these GPUs if they have a lot of budget to begin with...
Why are You turning on RT only in games with weak RT when AMD wins? Why in Spiderman, Cyberpunk, The Witcher, Hogwarts Legacyis (AMD's game) RT is off?? ... Rhetorical question. 😂 But ok, AMD need more propaganda, so more people would buy AMD, and them NVIDIA will have to lower prices! 😄 I wonder thet NVIDIA have 51% of the market, still best, but no totally dominated like now, and is forced to lower prices! 😀
i have the 6700xt card and it is a good option but im so tired about issues with drivers some games are unplayable like dead space so much sttuttering is terrible i will sell it to buy a 3060ti card.
Don't get away with Amd misleading crowd 3060 ti is equivalent to 6700xt even after having less vram. Even better than 6700xt in 4k . Best option is 7900gre for now if u want to upgrade
you just have to play with graphical settings on high and not ultra...hogward lagacy uses 11 gb vram at 1440p ultra while it uses 7gb at 1440p high and 9gb at 4k high and less than 8gb vram at 4k high + dlss quality. And the difference in quality between ultra and high is really small, i would rather play at 1440p high or 4k high+dlss quality(or even performance) than 1080p ultra just to get those ultra settings. We have seen several games where the diference between ultra and high changes everything in vram utilization so 12 gb is ideal for mid tier gpus such as the 4070, and for gpus less powerful than the 4070, 8 gb is just fine. on hellblade 2 at 1440p ultra the vram utilization is 7.6gb so i think 8gb on a 3060 ti is perfect.
@@gaz3146 Are you aware the 3070 costs more than even the 6750XT? What kind of "equivalents" are you on about? Stop being a fanboy you're embarrassing yourself lmao
@@leanlifter1 dude you just have to play with graphical settings on high and not ultra...hogward lagacy uses 11 gb vram at 1440p ultra while it uses 7gb at 1440p high and 9gb at 4k high and less than 8gb vram at 4k high + dlss quality. And the difference in quality between ultra and high is really small, i would rather play at 1440p high or 4k high+dlss quality(or even performance) than 1080p ultra just to get those ultra settings. We have seen several games where the diference between ultra and high changes everything in vram utilization so 12 gb is ideal for mid tier gpus such as the 4070, and for gpus less powerful than the 4070, 8 gb is just fine. on hellblade 2 at 1440p ultra the vram utilization is 7.6gb so i think 8gb on a 3060 ti is perfect.
AMD: same price even cheaper, better gaming performance, better vram, support open source like fsr for old - new gen amd gpu even old nvidia gpu (but amd get better performance in fsr). 3d productivity? amd can use radeon prorender plugin. Nvidia: productivity (video & 3d rendering), deep learning, better ray tracing.
Nvidia generally has more support from developers, either paid by Nvidia (rumor i made up), or generally developers optimize their software/games because... well, the market share says it all. That's also one big reason why people struggle to switch to AMD. I also had the idea between 6700 XT or 3060 12 GB version. Both were the same price, and i knew which one did better in games, but i knew which one was doing much better in productivity (premiere pro, after effects, stable diffusion) etc... even my friend is still deciding because he does astrophotography and uses AI tools for his hobby, yet that program requires and only works on CUDA cores. ROCm is the answer we needed from AMD but still it'll take time (or if it even takes off, i hope it does). Tough choice for people who do both gaming and productivity. Easy choice for gamers.
even though I only play in 1080p 60fps because that's all anyone ever needs, anything more is a stupid idiotic fad... it has to be appreciated how the 6700xt stays cooler while delivering more FPS. if only their drivers wouldn't be fucked.
yea it will do it's job but try to upgrade your GPU next because i used a Ryzen 3600 back then with a Rx5700 and a Rx7800xt is too much for a Ryzen 5800x in 1080p because the CPU is botlenecking the GPU so yes go with this GPU if you want to but next step wil lbe a CPU upgrade.
Yes, this test is made in favor of AMD, since the resolution is high, and all RT settings are disabled, if there was a test in 1080p with RT, then this RX 6700 XT would have lost with a bang!
@@Igor-Bondwho cares about RT ? U r still thinking to enjoy rt with 8 gb vram & medium budget nvidia card ? If you want to enjoy rt. Then buy rtx 4090.
@@shoxruxbekabduraxmonov6958 I do not know who is not enough, but my RTX 3070 is enough for me, I have already passed 10+ fairly fresh games, at high-ultra settings, and on my 1080p, 144 hertz monitor I had enough performance, no problem!
yeah, i have noticed this trend in many benchmarks. especially when compared to nvidia cards that have same vram, e.g. 4070 12gb, the 12gb amd cards still uses more.
It's called technology diff. Even though Amd have 12gb vram but it's working speed is far less than Rtx cards . It's the speed at which transfer of data occurs to make things go smooth and faster. That's why u see 3060ti beating 6700xt in higher resolution like 4k
FSR at 4k looks pretty good. im playing god of war on optimized settings (almost everything at max) and getting around 90 fps, minimum at 60 fps on very demanding areas
befor a year: 330€ rx6700xt vs 430€ 3060ti what you choose the "i have 5%more fps at raytracing" or the i have 5-30% more fps without raytracing bcz. my vram not spitover?? i know the nvidia boys choose the rtx 3060ti, me as gamer for fps choose the rx 6700xt :D
Both are worth it if you can find them used, i manage to find one rx 6700 xt at $230 and one rtx 3060 ti at $260 but my 2070 still perform well so i don't need it for now. But be careful if you want to find used amd gpu, most of them are ex mining gpu
I'm a 6700XT owner. I'd consider the RTX 3060Ti for Ray Tracing up to 1440p unless the 6700XT is way cheaper. If they're similarly priced, and you plan on playing a lot of Ray Tracing, go Nvidia. If you don't care about Raytracing and you consider maybe 4k gaming, I can tell you the 6700XT can absolutely handle a lot of games at 4k even without FSR.
the RTX 3060ti wont do much in Raytracing, the RTX 3070ti wont do much in raytracing and the RTX 3080 10/12 gb wont do much ... all RTX 3000 cards are bad and all RTX 4000 cards are bad because they are too overpriced. The Rx6700xt is matching even the RTX 3070ti, dont tell me a RTX 3060ti is beating it, we all know the real benchmarks and the Rx6700xt beat even a RTX 4060ti. But here we have a Fanboy who belive every bs what he see on youtube.
"Look at Core clock speed" Yeah buddy no shit they're different lmao? Legit comparing the clocks of RDNA2 and Ampere as apples to apples, you're embarrassing yourself lol. I also don't quite get how it's relevant whatsoever as, in case you didn't know, core clock alone does not define whether or not one gpu is stronger than the other
for those who keep bringing up DLSS don't forget that it only supports a few dozen games and AMD is a good alternative to NVIDIA if you want framerates and more memory. Whilst NVIDIA can have AI learning (DLSS) to add more frames it has a higher latency also under 30 FPS just looks bad with DLSS for example teardown wants massive memory space to be able to run smooth...ish I wouldn't complain at my graphics card if it couldn't handle the game at certain moments but I believe AMD would do a way better job at handling it than NVIDIA I know there are AMD lovers and NVIDIA lovers hating each other just know that I am not biased. NVIDIA isn't doing great lately that's all I have to say.
Frame Generation is not on rtx 3000. AMD's only advantage is the vram. Nvidia also gives you better productivity performance and better features. So it depends on what you need.
Tbh the 3060ti is typically no more than about 7% slower at the most 11%. However I think DLSS more than makes up for thst difference and allows for raytracing at 1440p on the likes of Cyberpunk, which looks incredible with it. 3060ti is holding up prettt strong, dont think ill be upgrading till the 50xx series
@@johnblair2294 No, it can't. Plenty of videos shows that it can only do 1080 high with RT and your card certainly isn't any different from the tested ones on many channels. And in 1440p DLSS is as crappy as FSR2, it's only really useful (for image quality) in 4k. I own a 3070ti and switching between FSR and DLSS you can barely see the difference, it's really on the very small details that you won't even notice while playing. And while i think the 3060ti is a small powerhouse on it's own, the 6700XT is a much superior card for 1440p, no amount of coping with "DLSS is better than FSR" or "BETTER RT" will change it. Only high end cards can really take the RT hit to performance and still deliver a good playing experience on newer titles or even CP.
@@RFKG you can do 60 FPS with raytracing on high with dlss quality @1440p. 1440p with dlss is absolutely grand, in lots of games it still looks better than native. I wouldn't buy a 3060ti now cos of its vram limits but head to head with the 6700xt with current games it holds it own close enough and if you want some raytracing then it beats it sizably. Honestly at its best the 6700xt wins by about 13%, in most 5% and loses in a few. That's pure raster as well. I don't think that performance gain is worth trading DLSS or some raytracing ability. If I was buying now I wouldn't buy either of the cards but I guess if my budget was 300 and I needed it to last a few more years then yeah 6700xt. But at present I prefer the 3060ti cos I can use raytracing with dlss and hit 60. Even when it drops to 50 odd every now and then it's no issue cos I've VRR.
@@johnblair2294 Well, you just said that a 3060ti can't mantain stable 60fps on 2k. It's just the way it is, all the tests shows it. And then again, FSR2 give que same amount of FPS as DLSS, not to mention that it just can't run modern games at 2k with 8gb of ram, so it will turn into an exclusively 1080p card very soon, while the 6700XT will still play games at 2k medium/low (another scenario where the better raster+vram will make the card age better). 11% more raster is a lot, and so is 4gb of ram. DLSS 2 is not an argument against FSR2, do the test by yourself. There's no difference in 2k. Like i said, the 3060ti is a great card, but DLSS and RTX are not valid arguments for a mid range card from last generation. The 6700XT is objectively better.
DLSS is the winner imo, power consumption is also better for the 3060ti (there are models with 200w max while the lowest i've seen for 6700xt is 225w sure not a big difference but worth mentioning). the only advantages for the xt is the 12gb vram and it's 50-60 euros cheaper depending on mondel - cheapest now is the 6700xt power color fighter 340 euros which is a good deal
I think you are blind. 6700XT is faster in 9 out of 10 games here, use much less power, cost less, heat less, have much more ram. DLSS is not a big deal anymore cos AMD have FSR which is very good now. Only thing Nvidia card has better is RT but this cards can't run any game with RT on anyway.
@@user-gl1tc7wi8g DLSS is generally higher quality and frames and while FSR is getting better and the XT had better frames her true but these tests were not done as direct comparison between DLSS and FSR where games that have higher details and are more demanding will benefit from DLSS. another important aspect is that FSR can be used with any card afaik there are no 6700XT that require only 1x8 pin for pcie and they all have 230W TDP while some 3060ti have a max of 200W TDP so at full power it's about 13% difference which isn't a big deal. as i said in first post vram and cost are advantages for the XT but i prefer the DLSS overall.
Hi, people say rtx series are best in terms of editing rather than amd rx series, so you think rtx 3060 ti is better than rx 6700 xt in terms of video editing ?
This video is something like… RTX 4080 vs 7900XTX Wins 7900XTX AMD fanboys : Yay! AMD the best!! RTX 4090 waiting for RX 7950XTX for a possible opponent*
empate técnico em desempenho mas prefiro a 3060ti pq esquenta menos, ray tracing muito melhor e a tecnologia dlss é muito melhor q a fsr e por puxar menos energia !!!
Here in Philippines these are the Price: -MSI RTX 3060 Ti 8GB oc v1 ($441.19) -MSI RTX 4060 Ti 8GB oc ($484.32) -MSI AMD RX 6700 XT 12GB ($514.28) I converted this to USD but this is pretty much the overall price. All are dual fans btw. I'm planning to build a PC(msi built) this August, so I'm not so sure where to aim my overall budget is around $1250
3060 TI. There is no way a 6700 XT is worth 20% more than a 3060 Ti. 4060 TI is only worth if most of your games have frame gen, or you're a huge MSFS player.
@@CHRoOMAX it doesn’t work for FPS games but for single player slow pace games, it’s pretty good. Just look at MSFS forums and people are very thankful for it.
wait the Rx6700xt is way stronger then the RTX 3060ti for sure and here 11 months ago we see the Rx6700xt in this video draw less power then the RTX 3060ti ... i mean come on what a BS is this, fake tests nvidia fanboy who dont really show the real numbers.
Being limited to the garbage-looking FSR is the sole reason I'll never go for the AMD GPU. Those can have a bit better performance/price ratio, more VRAM etc., but in the end I'll get more from nVidia GPU with no real loss in image quality thanks to DLSS upscaling being so much better.
@@markolumovic2750 my dude you either never compared FSR to DLSS or have eyesight problems. Being toxic piece of shit over someone's opinion isn't the best strategy for ya.
I agree 100% with you. Also not a fan boy or anything. I just prefer what works better. I prefer AMD to Intel when it comes to CPUs, due to AMD sticking with the same socket for multiple generations. But yeah when it comes to GPUs, I prefer Ngreedia since DLSS looks way better than FSR. And nowadays DLSS and FSR is kinda mandatory on most single player games even at 1080p, due to how unoptimized games are.
@@CosmicVoid420 I totally agree about the AMD vs Intel part. I got myself a R5 7600 build a month ago and I know it'll serve me well for many years to come.
In 2021 I bought the 3070 Ti LHR at a better price than any 6700 XT version. It still satisfies me, even with RT ON. Two years have passed since then, an eternity in the life of video cards. The 6700XT wins over the new 4060 in rasterization, but loses terribly when DLSS 3 intervenes. It is not more expensive than the 6700XT. Simple and non-overclocked models are even cheaper. It all boils down to the angle from which you look at the picture as a whole.
AMD will update their FSR so they will catch up eventually but what's annoying is that you get only 8gb vram for the next gen mid range gpus (rx 7600 , rtx 4060)
@@aziz2181 , for 1080p, 8GB is enough. Even for 1440p in esport games. FSR is weak and 3.0 has been promised for a year and the promise remains. DLSS 3.0 is a reality and helps the 4060 enormously in AAA games.
@@gicaio8564 so you are okey with the next gen MID range gpus having only 8gb of vram ? For how long are u planning to play on 1080p when a 3 year old console can play games in 4k
@@aziz2181 i plan to play in 1080p for as long as they make high refresh rate ips monitors w/ improvements, as 1440p is not designed for 24-25 inch monitors and i do not wish to game on bigger (except single player games, which i have a 3rd 1440p monitor for but its my least useD). some people play competitive pvp games that have a massive disadvantage with larger monitors and this will never change.
@@ugursk7627 ray tracing only cut down fps so much down i would cry and do little change, same as dlss nvidia option, it gives u fps but downgrade quality of picture. I undervolted my rtx 3060 ti so it cut down temp and give little more fps plus if i want good graphics ,i dont need max settings from game. And on top of that reshade program make game looking like something from future at cost of few fps.
@@Neatcraft he states Dollar you Euro, clearly diffrent country with diffrent prices lol. In germany the rx 6700xt is 30 euros more, source Mindfactory
