Vayra86Its about a stable image though, resolution isn't an influence on that. Image stability means pixels are what they are, and not having constant artifacting on anything that is in motion, or a heavily blurred image to hide those motion artifacts. And unfortunately that is what FSR still is, and DLSS is not much better at it either: things in motion will create artifacts. Sometimes akin to ghosting. Other times you've got several trailed copies of a license plate (Cyberpunk) while driving, or the grass seems to split in front of you instead of moving with the wind.

Even if minor, those errors stand out because they are simply unnatural, uncanny, and butt ugly. Upscaling is not quite at the point of completely eliminating those issues - not even DLSS - but FSR is notably worse at that. In static imagery, it looks fine. In motion? I can't get used to it. The same thing applies to the vaseline filter that is running a below native res form of upscaling. It ain't better. Its a notable loss of fidelity to gain some FPS, simple as that.

When Nvidia and ATi/AMD tried constantly cheating a number of times 10-20 years ago, they had to admit it and explain themselves. Today it's a feature. Buggy, with artifacts and ghosting? It's a must have feature. We can't avoid it. But having tried FSR I can say that as in case with stupid plot holes in pop corn movies, I can ignore visual problems because I am playing a game, not watching a graphics demo. Other than the water in Wukong's benchmark, where I think with FSR was totally broken, but that could be the game implementation, I haven't noticed such problems that will make me forget the game and focus on artifacts. Also let's not forget that no matter how much developers try to recreate a world in PC 3D graphics that is close to a real world, they never really succeed. I haven't seen a game where it's graphics can look really real. Throwing more color and more reflections on screen doesn't make the 3D world more accurate. Where I am going is, even if upscaling or a vaseline filter reduces the visual quality a bit, the average gamer that simply plays a game, wouldn't notice. The world of the game, any game, is already very inaccurate anyway.

That being said I would love to only have native options and the game's engine just throw ALL the pixels in their correct positions instead of trying to guess what to show next.

TumbleGeorgeI hope UN prohibit the use of computers drawing more than 250 watts from the electrical outlet, including the case, monitor and all other peripherals.

Nah, they first need to ban the diesel/petrol vehicles, the kerosine aircraft, the diesel ship, and to ban the oil production for transportation uses.

NostrasDid everyone forget about the RX480 or even the 5700XT? The former was a massive downgrade compared to prev gen and the latter was also notably behind.
If the price is right it's about as far as it could be from the death of progress in the mid range gpu market.
Unless you think a 4080 Super for 1000$ is mid-end. Fair enough I guess.

Considering that the 5700(XT) and RX 6000/7000 mid-range were almost literally Nvidia pricing -5%, it's quite a stretch to think AMD is going to price this well. The mentioned 5700XT had shitty pricing when announced, got a price cut before it even launched, and it still was kinda bad, having barely better perf/$ than the Nvidia alternative that released at basically the same time, while using more power, lacking features and having driver issues.

3valatzyNvidia doesn't dictate anything. The company will have problems once TSMC stops releasing new processes, which will inevitably happen because the Moore's law has been dead for a while already.
Nvidia relies on the old nodes 6nm and 4nm, and this is a disaster for them.

They do today. They have architectural advantages and many games in their PC ports optimize specifically for Nvidia. The public buy the sticker blindly, it's not a case of TSMC.

AcENo, in fact it didn't help when RDNA 3 came out with driver issues that were caused by a new architecture that is more complicated - dual issue shaders being the culprit but also other things. As I mentioned somewhere else, if AMD streamlines their approach to architecture like Nvidia did, it will make driver issues less and less, and they will have very good drivers even at launch. Now we go back to RDNA 2, RDNA 2 had proper drivers at launch because it was just a bigger RDNA 1 with RT cores added, not a much changed architecture like RDNA 3 was. If RDNA 4 has very good drivers from second 1, it will get nice mind share, just like RDNA 2.

They tried to streamline it with RDNA for gaming and CDNA for compute and then compute and AI and Stable Diffusion and stuff happened and now they are moving into combining those again, meaning one architecture for everything, back to the GCN era. AMD failed with RDNA 3 not because of drivers, but because they failed to predict that a feature like RT, a gimmick that probably doesn't do much or maybe it does, would become a very important parameter for when buying a GPU much faster than what they where expecting. If RDNA 3 was bringing twice RT performance from the same number of CUs compared to RDNA 2, AMD wouldn't have lost so much market share. Then they failed to take advantage of the better compute capabilities of RDNA 3. Getting Amuse and promoting it with their GPUs shows that at least they understand that buyers of graphics cards want to (feel they can) do more with their hardware than simply playing games. When the equivalent of a $200 GPU from 10 years ago, today costs $500, consumers want to have at least the impression that they get more for paying more. And I don't just mean raster performance. While I keep saying a number of things about Nvidia, the buyer of a $500 Nvidia card will only get gimped in VRAM. It will get raster, RT, AI upscaling, FG, CUDA, AI, OptiX. With AMD until recently the buyer was getting only raster performance and FreeSync. AMD had to go to FSR 3.1 to offer something good, buy Amuse and offer it free for those wanting to play with image creation through AI, implement AFMF 2 in the driver to come to a level where the buyer was feeling that was getting more than simply raster performance for gaming.

AcEIllusion or not, frame gen works, not so in competitive games, where I would never use it, as it doesn't improve your relative latency, but in other games it's working well and it is really like you are having more FPS. The buyer cares about how good the game works, not about intrinsic technicalities like "if it is generated or real performance". "Real" is also relative and freely arguable. "Real" is for me what works, and not "traditional" performance. So frame gen is very much real, as long as it performs like advertised (and it usually does, I used it extensively in CP2077 for example - I used it in D4 because of CPU bottlenecks in the cities, it worked in both cases). Frame gen has three downsides: 1) it's not really usable for competitive games as it's not making you see enemies better, as the relative latency doesn't improve, 2) it has rare image glitches, the quality is mostly very good, but not always. 3) frame gen is not (really) usable if your fps is under 50-60 fps, without it being turned on. So you can't use it if your frames with settings X aren't high enough.

What I posted above! I guess we agree here. But you didn't realised what I meant. It is an illusion with the RTX 4060 vs RTX 3060 and that's why Nvidia haven't supported Frame Generation on RTX 3000 cards. Because the performance stagnation in many cases would have been obvious. So when I am talking about an illusion in this situation, it is not about FG working or not, but the artificial limitation of not offering FG to 3060 and any 3000 model.

DBGTAre you saying that it is ok to sell a new generation card with almost equal raster performance with same price, only because of RT improvement? I am actually not caring that much of the RT.

GRE is selling for much higher than $500 I think. At least in most countries. Considering that AMD almost always starts with a relatively high MSRP and drops the price slowly even weeks after release, a $500 MSRP will translate in $450 6 months latter. A raster performance of 7900 GRE and an RT performance higher than that of 7900XTX for $500 MSRP, $450 6 months later, is not bad at all. Intel's top models and Nvidia's 5070 and 5060 models will dictate the final price. But AMD the last few years always starts with a higher MSRP than we wish to see. Maybe because at AMD they are super annoyed reading the same phrase over and over again for the last two decades
"Please AMD, build something good and cheap, so Intel and Nvidia drop their prices, so I could go and buy cheaper Intel and Nvidia hartdware".

The leaks said 4096 shaders, I don't know what people are expecting.

TheDeeGeeIt will make the developer's life a LOT easier than having to hand craft baked lighting.

No it doesn't, they still have to manually place lights. Realistic lighting is not good lighting, same way movies are shot with a lot of artificial lights and not just ambient lighting. Try and think for more than 1 second before you write something that's obviously untrue.

Vya DomusThe leaks said 4096 shaders, I don't know what people are expecting.

Something good and cheap so they can hope to buy cheaper Nvidia GPUs?

I don't get why AMD would go this route, RT and upscaling are just Nvidia snake oil. Just call them out as such. The tech press also not saying what's in front of them is the other problem. Pressure is applied?

The performance hit from RT for what amounts to slightly better shadows and reflections isn't worth it at all.

Upscaling is another step backwards, reducing image quality and introducing shimmering and other artifacting.

AMD shouldn't bother with either and say why they're doing it. They'll never get anywhere copying Nvidia's sales tactics but doing it much worse.

john_Maybe because at AMD they are super annoyed reading the same phrase over and over again for the last two decades
"Please AMD, build something good and cheap, so Intel and Nvidia drop their prices, so I could go and buy cheaper Intel and Nvidia hartdware".

john_Something good and cheap so they can hope to buy cheaper Nvidia GPUs?

I don't think this is serious. AMD pays attention about the regular public trolling can't be true.
What about the real buyers who want to buy a Radeon at a discount ? :confused:

Vya DomusThe leaks said 4096 shaders, I don't know what people are expecting.

It will offer around 35% higher performance than RX 7700 XT, around 15% higher performance than RX 7800 XT, and around 90% higher performance than RX 7600.
If AMD thinks progress, it has to market it as an RX 7600 successor, and charge no more than $299 for it.

In this way, the reviewers, readers and buyers would get impressions that it actually brings the long-awaited performance progress.

mb194dcUpscaling is another step backwards, reducing image quality and introducing shimmering and other artifacting.

These are not visual imperfections, these are features that PC enthusiasts struggle to purchase at any cost. The more artifacts, the more they can boast in one of the benchmarks threads.

Intel & AMD trying to bring Prices back to sane levels?
This card at $500 is way too high it should be $350, no more.

3valatzyI don't think this is serious. AMD pays attention about the regular public trolling can't be true.
What about the real buyers who want to buy a Radeon at a discount ? :confused:

The real buyers prefer Nvidia hardware even when AMD options are better.
It's not trolling. It's something happening for over a decade. AMD having the stump of the value for money brand makes many to avoid it, even when offering better value and/or performance. Many will go and buy the "premium" sticker than accepting anything with an AMD logo on it. It's something that AMD needs to deal with, it's the reason why Qualcomm came out with only expensive laptops for Windows, instead of offering cheap options to get market share. They scared to be seen as a budget option.

3valatzyIf AMD thinks progress, it has to market it as an RX 7600 successor, and charge no more than $299 for it.

You would never put such a low price on an equivalent Nvidia model.

DemonicRyzen666Intel & AMD trying to bring Prices back to sane levels?

While Intel's B580 is promising and 12GBs for $250 MSRP is a step in the right direction, B580 looks good compared to 2 and 4 years old models from AMD and Nvidia. We haven't seen RTX 5050 and RX 9060 or whatever AMD names it, to see how B580 positions next to them. But yes, for now Intel looks like the one player who tries to get market share with better pricing. With AMD things are more complicated. They usually try to avoid provoking a price war with Nvidia while at the same time taking advantage of Nvidia's high pricing. Now the market is different and while they might start again with high MSRP's, if Intel's solutions start gaining consumer attention and support, they could be forced to lower pricing. What I fear is that even if AMD lowers pricing, people today will keep ignoring AMD's offerings. So monopoly will remain intact for the next years, with consumers expecting the other premium brand, Intel, to save them.

Neo_MorpheusAbout RT, to each their own, since I personally havent found worth the performance hit and PT is even worse and present in only one game (?) which doesnt really had nothing to the gameplay.

LOL, not one game of course, but many:

Star Wars Outlaws
Cyberpunk 2077 Overdrive
Indiana Jones and The Great Circle
Black Myth Wukong
Desordre
Alan Wake 2
Minecraft RTX
Quake 2 RTX
Portal RTX
Portal Prelude RTX
Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3
Call of Duty Warzone
Dragon's Dogma 2 (mod)
Resident Evil 2 Remake (mod)
Resident Evil 3 Remake (mod)
Resident Evil 4 Remake (mod)
Doom 1 (mod)
Doom 2 (mod)
Quake 1 (mod)
Half Life 1 (mod)
Serious Sam First Encounter (mod)

7900 GRE performance with better efficiency and much better RT for $500? I can't say I'm crapping my pants from excitement, but it sounds good enough to me. It'll all depend on that "much better RT" part, and how well-rounded product it is straight from launch.

Lisa gonna Lisa.

Lisa doesn't care about discrete GPU's. It's pretty obvious given how she's operated AMD for all these years. Love her for the CPU work, if you like, but don't sugarcoat the complete failure she's done in the discrete market. Who goes four generations without a hardware-based upscaling solution and proper ray tracing support and expects success? Radeon is something she uses to advertise for APU's. One day soon she's going to ditch the discrete GPU space entirely once the APU's thing starts making people say they don't "really" need a discrete card unless they're rich. "There's always upscaling." Intel will have gone belly up by then and carved up for IP. And Jensen will finally be able to do whatever he likes to what's left of the discrete market, sending the rest scrambling to his cloud service he's happy to charge you for per month plus per hour after you exceed his artificially created cap.

Or you can buy a handheld/console with one of those AMD APU's Lisa thinks is enough because that's all she'll have to offer you.

All because Lisa doesn't care for discrete GPU's. I wish they'd spin Radeon off just like I wish Nvidia would spin Geforce off. Then the ones making our discrete GPU's could finally start competing again and give us cards we deserve with features we need at prices appropriate to the audience as though they really want our business instead of waiting on us to require an upgrade because our card's soldering was too poor to last more than ten years.

MuhammedAbdoLOL, not one game of course, but many:

Star Wars Outlaws
Cyberpunk 2077 Overdrive
Indiana Jones and The Great Circle
Black Myth Wukong
Desordre
Alan Wake 2
Minecraft RTX
Quake 2 RTX
Portal RTX
Portal Prelude RTX
Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3
Call of Duty Warzone
Dragon's Dogma 2 (mod)
Resident Evil 2 Remake (mod)
Resident Evil 3 Remake (mod)
Resident Evil 4 Remake (mod)
Doom 1 (mod)
Doom 2 (mod)
Quake 1 (mod)
Half Life 1 (mod)
Serious Sam First Encounter (mod)

You gave 10 games for "Path Tracing" from DX12 out a total of 526 games that could use it. Basically 2% of current DX12 games or 4% of all Raytracing games out of 246 for all those that have raytracing.

Why are people so shocked? AMD has been banging all of you over the head non-stop that they are dropping out of the high end.

Also, the same leak (why doesn’t TPU ever link sources?) says $649 USD. $100 more than the current 7900 GRE price for the same performance. Now you know why AMD discontinued the GRE.

SpeedyblupiI disagree. It wouldn't be terrible, but it wouldn't be good either, it would just be a continuation the same painfully slow gradual process we've been getting for the past 4 years.
AMD released the 7800 XT with similar performance to the 6800 XT with slightly better efficiency and ray tracing, at a slightly lower price. It sold ok (I bought one), but they lost market share overall.
AMD doing the same with the "9070 XT" compared to the RX 7900 GRE isn't enough if they want to retake market share. If Nvidia release an RTX 5070 that's effectively an RTX 4070 Ti for $600, most people will still buy that instead. The 9070 XT would still be behind in path traced or fully ray-traced games, even if it has 3x the ray tracing performance of the GRE.

Using A Path Tracing Benchmark? What AMD card supports Path Tracing?

Guwapo77Damn, this is worst than I had imagined. I knew it would underperform for my needs, but this is just ridiculous. In short, this will not be a 5700XT.

I think they are going for a RX 5700 XT moment again.

While the RX 5700 XT was not the best card back in 2019, it was a significant change since they released a new architecture, from GCN to RDNA for consumer cards. If I remember correctly, it was matched between the RTX 2070 and the RTX 2070 Super (64 ROPs/2560 shaders/160 TMUs).

Remember that the Radeon VII and the RX 5700 XT had very similar gaming performance, but in the end the RX 5700 XT evolved more once the drivers for RDNA matured, particularly in 2020.

Driver immaturity with new architecture is a big part of this disappointing synthetic benchmark score. But it don't stop many jumping to conclusions already in this thread.

CP2077 RT is NVIDIA tracing, its heavily favoring Nvidia because it was built by Nvidia! CP2077 RT is a tech demo for Nvidia. Every single Nvidia sponsored title is an Nvidia RT DEMO! Its not a real representation of RT.

If it ends up being 5% faster than the 7900GRE in games and costs $500 it would be a big improvement over anything that we have now! The GRE sold for $600 for the longest time, though they can still pop up here and there for $570 or $580.

So a GPU that is faster than the GRE, is more power efficient, has up to 2.5x RT performance and costs $100 less, fuck yeah!!! That is a great card and a big win for consumers, considering Nvidia's 5070 is going to cost $800 and the 5070ti is going to cost $1000.

CheeseballI think they are going for a RX 5700 XT moment again.

While the RX 5700 XT was not the best card back in 2019, it was a significant change since they released a new architecture, from GCN to RDNA for consumer cards. If I remember correctly, it was matched between the RTX 2070 and the RTX 2070 Super (64 ROPs/2560 shaders/160 TMUs).

Remember that the Radeon VII and the RX 5700 XT had very similar gaming performance, but in the end the RX 5700 XT evolved more once the drivers for RDNA matured, particularly in 2020.

Yup, it wasn't the best card at all, I stuck with my Fury X in Xfire (not that did much in Xfire).

Man, did i call it or did I call it? It's a 7900 gre, again. Bet it goes for $450 so there is 0 percent price/perf improvement over last gen.

john_The real buyers prefer Nvidia hardware even when AMD options are better.
It's not trolling. It's something happening for over a decade. AMD having the stump of the value for money brand makes many to avoid it, even when offering better value and/or performance. Many will go and buy the "premium" sticker than accepting anything with an AMD logo on it. It's something that AMD needs to deal with, it's the reason why Qualcomm came out with only expensive laptops for Windows, instead of offering cheap options to get market share. They scared to be seen as a budget option.

When was this? In the last decade, AMD has NEVER had a better card. That's why they keep competing with price, there's always a compromise. Even the Rx 6000s, you gave up any sort of usable RT.

The way to fight that is consistently offer a product stack with some benefit. Rx 6000s had that, they were faster then Nvidia in raster, but they fell behind the very next gen and never caught up.

TumbleGeorgeI hope UN prohibit the use of computers drawing more than 250 watts from the electrical outlet, including the case, monitor and all other peripherals.

Why 250? You can build a perfectly functional PC with a 100w TDP rating.

MuhammedAbdoLOL, not one game of course, but many:

Star Wars Outlaws
Cyberpunk 2077 Overdrive
Indiana Jones and The Great Circle
Black Myth Wukong
Desordre
Alan Wake 2
Minecraft RTX
Quake 2 RTX
Portal RTX
Portal Prelude RTX
Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3
Call of Duty Warzone
Dragon's Dogma 2 (mod)
Resident Evil 2 Remake (mod)
Resident Evil 3 Remake (mod)
Resident Evil 4 Remake (mod)
Doom 1 (mod)
Doom 2 (mod)
Quake 1 (mod)
Half Life 1 (mod)
Serious Sam First Encounter (mod)

Clearly you missed the (?) but fine.

Also missed the part of me not caring about it due to the performance hit without providing anything to the gameplay.

Oh, hi Wolf :D

I still stand by my previous comment and this is an experiment you by amd. This is a testing card for next gen Xbox and Ps6 since they won the contract for both parties.

HyderzI still stand by my previous comment and this is an experiment you by amd. This is a testing card for next gen Xbox and Ps6 since they won the contract for both parties.

Plausible thought, also amd is shifting gears for udna anyway, how about people get the card in their hands first...