AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT

[Assimilator]

The 4080 despite being a "replacement" for the 3080 is a whopping 500 dollars more than the 3080 was at launch. So it's a replacement only if you ignore that astronomical 70% increase in price. Meanwhile the 7800XT is 500 dollars vs 650 dollars that the 6800XT was at launch, so it's actually cheaper.

To quote our lord and master:

Compared to the GeForce RTX 3080, the gen-over-gen performance uplift is a a massive 49%.

70% price increase for 50% more performance is not great value, but it's also not the incredible rip-off you're attempting to portray it as... "just" a rip-off.

Meanwhile the 7800 "XT" is barely faster than the 6800 XT - here AMD has taken the opposite approach, offer something that's barely better than the previous generation but price it lower. Except that the previous generation is already at the price of the new card, so 7800 XT looks like bad value.

So, if one were to think, they'd realize they have to look at the prices and come to the conclusion that neither of these cards are replacements for their older counterparts.

This I agree with 100%.

 

[ARF]

I mean this is the competition this generation

4090
4080 vs 7900XTX 100+ cheaper
4070ti vs 7900XT slightly cheaper
4070 vs 7800XT 100 cheaper although the 4060ti 16GB is closer in price so that works as a competitor also either way the card is fine. 450 would have been better but in the states it sold out anyway.
4060ti vs 7700XT more expensive
4060 vs 7600 slightly cheaper

This is not the competition, the competition is:

RTX 4090 vs RX 7900 XTX (less expensive and slower)
RTX 4080 vs RX 7900 XT (less expensive and slower)
RTX 4070 Ti vs RX 7900 gre (depending on the market) | RX 7800 XT (less expensive and slower)
RTX 4070 vs RX 7700 XT (less expensive and slower)
RTX 4060 Ti vs nothing
RTX 4060 vs RX 7600 (slightly less expensive and on par)

 

[theouto]

You'd have to drop textures. The same way you have to drop settings on the 7800xt because it struggles in rt games.

Or you could turn rt off, but I mean, the 4060ti can't do rt all that well either, both would struggle and it wouldn't be a pleasant experience in either GPU. I love raytracing, but I understand it's not the be all end all of what GPU you choose even if it is something to weigh in.

At this class of performance, neither GPU can do RT particularly well, and if you decide to go with the 8GB 4060ti instead, that one can't do RT either because it's running out of VRAM. Also, AMD gpus run better in rt games than what you might think, just turn on fsr (or find a way to lower rt resolution) and it'll put a better showing than you might expect, I mean, I am running Metro Exodus Enhanced on ultra, 1440p rt high (and rt reflections) just by modding in fsr, and it runs at over 100 frames in the volga, it may not be as good as nvidia's, but it's still useable believe it or not.

 

[Shatun_Bear]

The RT performance is getting there. I'm quite impressed with the numbers there.

 

[ratirt]

You'd have to drop textures. The same way you have to drop settings on the 7800xt because it struggles in rt games.

RT is irrelevant since you have games where 4090 cant manage to give OK FPS and yet 4060Ti still loses to 7800xt in RT. So now tell me what are you arguing about? 4060Ti is slower both RT and Raster. It is not the best value in comparison with 7800xt. If you look at only performance of these 2 cards then the difference is huge. So honestly, what is it you are trying to prove here?

 

[JustBenching]

Or you could turn rt off, but I mean, the 4060ti can't do rt all that well either, both would struggle and it wouldn't be a pleasant experience in either GPU. I love raytracing, but I understand it's not the be all end all of what GPU you choose even if it is something to weigh in.

At this class of performance, neither GPU can do RT particularly well, and if you decide to go with the 8GB 4060ti instead, that one can't do RT either because it's running out of VRAM. Also, AMD gpus run better in rt games than what you might think, just turn on fsr (or find a way to lower rt resolution) and it'll put a better showing than you might expect, I mean, I am running Metro Exodus Enhanced on ultra, 1440p rt high (and rt reflections) just by modding in fsr, and it runs at over 100 frames in the volga, it may not be as good as nvidia's, but it's still useable believe it or not.

Yes, both would struggle, but one is much cheaper than the other.

 

[ARF]

At this class of performance, neither GPU can do RT particularly well

This is an absurd. A 500$ card that is high-end can't do something?
So, now what, only 4090 and 3090 can do it? Or even they can't?

 

[JustBenching]

RT is irrelevant since you have games where 4090 cant manage to give OK FPS and yet 4060Ti still loses to 7800xt in RT. So now tell me what are you arguing about? 4060Ti is slower both RT and Raster. It is not the best value in comparison with 7800xt. If you look at only performance of these 2 cards then the difference is huge. So honestly, what is it you are trying to prove here?

I thought we were talking about performance per dollar, not flat out performance. The cards perform very similarly in performance per euro you spent on them, both in raster and rt.

 

[sLowEnd]

I agree, that is one interesting rant. So if this card matched the performance of the 4080 and also got a 70% price hike it is now good?

I don't understand the point they were trying to make the best I could come up with is they want 4080 performance from AMD for 500 usd..... Maybe they will clarify what they actually meant at some point.

I mean this is the competition this generation

4090
4080 vs 7900XTX 100+ cheaper
4070ti vs 7900XT slightly cheaper
4070 vs 7800XT 100 cheaper although the 4060ti 16GB is closer in price so that works as a competitor also either way the card is fine. 450 would have been better but in the states it sold out anyway.
4060ti vs 7700XT more expensive
4060 vs 7600 slightly cheaper

I mean it makes sense to me regardless of the naming.

This is not the competition, the competition is:

RTX 4090 vs RX 7900 XTX (less expensive and slower)
RTX 4080 vs RX 7900 XT (less expensive and slower)
RTX 4070 Ti vs RX 7900 gre (depending on the market) | RX 7800 XT (less expensive and slower)
RTX 4070 vs RX 7700 XT (less expensive and slower)
RTX 4060 Ti vs nothing
RTX 4060 vs RX 7600 (slightly less expensive and on par)

Nah man, oxrufiioxo's list makes way more sense from a price perspective.

AMD has nothing priced/performant to compete with the 4090 this generation. It's an uncontested product tier.

 

[ARF]

AMD has nothing priced/performant to compete with the 4090 this generation. It's an uncontested product tier.

It doesn't work like that. AMD is the underdog, nvidia is the premium brand with much more customers acceptance.
AMD must undercut the nvidia lineup by huge margins, and even then it doesn't help.

So, yeah, the list remains:

RTX 4090 vs RX 7900 XTX (less expensive and slower)
RTX 4080 vs RX 7900 XT (less expensive and slower)
RTX 4070 Ti vs RX 7900 gre (depending on the market) | RX 7800 XT (less expensive and slower)
RTX 4070 vs RX 7700 XT (less expensive and slower)
RTX 4060 Ti vs nothing
RTX 4060 vs RX 7600 (slightly less expensive and on par)

 

[theouto]

This is an absurd. A 500$ card that is high-end can't do something?
So, now what, only 4090 and 3090 can do it? Or even they can't?

View attachment 312489

That is 1080p, with that class of GPU I would expect to do something more intensive, like 1440p or 4k, And I wouldn't want to play at 1080p60 (with likely dips!) when paying for that much muscle, and yes, I know you'd probably turn on dlss/fsr at those resolutions, but those are not the performance numbers we are working with.

We are also talking about the 500usd (or regional equivalent) price segment, none of those gpus that were highlighted are in that segment, nor do all of those perform at an enjoyable framerate

 

[ratirt]

I thought we were talking about performance per dollar, not flat out performance. The cards perform very similarly in performance per euro you spent on them, both in raster and rt.

The cards dont perform similar LOL. The performance per $ can be similar.
Apparently you dont understand what the performance per dollar metric is showing actually.

 

[ARF]

That is 1080p, with that class of GPU I would expect to do something more intensive, like 1440p or 4k, And I wouldn't want to play at 1080p60 (with likely dips!) when paying for that much muscle, and yes, I know you'd probably turn on dlss/fsr at those resolutions, but those are not the performance numbers we are working with.

We are also talking about the 500usd (or regional equivalent) price segment, none of those gpus that were highlighted are in that segment, nor do all of those perform at an enjoyable framerate

I only hope that one day the *50 and *60 tiers for 100-300$ will do at least RT medium 1080p60 or higher.
But this means that AMD must work to make it possible. They have to include more processing power for ray-tracing operations, more RT units in the future designs are a must.
Otherwise, RT will always serve as a shiny "new" feature that no one can fully enjoy.

 

[JustBenching]

The cards dont perform similar LOL. The performance per $ can be similar.
Apparently you dont understand what the performance per dollar metric is showing actually.

Its showing how much frames you get per dollar spent. You get similar frames per dollar spent on both the 7800xt and the 4060ti.

The 4060ti is a horrible card at performance per dollar while the 7800xt is great, even though they both have the same value. Go figure

 

[theouto]

I only hope that one day the *50 and *60 tiers for 100-300$ will do at least RT medium 1080p60 or higher.
But this means that AMD must work to make it possible. They have to include more processing power for ray-tracing operations, more RT units in the future designs are a must.
Otherwise, RT will always serve as a shiny "new" feature that no one can fully enjoy.

I mean, I hope for that as well, and it's not just in AMD's court, it is also in NVIDIA's (and the developers to make optimized RT implementations, like the one in metro exodus enhanced) court, though I will agree that AMD needs to work a bit harder, since NVIDIA still performs better for rt workloads.

Either way, we are talking about the present and what GPUs exist now, not what might, what we have now, and sadly, at this moment, none exist for that price range, because the tech is new and unoptimized, and because it's still a shiny new thing that can be used for marketing and driving up sales.

Am I too jaded towards the GPU industry? Is this what a bad generation does to a man

 

[ratirt]

Its showing how much frames you get per dollar spent. You get similar frames per dollar spent on both the 7800xt and the 4060ti.

The 4060ti is a horrible card at performance per dollar while the 7800xt is great, even though they both have the same value. Go figure

It is just a metric to show the value of the card but that is not the big picture.
Lets say you have a hypothetical card.
RXT 1122
Cost $180 for 40FPS average at 1440p. Perf per $ 4.5
then you have 7800xt
cost $500 for 108FPS average 1440p. Perf per $ 4.62.

Now tell me. Would you pick the hypothetical card for your main rig if you want to play at 1440p?
The value is substantially better than 7800xt so it should be an obvious choice. Can you judge a card only by perf per $ or is this metric showing you something different that you claim it to be and there are other aspects of the cards to consider? Do you actually understand what I'm trying to say? Do you understand what this metric is for?

 

[Vayra86]

what's the point of selling a product that is identical (or even slower) with the product it replaces? for more money...
seems like the clowns at AMD working overtime again...
View attachment 312350

The point?
- Smaller die, lower power consumption
- Lower transient spikes, removing the inflated PSU requirement on RDNA2 which started to make itself known at the 6800XT and up.
- Highly competitive offer against Nvidia's midrange/upper mid range
- Marketing, higher number more better, look its RDNA3 and not ye olde 2 etc.

What you really need to ask here is why the 4070 which is considered a vast improvement over Ampere (+4GB and better power efficiency (hey!)) is still trailing performance wise against a card that is essentially just a shrink and still costs $100,- more than it.

Also you need to really ask why you didn't just buy a 6800XT already, before questioning the existence of the 7800XT, while considering any Ampere/Ada midrange card.

Its really a matter of perspective isn't it, but the bottom line is that the 7800XT can exist just fine as it is now because Nvidia's Ada is so utterly crappy. If Nvidia hadn't cut down its line up from 4080 on down, AMD wouldn't have this luxury. If anything in the current state of the market/line ups the real question is why Nvidia's line up is so expensive for such a tiny piece of hardware.

 

[JustBenching]

It is just a metric to show the value of the card but that is not the big picture.
Lets say you have a hypothetical card.
RXT 1122
Cost $180 for 40FPS average at 1440p. Perf per $ 4.5
then you have 7800xt
cost $500 for 108FPS average 1440p. Perf per $ 4.62.

Now tell me. Would you pick the hypothetical card for your main rig if you want to play at 1440p?
The value is substantially better than 7800xt so it should be an obvious choice. Can you judge a card only by perf per $ or is this metric showing you something different that you claim it to be and there are other aspects of the cards to consider? Do you actually understand what I'm trying to say? Do you understand what this metric is for?

Of course I understand, I'm in agreement with you. You first set a performance target, and then you look for the cheapest card that reaches that target.

But that in no way negates the point that the 7800xt is not a better value than the 4060ti.

 

[apoklyps3]

Of course I understand, I'm in agreement with you. You first set a performance target, and then you look for the cheapest card that reaches that target.

But that in no way negates the point that the 7800xt is not a better value than the 4060ti.

7800xt is better value than 4070.
4060ti doesn't even exist in this discussion

 

[theouto]

Of course I understand, I'm in agreement with you. You first set a performance target, and then you look for the cheapest card that reaches that target.

But that in no way negates the point that the 7800xt is not a better value than the 4060ti.

No, it is better value, better than 4070 performance at $100 less, if you have any more doubts go back and look at the HUB pictures, it is objectively better value by all metrics, better performance, better performance per dollar, hell even better average rt performance

 

[ratirt]

Of course I understand, I'm in agreement with you. You first set a performance target, and then you look for the cheapest card that reaches that target.

But that in no way negates the point that the 7800xt is not a better value than the 4060ti.

That is the point. I think you dont understand and you misinterpret the meaning and objective of the perf per$. You dont look for the cheapest. You look for the best value and now we are here perf per $. It does not necessarily mean (as I hope you know already) the lowest ration for performance per $ is the best.
7800XT is better value. The chart with numbers says it is better and that is if you judge only by perf per $ it turns to be cheaper. I'm surprised you still argue about this. It's like you say you understand and then you say different. It is weird.

 

[AusWolf]

Of course I understand, I'm in agreement with you. You first set a performance target, and then you look for the cheapest card that reaches that target.

But that in no way negates the point that the 7800xt is not a better value than the 4060ti.

MSi Ventus 3X 4060 for £460 or Sapphire Pulse 7800 XT for £480? You'd be daft to say that 25% better performance for 5% higher price (20 quid) isn't totally worth it.
(current prices at Scan UK)

 

[JustBenching]

MSi Ventus 3X 4060 for £460 or Sapphire Pulse 7800 XT for £480? You'd be daft to say that 25% better performance for 5% higher price (20 quid) isn't totally worth it.
(current prices at Scan UK)

Quoting prices from one place is kinda cherrypicking the data. In my country I can find the 4060ti for 499 and the 7800xt for 730. That's a 45% price difference..

 

[theouto]

Quoting prices from one place is kinda cherrypicking the data. In my country I can find the 4060ti for 499 and the 7800xt for 730. That's a 45% price difference..

Quoting prices from one place is kinda cherrypicking the data. In my country I can find the 4060ti 16GB for 529 euro and the 7800xt for 569,90 euro.

See how that argument doesn't work? But in most places the 4060ti 16gb (hell, in my country I found the regular 8gb 4060ti for 480 euro) and the 7800XT are in a very similar spot price wise, to the point that makes the 4060ti a big no go

 

[ratirt]

Quoting prices from one place is kinda cherrypicking the data. In my country I can find the 4060ti for 499 and the 7800xt for 730. That's a 45% price difference..

HUB quoted prices from US and the 4060Ti does not look better. So what's your point?