AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT

[tfdsaf]

There's plenty of benchmarks where the 6800 XT is ahead, and not by an insignificant margin. It is not faster, it'd be generous to call them dead even. I don't think it's always a no-brainer, it'll depend on the use case and the prices being practiced on either model. RDNA 2 should also decode AV1, just not encode it, but this isn't too critical - i'd be more concerned with the improved h.264 encoding... Ampere's NVENC was quite competent, but this is not the case with RDNA 2's.

The rest is speculative, but like I said - you have it inverted, if we can't have a competitive market it's not because of Nvidia. They're the market leaders, so they set the standards that AMD and Intel must match and exceed. Like I said earlier, an AMD fan's deepest desire is that they owned an Nvidia GPU. Let that sink in, I do not say this to stoke fires but to objectively look at what Nvidia offers and AMD does not. Since only Nvidia can offer what they do, they charge for this privilege.

Software and hardware have a symbiotic relationship. If one falters, both suffer, and AMD's achilles heel has long been their substandard drivers. Yes, they have improved lately... but most AMD diehards make it a point to never buy an Nvidia card, so they don't know what they're missing out on and set their foot down on this belief that they're equivalent, and go out on limbs criticizing the NVCP being outdated or something.



Welcome to the madhouse, mate.

What in the hell? AMD drivers have been BETTER than Nvidia's for at least the past 5 years! There has been so many issues with Nvidia drivers, from bricking GPU's to massive stuttering issues, to black screen of deaths, to not rendering properly in video playback, etc... Nvidia have also been worse at optimizing for games and their drivers tend to generally lower performance over time, rather than increase it, with AMD its the other way around, their GPU's usually become faster with subsequent drivers!

The "AMD drivers bad" is such a literally decade old bullshit at this point, we are literally talking about HD 5000 era stuff or earlier... And as much major issues AMD drivers have had and they've enough of them, Nvidia has had the same of even more major issues!

I had issues with my GTX 1060 for almost 2 YEARS where video playback would become corrupted in browsers, in applications, anywhere, and I would have to restart the video to fit it and after a while it becomes corrupted again!

Two years before this issue was completely fixed! When I switched to RX 5700 I literally had zero problems from start to finish and AMD software bundle is so much better, more ergonomic, more advanced, more modern, open source, no registration, no telemetry, no spying, they don't want to know your ID number and bank account number, unlike Nvidia, built in overclocking, easy to use features built into the software, etc...

AMD's drivers and software bundle are literally 50x better than Nvidia's! This is not an exaggeration, it's an understatement!

 

[Prima.Vera]

Wait. How come this card is just 3% faster than their 6800XT card??
Is there something I'm missing??
And no, this card is also not faster than RTX 3080, at least not in the games that matter, games that have high fps to even notice.
And RT performance is abysmal again...

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Wait. How come this card is just 3% faster than their 6800XT card??
Is there something I'm missing??
And no, this card is also not faster than RTX 3080, at least not in the games that matter, games that have high fps to even notice.
And RT performance is abysmal again...

It's a 6700XT replacement by price with a stupid name this thread has gone in circles about it already.

 

[ViperXZ]

What in the hell? AMD drivers have been BETTER than Nvidia's for at least the past 5 years! There has been so many issues with Nvidia drivers, from bricking GPU's to massive stuttering issues, to black screen of deaths, to not rendering properly in video playback, etc... Nvidia have also been worse at optimizing for games and their drivers tend to generally lower performance over time, rather than increase it, with AMD its the other way around, their GPU's usually become faster with subsequent drivers!

The "AMD drivers bad" is such a literally decade old bullshit at this point, we are literally talking about HD 5000 era stuff or earlier... And as much major issues AMD drivers have had and they've enough of them, Nvidia has had the same of even more major issues!

I had issues with my GTX 1060 for almost 2 YEARS where video playback would become corrupted in browsers, in applications, anywhere, and I would have to restart the video to fit it and after a while it becomes corrupted again!

Two years before this issue was completely fixed! When I switched to RX 5700 I literally had zero problems from start to finish and AMD software bundle is so much better, more ergonomic, more advanced, more modern, open source, no registration, no telemetry, no spying, they don't want to know your ID number and bank account number, unlike Nvidia, built in overclocking, easy to use features built into the software, etc...

AMD's drivers and software bundle are literally 50x better than Nvidia's! This is not an exaggeration, it's an understatement!

No use arguing with people that are obviously biased towards Nvidias side and will use every small detail in order to talk AMD down, suffice to say, complete nonsense. Have to say it's pretty cringe that tech enthusiasts behave like that, can't be neutral, can't enjoy all tech, just one side cause of their insecurities. They essentially project themselves onto Nvidia and then feel threatened and have to attack AMD. It's a psychological issue.

It's ironic that a person is talking about a "madhouse" while helping to make the discussion into a toxic NV vs AMD discussion himself. It's surely NO madhouse to talk about tech, if people can be neutral / enjoy all tech instead of projecting themselves into brands or companies they have NO relation with. Nvidia or AMD are *not* your friends, so being biased towards them, behaving as their defender, or being a extreme fan, helps them, maybe, but not yourself and not the wider population who falls for those lies and made up "problems" AMD allegedly has with drivers. It's always comical: if Nvidia has a problem, it's the user (they make it about themselves), if it's AMD, it's AMD, not the CPU, but Radeon. Ryzen meanwhile has fan levels of Geforce, it's "protected" as well from having realistic expectations.

Every average PC user should usually know, that software is never perfect and always had and always will have issues, the same is true for tech and PCs in general. Literally anything which runs software is prone to failure, meanwhile a dumb TV pre-smart era isn't because it lacks that. I can give so many examples of why fanaticism towards tech makes no sense. At least, if you're fanning tech, then fan all good tech and not just the side you're biased to. In the end this is also highly ignorant and doesn't serve yourself.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

No use arguing with people that are obviously biased towards Nvidias side and will use every small detail in order to talk AMD down, suffice to say, complete nonsense. Have to say it's pretty cringe that tech enthusiasts behave like that, can't be neutral, can't enjoy all tech, just one side cause of their insecurities. They essentially project themselves onto Nvidia and then feel threatened and have to attack AMD. It's a psychological issue.

Yeah, I think at this point it is more of a perception than a reality although I think just like with anything and this goes for both Nvidia and AMD some people just have issues with their hardware that is either hard to replicate or unique to their setup. The last time I had any issues with an AMD setup was during the 600/7000 series where I felt Nvidia was slightly better especially sli vs crossfire, Post that it really was just the 5700XT fiasco. Nvidia has had it's share of issues as well the most recent one that was annoying was an Issue with Chrome on Pascal GPU that persisted for a while I also had issues with some games but nothing major.

AMD AGESA on the other hand it almost seems like they are trying to break stuff half the time to the point I haven't updated my Bios on either X570 system in a year because I don't really trust that my memory settings which are rock solid on both won't go to shite.

 

[ViperXZ]

AMD AGESA on the other hand it almost seems like they are trying to break stuff half the time to the point I haven't updated my Bios on either X570 system in a year because I don't really trust that my memory settings which are rock solid on both won't go to shite.

That's another discussion, but briefly, AGESA is no software, it's firmware. Ryzen 1000 it needed time to mature, it eventually matured after about 6 months. Later it was pretty good. Recently mainboard companies had problems with overvolting Ryzen 7000 chips, whether that was Agesa or not, i don't know, all in all Agesa was pretty problem-free after the Ryzen 1000 6 months of early adopter phase. I'm using the new Agesa on X570 now, no problems.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

That's another discussion, but briefly, AGESA is no software, it's firmware. Ryzen 1000 it needed time to mature, it eventually matured after about 6 months. Later it was pretty good. Recently mainboard companies had problems with overvolting Ryzen, whether that was Agesa or not, i don't know, all in all Agesa was pretty problem-free after the Ryzen 1000 6 months of early adopter phase. I'm using the new Agesa on X570 now, no problems.

I've been on X570 since launch on both Gigabyte and Asus it has been up and down some decent some trash. in 2021/2022 a lot of them broke my memory settings and would not work so I haven't updated since.

I built a lot of X370 and X470 based PC I was always conservatives with memory on them so never had any issues honestly even from launch.

 

[ViperXZ]

in 2021/2022 a lot of them broke my memory settings and would not work so I haven't updated since.

OC / memory tweaking can never be blamed on the company, it's always your own risk / your own fault. AMD guarantess you only one thing: up to 3200 speeds and that's it. After that you're basically in OC territory whether your kit is a 4000 or 3600 or anything over 3200. They say 3600 is the sweetspot, but don't give you an guarantee on it. Officially it supports up to 3200 speeds.

There's 0 difference between Agesa on X370 + X470 + X570 they are all related btw.

 

[MarsM4N]

I mean to me the most telling metric is the card actually sold out in the States.... No card since the 7900XTX/4090 has done that. Hats off to AMD for finally releasing a product people seem to want.

They all bought to get a FREE copy of "STARFIELD - Premium Edition". Not joking, people are like that.

Also really funny how folks here battling about 4060ti vs. 7800 XT. It's like a no brainer, esp. with the free 65+ bucks game. Basically 100 bucks more for ~30% more performance.

 

[ViperXZ]

They all bought to get a FREE copy of "STARFIELD - Premium Edition". Not joking, people are like that.

No, that's just icing on the cake, the card has higher value anyway. Higher performance (especially in games that properly support RDNA 3, it's pretty fast then and punches over its weight class), higher vram amount, lower cost (than the 4070), all at the same time. Starfield? Very nice bonus, I'd take that too.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

No, that's just icing on the cake, the card has higher value anyway. Higher performance (especially in games that properly support RDNA 3, it's pretty fast then and punches over its weight class), higher vram amount, lower cost (than the 4070), all at the same time. Starfield? Very nice bonus, I'd take that too.

Yeah, even without the game it's a no brainer over the 4060ti

 

[Dr. Dro]

What in the hell? AMD drivers have been BETTER than Nvidia's for at least the past 5 years! There has been so many issues with Nvidia drivers, from bricking GPU's to massive stuttering issues, to black screen of deaths, to not rendering properly in video playback, etc... Nvidia have also been worse at optimizing for games and their drivers tend to generally lower performance over time, rather than increase it, with AMD its the other way around, their GPU's usually become faster with subsequent drivers!

The "AMD drivers bad" is such a literally decade old bullshit at this point, we are literally talking about HD 5000 era stuff or earlier... And as much major issues AMD drivers have had and they've enough of them, Nvidia has had the same of even more major issues!

I had issues with my GTX 1060 for almost 2 YEARS where video playback would become corrupted in browsers, in applications, anywhere, and I would have to restart the video to fit it and after a while it becomes corrupted again!

Two years before this issue was completely fixed! When I switched to RX 5700 I literally had zero problems from start to finish and AMD software bundle is so much better, more ergonomic, more advanced, more modern, open source, no registration, no telemetry, no spying, they don't want to know your ID number and bank account number, unlike Nvidia, built in overclocking, easy to use features built into the software, etc...

AMD's drivers and software bundle are literally 50x better than Nvidia's! This is not an exaggeration, it's an understatement!

Writing in large, colored characters will not change anything. Not only this isn't true but there is a very, very long way to go for them to come even close to the quality and refinement of Nvidia's driver software. It's not as performant, it's not as stable, it doesn't feature as many things. You won't sell me on the fine wine narrative (aka release broken, fix someday) being a positive, either. Their marketing is good at getting at regular gamers, but if you're a little above the usual chaff... eh, I won't pick a fight with you over this. I will say this, though, If you knew how many years I've had serious issues with AMD drivers, and how many personal reports I've made directly to them, each letter would be twice as red, twice as bold, and twice as large.

I'm glad you're happy, I ain't, and I don't think I'll be for some time. But I'm willing to give them another chance sometime.

No use arguing with people that are obviously biased towards Nvidias side and will use every small detail in order to talk AMD down, suffice to say, complete nonsense. Have to say it's pretty cringe that tech enthusiasts behave like that, can't be neutral, can't enjoy all tech, just one side cause of their insecurities. They essentially project themselves onto Nvidia and then feel threatened and have to attack AMD. It's a psychological issue.

It's ironic that a person is talking about a "madhouse" while helping to make the discussion into a toxic NV vs AMD discussion himself. It's surely NO madhouse to talk about tech, if people can be neutral / enjoy all tech instead of projecting themselves into brands or companies they have NO relation with. Nvidia or AMD are *not* your friends, so being biased towards them, behaving as their defender, or being a extreme fan, helps them, maybe, but not yourself and not the wider population who falls for those lies and made up "problems" AMD allegedly has with drivers. It's always comical: if Nvidia has a problem, it's the user (they make it about themselves), if it's AMD, it's AMD, not the CPU, but Radeon. Ryzen meanwhile has fan levels of Geforce, it's "protected" as well from having realistic expectations.

Every average PC user should usually know, that software is never perfect and always had and always will have issues, the same is true for tech and PCs in general. Literally anything which runs software is prone to failure, meanwhile a dumb TV pre-smart era isn't because it lacks that. I can give so many examples of why fanaticism towards tech makes no sense. At least, if you're fanning tech, then fan all good tech and not just the side you're biased to. In the end this is also highly ignorant and doesn't serve yourself.

I hadn't realized that I'm biased towards Nvidia here, but I sure as hell am not feeling too generous towards AMD. You could use some text interpretation skills, have you read the post I replied with the madhouse remark? Either way, if anything I say ends up bothering someone, it's more than likely that there's a little more than just a speck of truth in there somewhere. You know full well a pretty control panel (with ads, love how no one ever mentions the ads) is beyond superficial. But let's see, if AMD is so great as you guys say, let's just wait for the GPUs to sell. I'm sure they will take back all that market share from Nvidia and have Jensen beg for his next leather jacket.

 

[Macro Device]

I've had serious issues with AMD drivers, and how many personal reports I've made directly to them, each letter would be twice as red, twice as bold, and twice as large.

What exactly were your issues?

I'm not taunting, trolling, or whatnot, just plain curious.

I only had

• Vsync issues in Cyberpunk and Cyberpunk alone (if driver is set to anything but "always off" you'll have your vsync being impossible to effectively disable if game is windowed)
• Crashes with fast timings + ReBAR Enabled (fixed in newer drivers)

I also have been an old school AMD/ATi GPUs user. They all worked completely flawlessly (probably because I never bought GPUs in the first year from the release).

With nVidia, however, I had glitches in some games (GTA V, one of Pro Evolution Soccer series games) which were only caused by driver instability. Once again, drivers must have been matured since I also used aged GPUs (as in GTX 1070 in 2019 to 2020).

For me, AMD drivers are superior in UI; nVidia ones are superior in expected/factual behaviour, yet by only insignificant margin. But I'm not such an extensive and intensive tech user. My mileage is by no mean exhaustive. I know there are at least a hundred issues with AMD which are not present in nVidia or are not that bad in them.

Misleading naming, meh pricing, embarrassingly slow feature implementation (DLSS3 is up to its anniversary whilst FSR3 is nowhere to be seen), bold decision to switch to chiplets right when they REALLY had a chance to win since the difference between RDNA2 and Ampere has been the least nVidia-favoured in ages... And then, experimental RDNA3 series with a lot of shortcomings. But hey, at least their $500 product is good value right from the start. What they offered for $500 3 years ago (6700 XT) is way, way worse. What nVidia offers for $500, it's a 4060 Ti. Just a full circus of a GPU. 4070 is so handicapped I'm seriously almost sure it's a conspiracy. Like, be AMD releasing GPUs in an appropriate time, 4070 would've lost $100 premium sickly fast. Same goes to 4080 which at least has 3 hundred dollars to lose to become reasonable in this regard. Not to mention absolutely absurd decision to implement new power connectors, especially considering their non-existent foolproofness. 8-pin connectors did nothing wrong, and if your GPU needs something extra it's you who makes bizarre monsters with crazy appetites.

So no, it's by no mean an "nVidia is reasonable and AMD is completely bad" situation. It's just "nVidia doesn't fail as much as AMD does."

I'd personally buy an RX 7800 XT right now but 1stly, I got no cash; 2ndly, there is no such thing as 7800 XT in Russia where I currently reside. For something less than $1000 at least xD

 

[Zarathustra1889]

Writing in large, colored characters will not change anything. Not only this isn't true but there is a very, very long way to go for them to come even close to the quality and refinement of Nvidia's driver software. It's not as performant, it's not as stable, it doesn't feature as many things. You won't sell me on the fine wine narrative (aka release broken, fix someday) being a positive, either. Their marketing is good at getting at regular gamers, but if you're a little above the usual chaff... eh, I won't pick a fight with you over this. I will say this, though, If you knew how many years I've had serious issues with AMD drivers, and how many personal reports I've made directly to them, each letter would be twice as red, twice as bold, and twice as large.

I'm glad you're happy, I ain't, and I don't think I'll be for some time. But I'm willing to give them another chance sometime.



I hadn't realized that I'm biased towards Nvidia here, but I sure as hell am not feeling too generous towards AMD. You could use some text interpretation skills, have you read the post I replied with the madhouse remark? Either way, if anything I say ends up bothering someone, it's more than likely that there's a little more than just a speck of truth in there somewhere. You know full well a pretty control panel (with ads, love how no one ever mentions the ads) is beyond superficial. But let's see, if AMD is so great as you guys say, let's just wait for the GPUs to sell. I'm sure they will take back all that market share from Nvidia and have Jensen beg for his next leather jacket.

"Let's just wait for the GPUs to sell."

Mate, they are bloody well sold out nearly everywhere lmao.

Let's consider a couple things here. Nvidia has priced out many prospective buyers in this price range and are essentially reselling 30 series cards with a few bells and whistles, perhaps marginal performance uplifts, but the primary feature that Nvidia wants the consumer to focus on is software. The only truly great card they've released this generation is the 4090 but I highly doubt everyone and their mother is running out to spend the price of a used car on a GPU. This generation has been lacking competitive mid-range options and now that AMD has targeted this price bracket so aggressively, I wouldn't be surprised if they swept the mid-range market this holiday season and gained both market share and mind share. If anyone is building a new system or upgrading during the holidays, the 7700 XT and 7800 XT are going to look like attractive options compared to the paltry offering from Nvidia.

Addressing your comment about Nvidia's software being so much better than AMD's, I should like to speak to the contrary. Insiders from Nvidia's own software department have recently stated that both funding and manpower has been siphoned away and reallocated to the AI and data center divisions. This would also correlate with the fact that the Starfield launch drivers for Nvidia have been embarrassingly abysmal for anyone without a 4090. They simply weren't given enough time or money to develop the software for it. If this trend continues, then we can only expect a further decline in Nvidia's software. Meanwhile, AMD's Adrenalin software has proved to be far more robust than the outdated GFE and Control Panel.

 

[Dr. Dro]

What exactly were your issues?

I'm not taunting, trolling, or whatnot, just plain curious.

I only had

• Vsync issues in Cyberpunk and Cyberpunk alone (if driver is set to anything but "always off" you'll have your vsync being impossible to effectively disable if game is windowed)
• Crashes with fast timings + ReBAR Enabled (fixed in newer drivers)

I also have been an old school AMD/ATi GPUs user. They all worked completely flawlessly (probably because I never bought GPUs in the first year from the release).

With nVidia, however, I had glitches in some games (GTA V, one of Pro Evolution Soccer series games) which were only caused by driver instability. Once again, drivers must have been matured since I also used aged GPUs (as in GTX 1070 in 2019 to 2020).

For me, AMD drivers are superior in UI; nVidia ones are superior in expected/factual behaviour, yet by only insignificant margin. But I'm not such an extensive and intensive tech user. My mileage is by no mean exhaustive. I know there are at least a hundred issues with AMD which are not present in nVidia or are not that bad in them.

Misleading naming, meh pricing, embarrassingly slow feature implementation (DLSS3 is up to its anniversary whilst FSR3 is nowhere to be seen), bold decision to switch to chiplets right when they REALLY had a chance to win since the difference between RDNA2 and Ampere has been the least nVidia-favoured in ages... And then, experimental RDNA3 series with a lot of shortcomings. But hey, at least their $500 product is good value right from the start. What they offered for $500 3 years ago (6700 XT) is way, way worse. What nVidia offers for $500, it's a 4060 Ti. Just a full circus of a GPU. 4070 is so handicapped I'm seriously almost sure it's a conspiracy. Like, be AMD releasing GPUs in an appropriate time, 4070 would've lost $100 premium sickly fast. Same goes to 4080 which at least has 3 hundred dollars to lose to become reasonable in this regard. Not to mention absolutely absurd decision to implement new power connectors, especially considering their non-existent foolproofness. 8-pin connectors did nothing wrong, and if your GPU needs something extra it's you who makes bizarre monsters with crazy appetites.

So no, it's by no mean an "nVidia is reasonable and AMD is completely bad" situation. It's just "nVidia doesn't fail as much as AMD does."

I'd personally buy an RX 7800 XT right now but 1stly, I got no cash; 2ndly, there is no such thing as 7800 XT in Russia where I currently reside. For something less than $1000 at least xD

I know, don't worry

But I have had so many over time. Some more obscure than others, some no longer applicable because the problems remained when the GPUs that I discovered them on went EOL with my feedback ignored - but my primary problems have always been regarding performance, consistency and stability. Not fun having to deal with BSODs (I've had BSODs caused even by their HDMI audio driver in the past, come oooonnnn), and low fps because the driver doesn't like X or Y game, not to mention the occasional quirk (that is, it goes completely belly up) when I just wanna play. Emulators fare particularly poorly on AMD as well (unless you're running on Linux, this has improved particularly fast thanks to emudeck initiative and people being really enthusiastic about the Steam Deck), as they tend not to develop against their driver... market share reasons. See the recent thing with Ratchet and Clank, that was one month until they got some prerelease driver rushed out the door because the game simply wasn't playable at launch on their hardware at all. Their reaction time can range weeks to months to problems that occur, and sometimes they never get fixed at all.

Agree with your take on this generation, though, and with the point of "Nvidia doesn't fail as much as AMD does".

"Let's just wait for the GPUs to sell."

Mate, they are bloody well sold out nearly everywhere lmao.

Let's consider a couple things here. Nvidia has priced out many prospective buyers in this price range and are essentially reselling 30 series cards with a few bells and whistles, perhaps marginal performance uplifts, but the primary feature that Nvidia wants the consumer to focus on is software. The only truly great card they've released this generation is the 4090 but I highly doubt everyone and their mother is running out to spend the price of a used car on a GPU. This generation has been lacking competitive mid-range options and now that AMD has targeted this price bracket so aggressively, I wouldn't be surprised if they swept the mid-range market this holiday season and gained both market share and mind share. If anyone is building a new system or upgrading during the holidays, the 7700 XT and 7800 XT are going to look like attractive options compared to the paltry offering from Nvidia.

Addressing your comment about Nvidia's software being so much better than AMD's, I should like to speak to the contrary. Insiders from Nvidia's own software department have recently stated that both funding and manpower has been siphoned away and reallocated to the AI and data center divisions. This would also correlate with the fact that the Starfield launch drivers for Nvidia have been embarrassingly abysmal for anyone without a 4090. They simply weren't given enough time or money to develop the software for it. If this trend continues, then we can only expect a further decline in Nvidia's software. Meanwhile, AMD's Adrenalin software has proved to be far more robust than the outdated GFE and Control Panel.

Don't think it's the case any longer, they are selling well but they are no longer selling out the second they arrive, so the market's stabilized plenty since then. Agree with your stance somewhat - I personally don't see the 4090 as all that, it's fast, I guess, but it's still quite cutdown... I just don't agree with the driver thing. Despite being unified, it contains ads (to me it's really a bad thing) and still simply an end-user interface to the driver's feature control. The Radeon Software panel is fresher, but that's about where it ends, my criticism is more targeted at the kernel and user mode drivers themselves. I can bypass the NVCP almost entirely simply by using Inspector if I want to get down to the nitty gritty. That isn't to say I don't recognize advances made here, their new PAL-based drivers are really great to have and this Hypr-RX thing they have been developing for some time will also be quite interesting - I just don't believe it is quite there yet. If anything, the 7800 XT may very well be the one card I buy to try it out, though.

I don't think the NV drivers have been abysmal for Starfield - they had a Game Ready release a week in advance, with no outstanding known issues (AMD had at least one regarding crashes with the default 75% FSR resolution scale - props for at least acknowledging that), and I haven't experienced any crashes or BSOD's about 63 hours in. Game itself is not in the best technical shape though, and will run poorly regardless of AMD, NV, Intel or whatever you're trying to run it on.

 

[Macro Device]

Game itself is not in the best technical shape though

Like anything released past half decade or so, with a really single digit number of games able to run flawlessly or with a short list of minor bugs in the first weeks after the release.

I can bypass the NVCP almost entirely simply by using Inspector if I want to get down to the nitty gritty

I wish I had something similar to change clocks, voltages, curves, and whatnot without hard-coded limitations. Like, my 6700 XT is limited to +7.5% VRAM overclocking. I have no way to know if my VRAM can physically run faster because the software doesn't allow it. Like, how can it even hypothetically harm them? Why can't I have an "I completely understand all risks and agree to lose my warranty" button?

 

[ValenOne]

Because its the best value card this generation, because it has AV1 support, it has 10bit support, it will run FSR3 when available, it has 16GB of vram and even when compared to the RX 6800XT its still a better card, performing generally few percentages better and costing on average $50 less. Again the average 6800XT price is $550, the absolute lowest price is at $530, but these are usually temporary and local pricings that don't last very long and very few people can get them at those prices.

I still don't think in the grand scheme of things its a great card, but when you look at this and the past generation, this is probably the best GPU to come out! I think it should in reality cost $450 or even less, but you need to blame Nvidia pricing their mid-range RTX 4070 at $600! Their GTX 770 was $400, GTX 970 $330, GTX 1070 $380. It was with the RTX 2000 series when Nvidia truly became Ngreedia and started overcharging for every single product and pricing them 1 tier above, while maintaining their previous performance!

RDNA 3 has dedicated AI acceleration with DirectX12U's incoming Shader Model 6.8 Wave MMA (matrix multiply-accumulate) HLSL extensions. Both 16 GB VRAM and Shader Model 6.8 WMMA are for fine wine.

HLSL Shader Model 6.8 Wave MMA is Microsoft's Tensor-like function for DirectX12U.

As most reviewers already understood this is the successor to the 6700 XT as it's Navi 32 vs Navi 22, very simple, so i don't understand enthusiasts in a tech forum complaining because they don't get it. Comical. Compared to the 6700 XT, which is its real predecessor, just like the 7900 XT is to the 6800 XT, the performance is way better. It's also a better product than the 4070, with more vram and performance for less money. No wonder it's already sold out in the shop i looked at. Depending on which game you look at the performance is easily better than the 6800 XT as well and rivals 4070 Ti even. Dual issue shaders pay off more and more.

RDNA 3 CU's new stream processors only support wave32 instruction sets while the other half's old stream processors support legacy GCN wave64 and RDNA wave32 instruction sets. There is no TMU (texture management unit) increase between RDNA 2 CU and RDNA 3 CU.

It's only a matter of time before AMD drops the GCN wave64 instruction set.

Stable Diffusion's Automatic 1111 implementation is optimized for NVIDIA GPUs.

Stable Diffusion's Shark implementation is optimized for AMD GPUs.

This is the only indication for incoming Shader Model 6.8 i.e. RDNA 2 doesn't have "fine wine" with Shader Model 6.8 while older RTX GPUs are VRAM-constrained.

Xbox Series DirectML-Powered DLSS-Like AI Upscaling An Area of 'Very Active Research' for Microsoft

Microsoft is still doing 'very active research' on DirectML-powered AI upscaling similar to NVIDIA's DLSS for its Xbox Series consoles.

wccftech.com

Microsoft's DirectML prototype with DLSS function. Microsoft is attaching deep learning extensions with Shader Model 6.8 Wave MMA (matrix multiply-accumulate) HLSL ecosystem.


PC RDNA 2 and Xbox RDNA 2 have shared matrix deep learning math extensions, but they are inferior when compared to RDNA 3's dedicated AI acceleration units.

I've been on X570 since launch on both Gigabyte and Asus it has been up and down some decent some trash. in 2021/2022 a lot of them broke my memory settings and would not work so I haven't updated since.

I built a lot of X370 and X470 based PC I was always conservatives with memory on them so never had any issues honestly even from launch.

With the latest firmware for ROG Strix X570-F Gaming's 4802 AGESA ComboV2PI 1.2.0.A, its XMP/DOCP support is partly broken for Ryzen 9 3900X (Zen 2) while XMP/DOCP works fine with Ryzen 7 5800X (Zen 3). My Ryzen 7 5800X was purchased from a bankrupt company auction, hence it was low-cost.

I'm (mostly) with @fevgatos here. Let's look at the general sentiment about each card:

7800 XT: Best value this generation!
4060 ti: Garbage! Worst value this generation! Waste of sand! Kill it with fire!

No, they don't compete with each other directly, but that's not really the point. Perf/$ is perf/$, no matter where you are in the stack. Are we even looking at the same graphs? From the 1440p HUB chart that's been referenced multiple times:

View attachment 312540

Yes, the 7800 XT does better than everything else, including the 4060 ti. But the 4060 ti is in second place. This raises the question on both fevgatos' mind and mine: Why, when the two cards are so close in this IMO very important value metric, does the 7800 XT get a parade and the 4060 ti get the torches and pitchforks? And don't say "because VRAM". The 4060 ti 16GB shows that more framebuffer hardly helps that chip at all. Even Wizz has said in multiple review conclusions that >8GB isn't nearly as important as folks like to think.

So no, if you're looking for 7800 XT levels of performance, you're not going to buy a 4060 ti; that's absurd. But if you do buy a 4060 ti, you're getting similar performance per dollar, yet that card is terrible while the 7800 XT is fine. I don't get it.

Factor in both performance per dollar and general performance. 4060 Ti's general performance is 128-bit memory bandwidth bound while RX 7800 XT (256-bit 16 GB) competes against RTX 4070 (192-bit 12 GB).

 

[ViperXZ]

The only truly great card they've released this generation is the 4090 but I highly doubt everyone and their mother is running out to spend the price of a used car on a GPU.

Bingo, 4080 is overpriced by about 200$ and competes with the 4090 as anyone (!) who can afford a 4080 will as well afford a 4090 - but anyone who CAN'T can maybe afford the XTX which sits at about 200$ less than the 4080. A much better price to performance card.

The same could be said about nearly every other Nvidia card:

4070 Ti is overpriced by 200$, should be 600$, it's a 192 bit card with just 12 GB and the performance can't hold a candle to the 7900 XT which it competes with at the same 800$.

4070 is overpriced by 100-200$.

4060 Ti is overpriced by about 100$ - and at 300$ no one would complain that it only has 8 GB VRAM.

4060 is overpriced by about 50-100$.

At AMD only the 7700 XT is currently strictly overpriced, but i think this is intentional to drive more people into the 7800 XT and will probably later be decreased, 7800 XT is nearly sold out at my shop, whereas 7700 XT is completely ignored, a stark contrast - it's obvious the price is too high and will be reduced later. 400-450$ is okay.

This would also correlate with the fact that the Starfield launch drivers for Nvidia have been embarrassingly abysmal for anyone without a 4090.

I don't think so, I think the game is just better suited in general for AMD hardware, at least RDNA 2 and 3, why, i cannot say, it's just a fact. I do not think Nvidia has "messy drivers" for this game, this never happens and Starfield isn't a exception.

RDNA 3 CU's new stream processors only support wave32 instruction sets

No, they support both 32 and 64 since RDNA (1). GCN could only do 64 while RDNA can do 32 and 64, hence it's a more flexible and better arch.

 

[W1zzard]

YouTube summary video uploaded

 

[ARF]

Wait. How come this card is just 3% faster than their 6800XT card??
Is there something I'm missing??

Because it unfortunately got a wrong and misleading marketing number.
This generation AMD failed to deliver true RTX 4090 equal performance (while it did with RX 6900/6950 XT vs RTX 3090 Ti), and the whole lineup below struggles.

RX 7900 XTX should have been named RX 7800 XT, and AMD should have waited a little longer for true RX 7900 XT which could have been Navi 31 KXTX silicon.
RX 7900 XT should have been named RX 7800.
RX 7900 gre should have been named RX 7800 LE.
This here "RX 7800 XT" is a direct replacement of the old RX 6700/6750 XT and Navi 22, and should have been named RX 7700 XT.
RX 7700 XT should have been named RX 7700.
RX 7600 should have been named RX 7500 XT.

So, back to Navi 32 and Navi 22.
This is the same size silicon which gets more hardware because of the shrink - 7nm to 5+6nm.

Navi 32: 28.1 billion transistors, 200 + 146 mm^2 silicon, launch MSRP: 500$, 3840 shaders, 96 ROPs.
Navi 22: 17.2 billion transistors, 335 mm^2 silicon, launch MSRP: 480$, 2560 shaders, 64 ROPs.

Navi 21: 26.8 billion transistors, 520 mm^2 silicon, launch MSRP: 650$, 4608 shaders, 128 ROPs.

 

[AusWolf]

Fact is, according to every review, the 7800xt is only slightly marginally better in performance per dollar than the 4060ti. The 4060ti is garbage in performance per dollar. Therefore.... draw your own conclusion. Mine just derives from the 2 above facts.

What facts? Look, they even enabled RT which should make the Radeons look worse, right?

If you want to blindly follow reviews based strictly on MSRP without considering current retail prices (not just in your country), then be my guest. But what I said stays: 5% higher price for 25% more performance.

 

[ARF]

The cost per frame is about users who care, I doubt that any or most of the nvidia buyers care that their cards are more expensive.
AMD always sells faster cards for less money in much lower volumes.

 

[JustBenching]

What facts? Look, they even enabled RT which should make the Radeons look worse, right?
View attachment 312652

If you want to blindly follow reviews based strictly on MSRP without considering current retail prices (not just in your country), then be my guest. But what I said stays: 5% higher price for 25% more performance.

Current prices in cheapest place in Germany are

7800xt = 549€
4060ti = 409€
4070 = 599€

So performance per dollar is identical between the 4060ti and the 7800xt. The 4070 is a little bit behind (like, 10%) in raster but wins in RT, both at 1080p and 1440p. Considering the 4070 should have been a 4060, can't see how the 7800xt that competes with it is a great card, but hey, that's just me.

EG1. Just did the exact numbers. The 7800xt gives you 0.006 more fps per €. So for every euro you spent, you get an extra 0.006 fps. Bargain

What exactly were your issues?

Well, besides the whole installing drivers mess, some old games just plainly refuse to run on RDNA 2 or fill the screen with black boxes when it decides to actually run. Eg. divine divinity. Tried it on 2 amd cards. On the other hand, tried it on 5 different nvidia cards (1060, 1080, 1080ti, 3090, 4090), worked like a charm.

 

[theouto]

We'll keep going in circles if we keep arguing about the 4060ti vs 7800XT thing, neither side will listen to the other, we've all made our points and have our reasons to believe what we believe, let's just move on, we are getting nowhere with this.

As for the comments on the drivers, honestly, AMD drivers have given me no issues, the only time where I have experienced driver instability was with OW2 (a restart fixed driver timeouts, no clue what was going on, but it fixed itself soooo), and now CS2, a limited time test that is still clearly unfinished, since other people I've played with have also reported crashes and instability (funny how it's still more polished and better performant than most finished games nowadays though, how even). But besides those 2 odd scenarios, I haven't had any issues with AMD that I wasn't having before with Nvidia, so I think the drivers argument is rather stale, both GPU vendors have drivers that are good to the point where talking about them is useless when trying to compare them to eachother, both will work, nothing more to it really.

 

[JustBenching]

We'll keep going in circles if we keep arguing about the 4060ti vs 7800XT thing, neither side will listen to the other, we've all made out points and have our reasons to believe what we believe, let's just move on, we are getting nowhere with this.

As for the comments on the drivers, honestly, AMD drivers have given me no issues, the only time where I have experienced driver instability was with OW2 (a restart fixed driver timeouts, no clue what was going on, but it fixed itself soooo), and now CS2, a limited time test that is still clearly unfinished, since other people I've played with have also reported crashes and instability (funny how it's still more polished and better performant than most finished games nowadays though, how even). But besides those 2 odd scenarios, I haven't had any issues with AMD that I wasn't having before with Nvidia, so I think the drivers argument is rather stale, both GPU vendors have drivers that are good to the point where talking about them is useless when trying to compare them to eachother, both will work, nothing more to it really.

Ι agree that we are going in circles, but people keep quoting me. And it's not like they disagree with me, all I did was use a calculator. It's the calculator they are in disagreement with. Well...