AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT Drops to $349, Includes a $60 Game Bundle

[HughMungus]

Wait do you bought RTX 4060 Ti 16GB version ? That's one of the worst graphics cards ever released on planet earth. For that price you got basically nothing and RTX 3060 Ti users are laughing and pointing fingers at you. RX 7700 XT wasn't that good at start but RTX 4060 Ti 16GB holy s*it that's an insult for logical thinking enthusiasts.
View attachment 365805

LMAO!

 

[Dr. Dro]

I mean there's always a way to do worse, like buying a 7600 XT

 

[kapone32]

I mean there's always a way to do worse, like buying a 7600 XT

You just cannot resist

 

[Dr. Dro]

You just cannot resist

Trying to use my own tricks on me huh, shame I wasn't replying to you at all, much less doing it just because it's you

 

[kapone32]

Trying to use my own tricks on me huh, shame I wasn't replying to you at all, much less doing it just because it's you

Maybe that is because every 2nd post from you is a blatant attack on AMD.

 

[Hecate91]

my own tricks

At least you admit it, but bashing in every AMD thread gets old.

 

[Dr. Dro]

Maybe that is because every 2nd post from you is a blatant attack on AMD.

Well, it's not a "blatant attack" if it's true. The 7600 XT is a horrible value, for the same reason the 4060 Ti 16 GB is. Except it's kinda even worse, since it has even less performance on tap.

At least you admit it, but bashing in every AMD thread gets old.

It gets old to read all the yap about "ngreedia" in every thread too. Knights in shining armor will still be ready to defend the spotless reputation of their favorite corporation on the clock, anyway

 

[kapone32]

Well, it's not a "blatant attack" if it's true. The 7600 XT is a horrible value, for the same reason the 4060 Ti 16 GB is. Except it's kinda even worse, since it has even less performance on tap.



It gets old to read all the yap about "ngreedia" in every thread too. Knights in shining armor will still be ready to defend the spotless reputation of their favorite corporation on the clock, anyway

Thankfully I have a 7600XT and know that you talking the narrative. It is ok though I understand your position towards AMD.

 

[Dr. Dro]

Thankfully I have a 7600XT and know that you talking the narrative. It is ok though I understand your position towards AMD.

Oh yes it's "me", not that these 16 GB low end cards (including the 4060 Ti 16GB) got critically panned by the entire tech press for being overpriced and underperforming, it's just that "I" "hate" on "poor little defenseless AMD", not that these cards are just bad and you're the one who's actually biased through your own favoritism

 

[sLowEnd]

Might as well just wait for RDNA4 this late into the product cycle

 

[Chrispy_]

The only thing wrong with these 16GB cards is the price. When 8GB was a sub-$150 mainstream option five years ago, it's painful to see vastly more potent GPUs crippled by a lack of VRAM, and game developers as a whole cramped by an audience who largely don't have more than 8GB.

An extra $100 at launch for 8GB more VRAM was insulting on the 4060Ti.
The $60 extra for the 8GB more VRAM on the 7600XT was less unreasonable but you can hardly call it a bargain given how much smaller the actual cost of VRAM is to the manufacturers. At least with the 7600XT you also got higher clocks for your extra money which helped make the extra.

Right now, these lower-end cards like the 4060-series and 7600-series are just about struggling by with 8GB but even today the most popular GPUs being used by gamers are several years old, and these 8GB cards are going to be as unfit for purpose as 3GB and 4GB cards are today. They really should have launched as 16GB models at a marginally higher price to start off with. That wouldn't have hurt sales of the 12GB 4070 in the same way that the 3060 having 12GB didn't isolate the 3060Ti and 3070 at launch for only having 8GB.

So back on topic, the 7700XT gets my approval as a decent, now-affordable GPU with enough VRAM for its performance class. Compared to the 8GB competition, it's an absolute no-brainer to buy the 7700XT unless you absolutely need CUDA or something for productivity as well. We know from plenty of different channels now that 8GB 4060 and 4060Ti don't even have enough VRAM to enable their raytracing in the latest games, so the Nvidia RT advantage evaporates completely, even if you want to just see what RTX looks like at a blurry, performance-upscaled cinematic 24fps.

 

[AusWolf]

It is just the narrative again. Being regurgitated by the noise. I got nothing but this for buying a 6500XT during the height of Covid and writing the positives of the card. The 4060TI is fine if you know your use case.

Exactly this. There's always a use case, and there's always a price. The rest is up to one's individual perception. That's why there's no such thing as a bad GPU.

 

[Darc Requiem]

All of this is opinion. Look at the most recent GPU reviews on TPU. We can wax on about pricing and I agree about Covid but that narrative that the 7900XT should have been a 7800XT is daft to me when the 7800XT is faster than the 6800XT with the same specs.

The 6900XT was the full Navi 21 die (80CUs). The 6800XT had 10% of the CUs disabled (72CUs). The 7900XT has 12.5% of the CUs disabled (84CUs) with the 7900XTX having the full Navi 31 die with all 96 CUs enabled. The entire Navi 31 and Navi 32 skus naming is off by a tier.

Edit: The 6800XT is 80CU RDNA2 (Navi 21). The 7800XT is 60CU RDNA3 (Navi 32). The specs aren't the same.

 

[Dr. Dro]

Exactly this. There's always a use case, and there's always a price. The rest is up to one's individual perception. That's why there's no such thing as a bad GPU.

There is no use case for 7600 XT or 4060 Ti 16 GB that is justifiable at current street prices. Bring it down to $200, I'll take one.

 

[mechtech]

If that was CAD$ I'd buy one just because.

 

[AusWolf]

There is no use case for 7600 XT or 4060 Ti 16 GB that is justifiable at current street prices. Bring it down to $200, I'll take one.

There is:

 

[Beginner Macro Device]

The only thing wrong with these 16GB cards is the price.

And the fact you need to enforce utterly specific scenarios for these "additional" gigabytes of VRAM to actually kick in. FHD and average QHD gamers won't tell 4060 Tis apart, nor will they be able to tell 7600s apart. 4K and high end QHD gamers ignore such low tier GPUs. Professional workloads that love VRAM usually (but not always!) involve high VRAM bandwidth and CUDA support as a semi-hard requirement so 7600 XT falls off again, albeit 4060 Ti 16 GB stands a clown nonetheless.

160 bit, 10 GB. This is what would've been both cheap and completely reasonable to do. This fixes both VRAM amount and VRAM b/w deficites. To a marginal 25% extent tho.

the Nvidia RT advantage evaporates completely

Not that RT really matters at this price. DLSS does, yet 7700 XT doesn't need upscaling at 1080p even for high refresh rates and can make its way sans at 1440p, albeit some games at Ultra are a horror for this GPU (Lords of the Fallen, for example). At 4K, 4060 Ti shows atrocious performance so DLSS being of much nicer image quality goes moot again.

Overall, yes, compared to other options, $350 7700 XT looks good enough. Still meh tho. We needed that long ago.

 

[Visible Noise]

If AMD comes through as rumored and releases up to 7900xt performance well below $500 for RDNA4 then I expect all you price critiques to buy it.

You’re setting yourself up for disappointment if you think this is going to happen.

 

[Beginner Macro Device]

if you think this is going to happen.

This might actually happen. 10 years from now.

 

[wolf]

That's why there's no such thing as a bad GPU.

Price absolutely can forgive any shortcomings if it's aggressive enough, yet the 6500XT is bad in so many other ways that relate to physical specifications, and then layer on that the price they asked for it at the time and even continue to ask where it's available, plus the corporate decision making that led to the product even existing.

By comparison the 7600XT 16G / 7700XT 12G are fantastic cards, offering similar current price to perf (in my region at least and better price to perf for the 7700XT) while being far more capable/less gimped. And yeah even those should have launched cheaper too, most of RDNA3 and Ada should have.

 

[Dr. Dro]

There is:

This is more of a problem with that game than a justification for a 16 GB version of this card. In almost every case, the largely nominal increase in performance from the XT comes from its almost 15% clock speed bump. It's still slower than the 8GB 4060 Ti at everything, and within single digits (often, literally a single digit implying 1 fps) from the 7600. And that's the video i'd use to back my claims.

 

[Beginner Macro Device]

most

I'd say the only GPU being priced adequately is the 4090 because it's a tier of its own. Can't be arsed.
Every single other SKU would've been flying colours fine even discounted by 40ish percent.

 

[starfals]

Not bad, but here its still 440 euro. I wonder when the prices will come down...

 

[Lew Zealand]

And the fact you need to enforce utterly specific scenarios for these "additional" gigabytes of VRAM to actually kick in. FHD and average QHD gamers won't tell 4060 Tis apart, nor will they be able to tell 7600s apart. 4K and high end QHD gamers ignore such low tier GPUs.

The 8GB 4060 Ti has enough power for Ark: SA and Hogwarts Legacy at 1440p/60fps but its 8GB VRAM limitation means that when I set the recommended settings from Digital Foundry or similar, both games run out of VRAM and start stuttering/dropping lots of frames, so I need to bump Textures down 1 or 2 settings to accommodate. My 7700 XT with 12GB does not have that problem in either title. This is just using recommended settings, no specific scenarios or gaming the system.

This will continue to happen more often and some games will mask it well with less noticeable stuttering/frame drops but the performance limitations of 8GB are happening.

I'd say the only GPU being priced adequately is the 4090 because it's a tier of its own. Can't be arsed.
Every single other SKU would've been flying colours fine even discounted by 40ish percent.

I was looking over this last night and frankly: The 4090 sucks for its price.

Right here:

The 4080 Super is the real standout at the top. I dunno, I guess I was taken in by the specs and relative performance of the 4090 like lots of people but the more I look at it critically in recent times, it's poor value and has been the whole time.

 

[AusWolf]

Price absolutely can forgive any shortcomings if it's aggressive enough, yet the 6500XT is bad in so many other ways that relate to physical specifications, and then layer on that the price they asked for it at the time and even continue to ask where it's available, plus the corporate decision making that led to the product even existing.

By comparison the 7600XT 16G / 7700XT 12G are fantastic cards, offering similar current price to perf (in my region at least and better price to perf for the 7700XT) while being far more capable/less gimped. And yeah even those should have launched cheaper too, most of RDNA3 and Ada should have.

Even the 6500 XT isn't a bad card for older and less demanding games. I know because I have one. I agree with you that it's mostly been sold at a horrendous price through its shelf life.

This is more of a problem with that game than a justification for a 16 GB version of this card.

Try to explain that to people who (want to) play that game.