I replaced my 3060 with my a770, and saw a performance increase - the a770 is more of a 1440p card than a 1080 card.
It's objectively not, all the latest reviews here point to it that it even struggles with 1080p and is clearly slower than a 7600 XT, deals blows with a 6600 / 6600 XT. It's a inconsistent 1080p card, calling it 1440p card ... isn't right.
At this point Intel and AMD are almost extinct as market share in discreet gpu, they are behind Nvidia in technology, power efficiency and performance.
That happens when the only serious GPU builder is 1 company and the others are only in it "on the side", by mainly being CPU companies and GPUs, for both of them, only important in data center, and oh surprise AMD is very competitive with Nvidia in data center - and that's it. AMDs GPUs in data center are also huge and expensive, really not comparable to stuff like 7900 XTX which is so "let me save costs, let me save 5nm wafers". It's light and day difference and what happens when there is money to be made compared to not really so.
Or what about the next generation of AMD also offering a more affordable 12GB option? We're not that far from the next generation or the next generation pushing the 7600XT / 7700XT towards the B580 price point.
Next gen will surely be faster, if it has more vram has to be seen, but 8 GB vram is still sufficient for 1080p and even 1440p mostly. Heck the reviewer here mostly even says it's enough for 4K in his tests. Most games, not all of them, mind you. So 8 GB is still safe for 1080p at least.
sk Sapphire why they can't make a cooler that can keep their vRAM bellow 90ºC in a 22ºC ambient with over 2000 rpm. on their fans
Sounds more like a heatpad / TIM issue than a bad cooler. Sapphire is pretty solid in general.
I was insanely optimistic about Intel's initial launch; however, I watched when they did and didn't do since then. This seems like more of the same.
The whole Battlemage fiasco is 2 years to late, it should be competing with Ada / RDNA 3 instead now it will compete with the successors, just kinda bad tbh.
Hardware Unboxed had a whole video listing all the issues in the games he owed when played on his Arc card.
Yes, but to be honest, they released 50 drivers I think they did a lot of work, I will give them that. So probably now ARC is pretty usable, compared to back then when it clearly was a alpha/beta product and kinda unusable.
At 272 mm^2, this is an expensive GPU to fabricate. Intel's margin on this must be extremely low. For context,
Navi 31's GCD is only 12% bigger. It is also
45% larger than the 4060 Ti's AD106. This doesn't bode well for larger Intel GPUs in this generation.
Yep, again, Intel can't get the performance with small GPUs, they have to at least build one at 250+mm² to hit performance of ones at AMD at only 200mm² in 6nm (!), Intel uses 5nm (!). Nvidia at 5nm is HALF the size at less than 150mm² (!). They are so far away from what NV/AMD can do, it's funny. It's at least 1-2 generations. Only their RT cores are somewhat impressive and i will admit that. XeSS ain't bad either. They did some things right.
