Reference (AMD) cards

[AusWolf]

Hi all.

A quick one, though I don't mind if it turns into a full-blown general discussion:

Does anybody have any experience with reference design AMD cards? Are they any good? I mean, I know Nvidia FE cards have a great reputation, but I don't know much about AMD reference designs.

I've been planning on an Arc A770, but I accidentally found a good deal on a reference design RX 6750 XT and I'm quite tempted. It goes for 100-150 quid cheaper than AIB versions, which is nice, I just don't want a "coffee grinder" in my PC (I hate noise - I'm oldschool, I play with speakers).

Any thoughts?

 

[Count von Schwalbe]

W1zzard mentioned in the 6700 XT review:

Gaming noise levels are "alright." While the card is not "loud" in any way, it is well audible when fully loaded. Given the relatively compact dual-slot cooler and the simple heatsink internals, I'd say that's as much as AMD could have done given their goal to keep the hotspot below 100°C. Other custom designs we've reviewed today are MUCH quieter, so you have plenty of options if noise is important for you.

The 6750 may use a larger cooler, I am not sure.

 

[AusWolf]

W1zzard mentioned in the 6700 XT review:



The 6750 may use a larger cooler, I am not sure.

I know, I've read it. I was just wondering if there was more first-hand experience out there.

The 6750 is the same cooler, just all black, as far as I know.

 

[kapone32]

The reference design for AMD 6000 is actually very capable in terms of cooling and also easy to disassemble to add a water block but the need is not there is you don't have a need for it. It might sound crazy but the reference design on the 6800XT is better than the Gigabyte OC edition. The reason? The fans are much quieter at high speed.

 

[Super Firm Tofu]

The 6750 XT uses a three fan design (like the 6800) so it should be quieter than the original 6700 XT (two fan).

I have a Gigabyte branded reference 6800 (non-XT), and I've never noticed any excessive fan noise.

*edit*

If noise is a major concern, I'd probably still look to an AIB

 

[VuurVOS]

About 50% of the ATI/AMD graphics card I owned were reference design.

My current graphics card is an AMD Radeon 6800 XT MB. It isn't a coffee grinder but I consider it as okay (headset gamer )

 

[Count von Schwalbe]

Ok, so I looked into it. The 6800 and 6750 XT have basically the same cooler and TDP, so I imagine the noise levels will be similar. Your current TUF 6500 XT is essentially the same noise as the 6800 at around 33 dB, while the Strix 6750 is louder and the MSI is quieter. Essentially, you should find that the noise levels are similar while temperatures are a little higher.

 

[AusWolf]

Ok, so I looked into it. The 6800 and 6750 XT have basically the same cooler and TDP, so I imagine the noise levels will be similar. Your current TUF 6500 XT is essentially the same noise as the 6800 at around 33 dB, while the Strix 6750 is louder and the MSI is quieter. Essentially, you should find that the noise levels are similar while temperatures are a little higher.
View attachment 264540View attachment 264541View attachment 264542

Wow, thanks!

I'm running my 6500 XT on the quiet BIOS, but it's overclocked, so my noise level should be somewhere in between 25 and 33 dBa. I guess nothing will be as quiet as my 6500 XT, which is a real bummer.

The 6750 XT uses a three fan design (like the 6800) so it should be quieter than the original 6700 XT (two fan).

I have a Gigabyte branded reference 6800 (non-XT), and I've never noticed any excessive fan noise.

*edit*

If noise is a major concern, I'd probably still look to an AIB

I thought the 6700 XT had the same three-fan design.

 

[Count von Schwalbe]

I'm running my 6500 XT on the quiet BIOS, but it's overclocked

This seems... counterproductive?

I thought the 6700 XT had the same three-fan design.

Nope, it's a little shorter. The fans are widely spaced, so I can imagine the thermals are not of the best.

I guess nothing will be as quiet as my 6500 XT, which is a real bummer.

Custom fan curves are your friend. Remember that hotspot temps up to ~95C are not actually an issue.

 

[r9]

Hi all.

A quick one, though I don't mind if it turns into a full-blown general discussion:

Does anybody have any experience with reference design AMD cards? Are they any good? I mean, I know Nvidia FE cards have a great reputation, but I don't know much about AMD reference designs.

I've been planning on an Arc A770, but I accidentally found a good deal on a reference design RX 6750 XT and I'm quite tempted. It goes for 100-150 quid cheaper than AIB versions, which is nice, I just don't want a "coffee grinder" in my PC (I hate noise - I'm oldschool, I play with speakers).

Any thoughts?

I have a reference 6700xt runs hot and loud but I would still not pay extra for better cooled one. If I can get one for the same money sure.
If I spend more money I'll just look at 6800 instead.

 

[AusWolf]

This seems... counterproductive?

Nope. The default fan curve with the quiet bios keeps the card cool and quiet even when overclocked. The "normal" bios is unnecessarily noisy for such a low-power card.

Custom fan curves are your friend. Remember that hotspot temps up to ~95C are not actually an issue.

That's true. There's also the "auto undervolt" option in the driver, which I haven't tried before.

Another question: Is it possible to decrease the power limit on reference cards? My TUF 6500 XT only allows -6% which I find weird.

 

[kapone32]

Nope. The default fan curve with the quiet bios keeps the card cool and quiet even when overclocked. The "normal" bios is unnecessarily noisy for such a low-power card.


That's true. There's also the "auto undervolt" option in the driver, which I haven't tried before.

Another question: Is it possible to decrease the power limit on reference cards? My TUF 6500 XT only allows -6% which I find weird.

The Adrenelin software will do the same for any card regardless of the brand 6% is the power limit in software. MSI Afterburner does have more granular controls and Sapphire Trixx has a FSR/DLSS precursor that works pretty good but is now redundant.

 

[Shou Miko]

Hi all.

A quick one, though I don't mind if it turns into a full-blown general discussion:

Does anybody have any experience with reference design AMD cards? Are they any good? I mean, I know Nvidia FE cards have a great reputation, but I don't know much about AMD reference designs.

I've been planning on an Arc A770, but I accidentally found a good deal on a reference design RX 6750 XT and I'm quite tempted. It goes for 100-150 quid cheaper than AIB versions, which is nice, I just don't want a "coffee grinder" in my PC (I hate noise - I'm oldschool, I play with speakers).

Any thoughts?

I love the AMD reference cards this time around I had the RX 6800 & RX 6800 XT and they are both awesome this time around.

Right now I am on a RX 6800 XT Red Devil

 

[AusWolf]

I love the AMD reference cards this time around I had the RX 6800 & RX 6800 XT and they are both awesome this time around.

Do they have the same cooler and power delivery as the 6750 XT? It appears so, but I haven't found any teardown. I guess no review bothered looking at the reference 6750 XT.

Now I'm also wondering about the RT performance. The 6750 XT kicks butts in pure raster performance, but RT seems to suck on this generation. Intel's A770 seems to be a bit faster here. Raster performance isn't an issue anyway. I don't need 200+ FPS, but I prefer turning on the eye candy if I can (I'm not a competitive gamer at all).

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Hi all.

A quick one, though I don't mind if it turns into a full-blown general discussion:

Does anybody have any experience with reference design AMD cards? Are they any good? I mean, I know Nvidia FE cards have a great reputation, but I don't know much about AMD reference designs.

I've been planning on an Arc A770, but I accidentally found a good deal on a reference design RX 6750 XT and I'm quite tempted. It goes for 100-150 quid cheaper than AIB versions, which is nice, I just don't want a "coffee grinder" in my PC (I hate noise - I'm oldschool, I play with speakers).

Any thoughts?

I bought reference cards since the 5800 series including three Polaris and this Vega still in my rig, the board's are very good, the cooling has also got a lot better though, I swapped to waterblocks on the Polaris and Vega because the blowers were not great but recently they upped their cooling game.

 

[Shou Miko]

Do they have the same cooler and power delivery as the 6750 XT? It appears so, but I haven't found any teardown. I guess no review bothered looking at the reference 6750 XT.

Now I'm also wondering about the RT performance. The 6750 XT kicks butts in pure raster performance, but RT seems to suck on this generation. Intel's A770 seems to be a bit faster here. Raster performance isn't an issue anyway. I don't need 200+ FPS, but I prefer turning on the eye candy if I can (I'm not a competitive gamer at all).

Haven't concidered the RX 6700 series because I was running 4K at the time and now down to 1440p.

The cooler is a 3 fan design for the RX 6750 XT and it could be a RX 6800 cooler that's been modded a little but I doubt it because the power connects are in a different place.

 

[AusWolf]

Thanks everyone for the answers!

Now my final dilemma is whether to wait and see for Intel Arc store prices and availability, and wait for it for more RT performance, or go with the 6750 XT and its more raster performance. I mean, RT is the future, not the present, I get that, but I think raster performance is already at its peak, at least on my 1080p monitor (I don't need 100+ FPS). The 6750 XT would make sure I won't have to upgrade again for a long time, but if RT kicks off in future games, I might have to.

The enthusiast in me says "play with Arc and its strangeness", but the gamer in me says "go with brute force on the 6750 XT". This reference 6750 XT is really a good deal for £470 when all other cards start at £550.

What do you guys think?

 

[dgianstefani]

Arc, it's an interesting product, and the A770 is pretty good for the price with 16GB, but it's gains over AMD in RTRT are somewhat mitigated by the drivers, which I don't expect to be on par with even current gen AMD/NVIDIA cards for at least another year.

If I were you I would wait for RTX4xxx release and AMD 7xxx cards, then either pick up a lower end one of those, or a new/used 3070/80, which ticks all of your boxes.

Most of the non-FE RTX3xxx cards weren't used for mining, since they had a hash limiter, there was a nicehash work around, but that only works with a single driver - I wouldn't be too concerned about buying a used GPU.

Even if you went new, 3070/80 are going for around £475-600 with the impending next gen GPU releases. Will probably drop more after at least in the used market.

TLDR wait, then either get new next gen cards, or used/new last gen RTX cards, or buy now and get solid raster with RX6xxx but bad RTRT and somewhat worse drivers/software features than RTX.

 

[AusWolf]

Arc, it's an interesting product, and the A770 is pretty good for the price with 16GB, but it's gains over AMD in RTRT are somewhat mitigated by the drivers, which I don't expect to be on par with even current gen AMD/NVIDIA cards for at least another year.

If I were you I would wait for RTX4xxx release and AMD 7xxx cards, then either pick up a lower end one of those, or a new/used 3070/80, which ticks all of your boxes.

Most of the non-FE RTX3xxx cards weren't used for mining, since they had a hash limiter, there was a nicehash work around, but that only works with a single driver - I wouldn't be too concerned about buying a used GPU.

Even if you went new, 3070/80 are going for around £475-600 with the impending next gen GPU releases. Will probably drop more after at least in the used market.

TLDR wait, then either get new next gen cards, or used/new last gen RTX cards, or buy now and get solid raster with RX6xxx but bad RTRT and somewhat worse drivers/software features than RTX.

Ever since mining kicked off, I haven't really considered buying a used card a safe option. Now that mining finally ended (mostly), the used market is flooded with cards that have been mined on, and the price of new cards is at a level that normal people can finally afford. So basically, I'm only thinking about a brand new card.

As for the choice, I agree that waiting for the RX 7000 series (or at least the announcement) is probably best. I don't have much faith in Nvidia these days because they seem to put all their focus and effort into the higher segments (xx80 and xx90 series), and sell only by name at prices tailored around fanboys who would never buy any other brand. Their new £600 mid-tier card will cost £900 just because it's got an xx80 name, which is disgusting. I don't think the picture will be any better in the lower price ranges, either.

It's only by accident that I found the reference 6750 XT for such a good price. Otherwise, I would have never considered buying one, as the 6700 series in general is out of my comfortable price range - only this reference model isn't. Its 12 GB VRAM is plenty, so I'm sure it would hold itself nicely in rasterized games for years to come. I'm just not sure it will keep up with even the A770 in future raytraced games.

 

[dgianstefani]

Ever since mining kicked off, I haven't really considered buying a used card a safe option. Now that mining finally ended (mostly), the used market is flooded with cards that have been mined on, and the price of new cards is at a level that normal people can finally afford. So basically, I'm only thinking about a brand new card.

As for the choice, I agree that waiting for the RX 7000 series (or at least the announcement) is probably best. I don't have much faith in Nvidia these days because they seem to put all their focus and effort into the higher segments (xx80 and xx90 series), and sell only by name at prices tailored around fanboys who would never buy any other brand. Their new £600 mid-tier card will cost £900 just because it's got an xx80 name, which is disgusting. I don't think the picture will be any better in the lower price ranges, either.

It's only by accident that I found the reference 6750 XT for such a good price. Otherwise, I would have never considered buying one, as the 6700 series in general is out of my comfortable price range - only this reference model isn't. Its 12 GB VRAM is plenty, so I'm sure it would hold itself nicely in rasterized games for years to come. I'm just not sure it will keep up with even the A770 in future raytraced games.

Fanboys and exploitative pricing aside, they're better cards, better hardware and software stack.

AMD is a great value option if you only want raster, hopefully this changes with RX7xxx, but to be honest, I still think they'll be behind and will instead compete in value at every tier.

 

[Aquinus]

Does anybody have any experience with reference design AMD cards? Are they any good? I mean, I know Nvidia FE cards have a great reputation, but I don't know much about AMD reference designs.

I've owned both a 6870 that was reference and a non-reference one as well. My Vega 64 is also the reference design. So this is my general opinion on the matter. Reference cards run hot with stock fan mappings, but at full tilt, is probably one of the best for cooling. I can run my Vega 64 at 100% fan speed while maintaining thermals at 330w power limit. The downside is that at 100% fan speed, those squirrel cage fans are loud as hell. Aftermarket designs tend to be far more quiet, even at 100% fan speed and gets you a lot of the same benefit without the noise. However, a lot of aftermarket designs depend on good case airflow. The reference design has the added benefit of exhausting out the rear of the case which is a +1 for cases with poor airflow.

There is one other thing to consider if you plan on putting such a card under water is that reference designs tend to have more options when it comes to full coverage water blocks.

(I hate noise - I'm oldschool, I play with speakers).

^ If you plan on overclocking, you're going to hate the noise when you crank the fan speed up. At stock, my Vega 64 is actually pretty quiet. It's only when I start pushing it does it get loud.

 

[AusWolf]

Fanboys and exploitative pricing aside, they're better cards, better hardware and software stack.

AMD is a great value option if you only want raster, hopefully this changes with RX7xxx, but to be honest, I still think they'll be behind and will instead compete in value at every tier.

Let's hope - though when I look at their 600-series motherboards, it's a bit doubtful.

Nvidia seems to be developing a disconnect from reality when it comes to price and value lately. I agree that their hardware is a bit better, but not so much better. Better or not, they're setting their prices at fanboy levels, not to mention taking a huge dump on affordable ranges of cards.

I've owned both a 6870 that was reference and a non-reference one as well. My Vega 64 is also the reference design. So this is my general opinion on the matter. Reference cards run hot with stock fan mappings, but at full tilt, is probably one of the best for cooling. I can run my Vega 64 at 100% fan speed while maintaining thermals at 330w power limit. The downside is that at 100% fan speed, those squirrel cage fans are loud as hell. Aftermarket designs tend to be far more quiet, even at 100% fan speed and gets you a lot of the same benefit without the noise. However, a lot of aftermarket designs depend on good case airflow. The reference design has the added benefit of exhausting out the rear of the case which is a +1 for cases with poor airflow.

There is one other thing to consider if you plan on putting such a card under water is that reference designs tend to have more options when it comes to full coverage water blocks.

^ If you plan on overclocking, you're going to hate the noise when you crank the fan speed up. At stock, my Vega 64 is actually pretty quiet. It's only when I start pushing it does it get loud.

The new reference isn't a blower anymore - it's a traditional two or three-fan design (three-fan in case of the 6750 XT) that exhausts hot air into the case.

I don't intend to overclock - I prefer silence over unnoticeable performance gains. The only reason I overclock my 6500 XT is because it's a low power card with a massively oversized cooler that works quietly even in "extreme" (on 6500 XT level extreme) conditions.

 

[dgianstefani]

Let's hope - though when I look at their 600-series motherboards, it's a bit doubtful.

Nvidia seems to be developing a disconnect from reality when it comes to price and value lately. I agree that their hardware is a bit better, but not so much better. Better or not, they're setting their prices at fanboy levels, not to mention taking a huge dump on affordable ranges of cards.

Their architecture was so good they achieved better than parity with AMD, while using an absolutely terrible process node (Samsung 8nm which is improved 10nm), while AMD used the excellent and industry gold standard TSMC 7nm node. This is similar to Intel being competitive with AMD 7nm products, while being on 14nm derivatives.

Furthermore, Nvidia fixed function and general purpose Tensor, RTRT and AI hardware has been leveraged with absolutely incredible software (being improved at a much greater pace than hardware is) to develop what I would basically call, at this point, a 3-5 year lead in software technology. Look at the RTX 4xxx keynote if you don't believe me, remastering old games with AI upscaling and RTRT? Huge and detailed worlds being created in three months by a small team? Mark Zuckerberg aside, metaverse integration and seamless workflow, with what used to be hardware exclusive to supercomputers or scientific servers now available to consumers and creative professionals that can't afford £10k quadro/firepro cards...

The people who RTX is aimed at for some strange reason is gamers, when creators and professionals benefit much more IMO. Guess that was why RTX2xxx was such a flop, people didn't quite grasp the new tech, and what it meant for the future, comparing it in raster and FPS, where the price didn't warrant the performance.

I think it's fantastic, for the record, that AMD is catching up so much with Intel and Nvidia in sales volume, and it's great to see real competition at most levels, not just entry level. I admired the RX6xxx series for being efficient (although lots of this was due to the process node advantage), and simple - they played traditional games very fast. But to say that Nvidia's hardware is "a bit better" is massively understating it IMO. Simply for playing games with baked lighting, there isn't much advantage to going with Nvidia, because you do pay more, and the feature set is aimed more ambitiously than just a focus on raster. So AMD is a great choice. But you spoke yourself about placing some value on RTRT, hence why you were attracted to Intel's Arc. Same problem AMD is going to face IMO - their hardware is good, but the software stack just doesn't compare, or even compete at the same level. Let's hope for consumers sake, that Intel/AMD can catch up to Nvidia in that sense.

Best of luck in your GPU shopping, AMD/Intel/NVIDIA.

 

[AusWolf]

Their architecture was so good they achieved better than parity with AMD, while using an absolutely terrible process node (Samsung 8nm which is improved 10nm), while AMD used the excellent and industry gold standard TSMC 7nm node. This is similar to Intel being competitive with AMD 7nm products, while being on 14nm derivatives.

Furthermore, Nvidia fixed function and general purpose Tensor, RTRT and AI hardware has been leveraged with absolutely incredible software (being improved at a much greater pace than hardware is) to develop what I would basically call, at this point, a 3-5 year lead in software technology. Look at the RTX 4xxx keynote if you don't believe me, remastering old games with AI upscaling and RTRT? Huge and detailed worlds being created in three months by a small team? Mark Zuckerberg aside, metaverse integration and seamless workflow, with what used to be hardware exclusive to supercomputers or scientific servers now available to consumers and creative professionals that can't afford £10k quadro/firepro cards...

The people who RTX is aimed at for some strange reason is gamers, when creators and professionals benefit much more IMO. Guess that was why RTX2xxx was such a flop, people didn't quite grasp the new tech, and what it meant for the future, comparing it in raster and FPS, where the price didn't warrant the performance.

I think it's fantastic, for the record, that AMD is catching up so much with Intel and Nvidia in sales volume, and it's great to see real competition at most levels, not just entry level. I admired the RX6xxx series for being efficient (although lots of this was due to the process node advantage), and simple - they played traditional games very fast. But to say that Nvidia's hardware is "a bit better" is massively understating it IMO. Simply for playing games with baked lighting, there isn't much advantage to going with Nvidia, because you do pay more, and the feature set is aimed more ambitiously than just a focus on raster. So AMD is a great choice. But you spoke yourself about placing some value on RTRT, hence why you were attracted to Intel's Arc. Same problem AMD is going to face IMO - their hardware is good, but the software stack just doesn't compare, or even compete at the same level. Let's hope for consumers sake, that Intel/AMD can catch up to Nvidia in that sense.

Best of luck in your GPU shopping, AMD/Intel/NVIDIA.

Thanks.

I know what you're saying. I'm not debating whether Nvidia is superior with their fixed function hardware and software stack - I'm debating its usefulness as a home user / gamer. The other thing I'm debating is whether fixed function and brand exclusivity is the right way. Nvidia seems to think so. As for me, I'd prefer if software was more general and could build on any architecture. What we're seeing now with prices is the result of this exclusivity, and the result of the fact that nobody could catch up with Nvidia with their RT and Tensor hardware and software until now. The developments in Arc look promising, and XeSS for example, is just as openly usable as AMD's FSR, which is what the industry needs, imo. GameWorks is not the way it's meant to be played.

I hope Intel's investments with Arc pay off so we have a third competitor, and AMD manages to show something great at reasonable prices with RX 7000. I see how Nvidia's tech is superior for now, but their prices are also superior, and increasing. Combine this with the exclusivity of their tech, and you get the definition of monopoly, which I'm not keen on supporting. It's the same reason why I don't support the Epic Store. Somebody should really kick them in the butt to make them focus their efforts on improving the gaming industry in general instead of pushing everybody else out of the game with exclusive tech. Making your developments open source may sound like a pipe dream, but AMD is the proof that it's doable at an economically feasible level.

All in all, I think Nvidia's tech is amazing - I just can't buy into the philosophy (and more importantly: the price) behind it.

So for now, my only options remain:

1. Buy the reference 6750 XT,
2. Wait for A770 prices and availability,
3. Wait for the RX 7000 announcement.

 

[dgianstefani]

Thanks.

I know what you're saying. I'm not debating whether Nvidia is superior with their fixed function hardware and software stack - I'm debating its usefulness as a home user / gamer. The other thing I'm debating is whether fixed function and brand exclusivity is the right way. Nvidia seems to think so. As for me, I'd prefer if software was more general and could build on any architecture. What we're seeing now with prices is the result of this exclusivity, and the result of the fact that nobody could catch up with Nvidia with their RT and Tensor hardware and software until now. The developments in Arc look promising, and XeSS for example, is just as openly usable as AMD's FSR, which is what the industry needs, imo. GameWorks is not the way it's meant to be played.

I hope Intel's investments with Arc pay off so we have a third competitor, and AMD manages to show something great at reasonable prices with RX 7000. I see how Nvidia's tech is superior for now, but their prices are also superior, and increasing. Combine this with the exclusivity of their tech, and you get the definition of monopoly, which I'm not keen on supporting. It's the same reason why I don't support the Epic Store. Somebody should really kick them in the butt to make them focus their efforts on improving the gaming industry in general instead of pushing everybody else out of the game with exclusive tech. Making your developments open source may sound like a pipe dream, but AMD is the proof that it's doable at an economically feasible level.

All in all, I think Nvidia's tech is amazing - I just can't buy into the philosophy (and more importantly: the price) behind it.

So for now, my only options remain:

1. Buy the reference 6750 XT,
2. Wait for A770 prices and availability,
3. Wait for the RX 7000 announcement.

Intel Arc requires support for XMX native code in order for their AI upscaling to work at full performance and quality - NVIDIA requires the same thing with their tensor and RTX hardware. AMD, who use software based algorithms running on general purpose hardware, (coincidentally?) are last in their RTRT approach, among other things. Shocking, considering that Intel is a brand new player with first generation hardware.

I'm all for generalised software, but there are simply things that cannot be done on traditional GPU hardware.

DX12 and Vulkan have some good qualities that allow for general code bases to run well on different types of hardware, including ray tracing, but fixed function or at least separate general function hardware acceleration will never go away - it's too good at what it does.

In the same way, IP law and other factors will almost always make it more profitable (purpose of business) to capitalise on innovative hardware, rather than support open source or openly available standards.