What is Radeon RX 7000 series for you? Please elaborate

[ViperXZ]

With my 7900 XTX, my screen still blanks at least once per session while using a Chromium browser (Edge) and scrolling sites or watching a YouTube video. Had this issue with my 6800 XT too with a different monitor. Seems like a GPU driver issue, and it's been around for a while. It's not making it unusable by any means, but it's a very strange thing to see on a $999 GPU. Overall I'm happy to have something that beats out the $1,200 4080 for less.

It's generally smart to deactivate hardware acceleration in the browser, I did that as well. It's just more reliable, less buggy and doesn't stutter if you happen to play a game that is hard on the GPU.

 

[N/A]

With NV41 /42 now canned. RX 7000 looks pretty good in the long-term. Literally, The fact you could run it longer, nothing better anytime soon or that's what they want you to believe.

 

[AusWolf]

With NV41 /42 now canned...

Seriously? NV41, NV42 (sorry, couldn't help it)

 

[Space Lynx]

@kozad i use chrome, brave, and firefox with windows 11 clean install with the latest drivers as of last week and have never seen this issue. I'd recommend you try a new cable, different port, clean install of everything after you back up, etc. I also have hardware acceleration on in all my browsers with 0 issues. Also, try running sfc /scannow in admin command prompt.

 

[ARF]

Was a disappointment and is still a disappointment. The prices are wrong.

AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX drops to 949 EUR, now cheaper than some high-end RTX 4070 Ti models - VideoCardz.com

ASRock RX 7900 XTX now 20% below MSRP ASRock, a relatively newcomer in the graphics card industry, has consistently maintained aggressive pricing for both its AMD Radeon and Intel Arc product lines for several months. We frequently highlight this company’s pricing strategies, as they often serve...

videocardz.com

16 GB Radeon RX 6800 for 460 vs. 12 GB Radeon RX 7700 XT for 480.

vs.

 

[AusWolf]

Was a disappointment and is still a disappointment. The prices are wrong.

View attachment 312953

AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX drops to 949 EUR, now cheaper than some high-end RTX 4070 Ti models - VideoCardz.com

ASRock RX 7900 XTX now 20% below MSRP ASRock, a relatively newcomer in the graphics card industry, has consistently maintained aggressive pricing for both its AMD Radeon and Intel Arc product lines for several months. We frequently highlight this company’s pricing strategies, as they often serve...

videocardz.com

16 GB Radeon RX 6800 for 460 vs. 12 GB Radeon RX 7700 XT for 480.
View attachment 312954vs.View attachment 312955

View attachment 312956

I think that's just how the store is trying to get rid of old inventory. The launch price of the 6800 was $579. The 7700 XT will get cheaper over time as well.

 

[ARF]

I think that's just how the store is trying to get rid of old inventory.

Don't tell me that they "replace" an older and superior card with this junk that is the 12 GB RX 7700 XT?! No way!

 

[AusWolf]

Don't tell me that they "replace" an older and superior card with this junk that is the 12 GB RX 7700 XT?! No way!

Nobody forces you to buy it. There's also the 16 GB 7800 XT for just a few bucks more. Or get that 6800 while it's in stock.

 

[ARF]

Nobody forces you to buy it. There's also the 16 GB 7800 XT for just a few bucks more. Or get that 6800 while it's in stock.

16 GB 7800 XT is much more expensive. I don't think the 6800 will disappear, I haven't seen messages that the production is EOLed. So, it is here to stay and is the better buy.

 

[NSX05]

What is Radeon RX 7000 series for you? Please explain why you think so.

With regards to the 7700 XT and 7800 XT, they are two very strange cards. I have conflicted thoughts. The 7600 was so long ago, I don't remember anything about it other than it being a 6600 XT in performance.

Firstly, the 7700 XT is a great improvement over the 6700 XT across the board, and its name makes sense. But its cost compared to the 7800 XT makes no sense. Why wouldn't you spend $50 more for another significant performance increase?

Secondly, the 7800 XT is essentially a 6800 XT with a new name. It might perform a few percent better with and without ray tracing but it's not at all interesting like its sibling. Its name makes little sense, and AMD has said that it should be compared to the 6800 non-XT, despite its name*. More importantly than the name, the pricing seems like a no-brainer when compared to the aforementioned sibling.

Second-hand choices for a 6800 XT, 6900 XT or 3080 represent a very compelling alternative to the 7800 XT.

* While the naming is confusing, I think AMD is trying to rid the Radeon names of non-XT products in an effort to make sure the CPUs and GPUs are easily identifiable. That has to begin somewhere so unfortunately, in this instance, it results in confusion. We just so happen to be at the point where both Ryzen and Radeon are in their 7000 series. Moving forward, that should rectify itself. The old "XT" might become the "XTX" from this point on, and I hope in that sense any CPU refreshes change the number rather than use the "XT" moniker.

 

[Vayra86]

Don't tell me that they "replace" an older and superior card with this junk that is the 12 GB RX 7700 XT?! No way!

Your view of the market is odd, honestly. 599 for a 7900XT? Lmao

16 GB 7800 XT is much more expensive. I don't think the 6800 will disappear, I haven't seen messages that the production is EOLed. So, it is here to stay and is the better buy.

Mhm. Dream on... 6800 and XT are rapidly moving out

 

[ARF]

@dylricho Speaking about the RX 7600.

AMD Fails Again: Radeon RX 7600 Review Hardware Unboxed

AMD is a Mess: Radeon RX 7600 GPU Review & Benchmarks Gamers Nexus

Equally Disappointing - $269 AMD Radeon RX 7600 Review Techtesters

A Good GPU With Bad Pricing : RX 7600 The Indian Budget Gamer

And about RX 7700/7800 XT launch

Thank you for not spitting in my face – AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT & 7800 XT Review Linus Tech Tips

 

[AusWolf]

16 GB 7800 XT is much more expensive. I don't think the 6800 will disappear, I haven't seen messages that the production is EOLed. So, it is here to stay and is the better buy.

The cheapest 7700 XT at Scan UK is £429.99, and the cheapest 7800 XT is £489.99. The cheapest 6800 is £521.99, and the cheapest 6800 XT is £539.99. Take your pick.

 

[NSX05]

I plan on upgrading my GPU around Black Friday, assuming I find something that I like, price wise. Or I will just buy second hand again.

 

[Macro Device]

599 for a 7900XT? Lmao

Not much weird honestly.

This tier products have always been superior to previous gen $700-900 products (RTX 3070 outperforming 2080 Super; RTX 2070 being close to GTX 1080 Ti in terms of raw performance also providing with DLSS and RT which makes this card superior; GTX 1070 Ti is faster than any Maxwell, and so on).

Now we've got a 7900 XT which is not just on par but a bit better than all RDNA2 and Ampere GPUs. $600 is a little cheap but $650 to $680 seem to be appropriate.

7800 XT is priced completely right despite its naming being as confusing as possible. 7900 XTX for $800 is a bit exaggeration and $900 to $920 MSRP would make a lot of sense. 7700 XT for $380 would be a no-brainer so I see $400 sharp as the most appropriate launch price.

What about RX 7600... This GPU spawned in the wrong place and the wrong time. Market, basically, is of no particular need for cards of this segment. Anything below $300 is covered by second-hand market like you it or not. RDNA3 exclusive features came out way too late to justify this card. Product is right, price is right but conditions failed it.

Overall, I'd buy a 7800 XT but I live in a weird place where you can get 6900 XT for almost 50% cheaper so it's kinda no brainer for me at the moment. Knowing our market, this will stay at "$400 for 6900 XT and $700 for 7800 XT" for a very long time, not gonna change before RDNA4 pops out for sure.

In case you're unfamiliar, RDNA3 is still worse than nVidia's GPUs in terms of RT, has no DLSS, worse in content creation (because does not have CUDA cores), and consumes more watts per FPS. Not considering these moments is insane.

Overall:

• RX 6500 XT ($200) → RX 7600 ($270). About double the performance for a little bit more money. Excellent.

• RX 6700 non-XT ($430) → RX 7700 XT ($450). About 150% the performance for virtually the same money (inflation-wise). Good.

• RX 6700 XT ($480) → RX 7800 XT ($500). About 150% the performance for virtually the same money. Good.

• RX 6800 non-XT ($580) → RX 7900 GRE ($650). About 120% the performance for a little bit more money. Bad. RX 7900 GRE is overall heavily handicapped by its slow VRAM. Including 20 Gbps VRAM like in higher tier GPUs with a little bit higher core clocks would justify these $650. I think it's the only RDNA3 GPU which has to be improved physically and not economically.

• RX 6800 XT ($650) → RX 7900 XT ($900). About 135% the performance for a bit more money. Bad. I know the current price is adequate but MSRP is balls.

• RX 6900 XT ($1000) → RX 7900 XTX ($1000). About 150% the performance for less money if we include inflation. Very good.

 

[AusWolf]

In case you're unfamiliar, RDNA3 is still worse than nVidia's GPUs in terms of RT, has no DLSS, worse in content creation (because does not have CUDA cores), and consumes more watts per FPS. Not considering these moments is insane.

Those are all niche cases, in my opinion. "Worse RT" is only marginally worse and still quite usable (not to mention it puts RDNA 3 on par with Nvidia on price-to-performance, while it's way better when you look at only raster), DLSS can easily be substituted by FSR in most games, content creation with CUDA is not what 99% of gamers do, and more Watts per FPS will give you a higher monthly bill by around the $2 mark.
All of these are non-issues for the average Joe.

Other than this, I agree with your post.

 

[Macro Device]

All of these are non-issues for the average Joe.

One hole here, one hole there... and your aeroplane no longer flies. Despite these disadvantages come in numbers unable to generally kill RDNA3 they really demand some discount. That's why $500 for 7800 XT is sane despite it being faster than $600 RTX 4070 in raw raster. Be it of same relative RT speed, have it access to DLSS3 (frame gen included), run it CUDA exclusives... Pricing it at $500 would be insane. It would be superior to 4070 in EVERY way so why not putting a 700 dollar price tag?

And we have what we have. RDNA3 is better in a half dozen things and is worse in a couple dozen other things, that's why it has to be cheaper than Ada and it in fact is cheaper than Ada.

 

[AusWolf]

One hole here, one hole there... and your aeroplane no longer flies. Despite these disadvantages come in numbers unable to generally kill RDNA3 they really demand some discount. That's why $500 for 7800 XT is sane despite it being faster than $600 RTX 4070 in raw raster. Be it of same relative RT speed, have it access to DLSS3 (frame gen included), run it CUDA exclusives... Pricing it at $500 would be insane. It would be superior to 4070 in EVERY way so why not putting a 700 dollar price tag?

And we have what we have. RDNA3 is better in a half dozen things and is worse in a couple dozen other things, that's why it has to be cheaper than Ada and it in fact is cheaper than Ada.

I call it a case of getting a car that's 20% cheaper only because it's not the exact premium shade of blue that you wanted when you walked into the dealership.

 

[Macro Device]

I call it a case of getting a car that's 20% cheaper only because it's not the exact premium shade of blue that you wanted when you walked into the dealership.

Not really accurate. DLSS gives superior quality (especially in 1080p) and is more stable overall. Frame gen is not to be underestimated. These are QoL features like air conditioning or mp3 players.

So I'd call it a case of getting a car that's 20% cheaper because its tyres are standard, its ECU is standard and it doesn't have a window in its roof whereas the competition has sport tyres, a bit more efficient ECU and a said window in the roof. Of course most people just drive across 40 mph limited asphalt roads additionally slown down by traffic jam and weather doesn't usually make this window beneficial but it's cooler to have these features than not to have. nVidia users, at least, can choose between three upscalers and AMD ones are limited to two. Makes sense to ask for some premium.

 

[AusWolf]

Not really accurate. DLSS gives superior quality (especially in 1080p) and is more stable overall.

That's arguable. Both are quite crap at 1080p in my opinion.

Frame gen is not to be underestimated.

Neither is the latency it adds. Besides, AMD's version is coming.

These are QoL features

You call them that. I call them gimmicks.

 

[Vayra86]

Not much weird honestly.

This tier products have always been superior to previous gen $700-900 products (RTX 3070 outperforming 2080 Super; RTX 2070 being close to GTX 1080 Ti in terms of raw performance also providing with DLSS and RT which makes this card superior; GTX 1070 Ti is faster than any Maxwell, and so on).

Now we've got a 7900 XT which is not just on par but a bit better than all RDNA2 and Ampere GPUs. $600 is a little cheap but $650 to $680 seem to be appropriate.

7800 XT is priced completely right despite its naming being as confusing as possible. 7900 XTX for $800 is a bit exaggeration and $900 to $920 MSRP would make a lot of sense. 7700 XT for $380 would be a no-brainer so I see $400 sharp as the most appropriate launch price.

What about RX 7600... This GPU spawned in the wrong place and the wrong time. Market, basically, is of no particular need for cards of this segment. Anything below $300 is covered by second-hand market like you it or not. RDNA3 exclusive features came out way too late to justify this card. Product is right, price is right but conditions failed it.

Overall, I'd buy a 7800 XT but I live in a weird place where you can get 6900 XT for almost 50% cheaper so it's kinda no brainer for me at the moment. Knowing our market, this will stay at "$400 for 6900 XT and $700 for 7800 XT" for a very long time, not gonna change before RDNA4 pops out for sure.

In case you're unfamiliar, RDNA3 is still worse than nVidia's GPUs in terms of RT, has no DLSS, worse in content creation (because does not have CUDA cores), and consumes more watts per FPS. Not considering these moments is insane.

Overall:

• RX 6500 XT ($200) → RX 7600 ($270). About double the performance for a little bit more money. Excellent.

• RX 6700 non-XT ($430) → RX 7700 XT ($450). About 150% the performance for virtually the same money (inflation-wise). Good.

• RX 6700 XT ($480) → RX 7800 XT ($500). About 150% the performance for virtually the same money. Good.

• RX 6800 non-XT ($580) → RX 7900 GRE ($650). About 120% the performance for a little bit more money. Bad. RX 7900 GRE is overall heavily handicapped by its slow VRAM. Including 20 Gbps VRAM like in higher tier GPUs with a little bit higher core clocks would justify these $650. I think it's the only RDNA3 GPU which has to be improved physically and not economically.

• RX 6800 XT ($650) → RX 7900 XT ($900). About 135% the performance for a bit more money. Bad. I know the current price is adequate but MSRP is balls.

• RX 6900 XT ($1000) → RX 7900 XTX ($1000). About 150% the performance for less money if we include inflation. Very good.

I used to be on that train of thought for years, but at some point the penny dropped that it ain't happening. Now, you're in the situation that you spend big for a 3-5 year worthy upgrade, or you're just going to be cutting back on those quality sliders in every new game that appears, ever further.

You can wait for the magical moment, I stopped, after waiting from 2017 until 2023.

What I haven't stopped doing is just upgrading when there is a massive perf increase to be had. 130% was always fully ignored. 150% and it had better be cheap or cost effective (sell off old, purchase new, gain + 50% and get great value on the sale to spend 50-100 bucks max overall). At 200%, I start waking up. The 1080 > 7900XT though was over 250%. That's not unworthy of decent money imho, and I know it'll last me years - but you know what struck me most of the last GPU upgrade? I think I might have been just fine with the 1080 as well and a boat load of tweaks. Shit's playable just fine. The upgrade was pure luxury.

And I do think that's the long and short of it. Everyone will simply upgrade, no matter how unfavorable the price point really is, when they feel they can't play properly anymore. Its entirely subjective, which is also why people still work it out even if they have an RX 480 or something of the sort. The bottom line is games don't really need new graphics cards at all, buying new games is a choice, not a necessity.

I mean say you're 16, Starfield comes out and you haven't got a penny to spend. You still want that open world dopamine loop... you dl Skyrim or whatever Fallout from somewhere, you install it on your ancient machine and you press go. Whatever.

 

[Macro Device]

Both are quite crap at 1080p in my opinion.

Agree. But FSR is worse.

Neither is the latency it adds

Latency below 30 ms is fine. Just don't use FG in CSGO, lmao.

You call them that. I call them gimmicks.

They are both QoL features and gimmicks at the same time.

You can wait for the magical moment

I don't wait for it. I just get the best I can get for money I have which doesn't stop me from discussing what's bizarre and what's even more bizarre. Why not? I was asked about my opinion on RDNA3, I spouted it. Appropriate as it gets.

 

[NSX05]

You call them that. I call them gimmicks.

I prefer to see reviewers test these products with settings turned up and no software aids to help them. It really shows the state of the market in terms of hardware, and how the game engines take advantage of them (or not).

I don't want these software aids to become an excuse for these companies to skimp on the improvements to the hardware (i.e., give you less rasterization frames, generation over generation). That seems to be what's happening.

 

[Vayra86]

I don't wait for it. I just get the best I can get for money I have which doesn't stop me from discussing what's bizarre and what's even more bizarre. Why not? I was asked about my opinion on RDNA3, I spouted it. Appropriate as it gets.

Oh yeah, we don't disagree, but there is agreement in the sense of logic, and there is disagreement given our actual purchases

Guess what commerce likes to rely on most I think if we truly reflect on it, this is how many consumer minds work, no matter what they say is 'really really really!! true'. Money doesn't lie.

 

[AusWolf]

Agree. But FSR is worse.

That comparison isn't too relevant, is it? Like comparing a GT 710 to a 730.

Latency below 30 ms is fine. Just don't use FG in CSGO, lmao.

We'll see when FSR 3 comes out (as I don't have an Ada card, so can't test it yet).

They are both QoL features and gimmicks at the same time.

Nah, they're just gimmicks. Running your games on high detail at native resolution with no DLSS/FSR/XeSS or frame generation is QoL.

I prefer to see reviewers test these products with settings turned up and no software aids to help them. It really shows the state of the market in terms of hardware, and how the game engines take advantage of them (or not).

I don't want these software aids to become an excuse for these companies to skimp on the improvements to the hardware (i.e., give you less rasterization frames, generation over generation). That seems to be what's happening.

Exactly!

"Your game doesn't run properly? Oh, just apply this image-blurring, resolution-decreasing magical slider, and now you've got double the FPS! Next time you won't be paying for performance, you'll be paying for the next version of the image-blurring, resolution-decreasing magical slider." Disgusting! Purely disgusting.