What is Radeon RX 7000 series for you? Please elaborate

[mama]

You must be an idiot if you believe that AMD can sell if they don't deliver - the only way to deliver is to improve the performance.
Otherwise, there will be a situation in which AMD's next-gen RX 8900 XTXTX will be as fast as nvidia's next-gen RTX 5060

Are you suggesting the 7900XTX is not an improvement over the 6900XT? Same launch price and serious performance improvement in both rasterisation and raytracing (if that's your thing).

 

[ARF]

Are you suggesting the 7900XTX is not an improvement over the 6900XT? Same launch price and serious performance improvement in both rasterisation and raytracing (if that's your thing).

Side grade with overkill VRAM buffer.
36% higher performance doesn't warrant a new purchase (from RX 6950 XT to 7900 series), even for die-hard AMD customers.

 

[AusWolf]

Side grade with overkill VRAM buffer.
36% higher performance doesn't warrant a new purchase (from RX 6950 XT to 7900 series), even for die-hard AMD customers.

View attachment 307348

Nobody is meant to upgrade with every generation, be it CPUs or GPUs in the last 5 or so years.

 

[Chrispy_]

Side grade with overkill VRAM buffer.
36% higher performance doesn't warrant a new purchase (from RX 6950 XT to 7900 series), even for die-hard AMD customers.

View attachment 307348

It's more like 45% uplift over the 6900XT (its true prior-generation equivalent), and even 36% more than the previous-gen's 6950XT refresh is conderably better than average for a generational uplift.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Nobody is meant to upgrade with every generation, be it CPUs or GPUs in the last 5 or so years.

Or your doing it wrong IMHO.
But, to be fair YmmV, you do you, if I had the money, I probably would have about 8 by now I wouldn't ever sell bits either, like a parts dragon sat on my pc gold.

 

[AusWolf]

Or your doing it wrong IMHO.
But, to be fair YmmV, you do you, if I had the money, I probably would have about 8 by now I wouldn't ever sell bits either, like a parts dragon sat on my pc gold.

Yep, I admittedly buy way too many PC parts. I don't recommend it to anyone.

 

[Macro Device]

Yep, I admittedly buy way too many PC parts.

So you're just a little cheeky shopaholic.

 

[Ferrum Master]

Aren't anyone here who had put a proper water block on a 7900XTX?

 

[AusWolf]

So you're just a little cheeky shopaholic.

Actually, I don't particularly like shopping (especially the part where the money leaves my bank account), but I've got an insatiable curiosity.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

They perform well, but I personally don't see a reason to upgrade this generation. RDNA 2 has some mileage left


I upgraded to a 6950 XT late last year, but I got a deal (<$600 USD new-in-box).


Tech prices have been insane for a while.

 

[dj-electric]

The good news is that moving some parts around and advancing to an already well established lithography can make even RDNA3 perform much better.
The problems are that AMD is not alone in this, and that they don't seem to be incentivised to compete.

You know AMD isn't too heated to capture market points when they "let" NVIDIA capture a wide range of price points with new products for months and months.
I really hope to hear about RX 7800 series soon, maybe with a sweetener that tastes like market price adjustments - official ones, AMD, not ninja-ones in Newegg with radio silence.

 

[AusWolf]

The good news is that moving some parts around and advancing to an already well established lithography can make even RDNA3 perform much better.
The problems are that AMD is not alone in this, and that they don't seem to be incentivised to compete.

You know AMD isn't too heated to capture market points when they "let" NVIDIA capture a wide range of price points with new products for months and months.
I really hope to hear about RX 7800 series soon, maybe with a sweetener that tastes like market price adjustments - official ones, AMD, not ninja-ones in Newegg with radio silence.

AMD is probably more concerned about getting chiplet GPUs work than about clawing for more market share. Whether that's a good thing or not, I'll let everyone decide for themselves.

 

[Dan.G]

It doesn't seem that much of an improvement, in relate to actual number of streaming processors.
RX 6950 XT has 5120, while the RX 7900 XT has 5376 and is around 15% faster.
Same could be said about nVidia, only they were tricky: increased GPU clocks by ~ 40%.
Cheeky bastards...

 

[Space Lynx]

@kapone32 got a XFX 7900 XT about two weeks ago, I really love it. been rock solid for me.

95% of games have been flawless, had some hitching in Starcraft 2, but I just went into AMD drivers, made custom game profile to turn on Enhanced Sync for SC2, and boom issue went away. Honestly was just going to try a bunch of variables to fix it, but that fixed it on my first try strangely enough. Only other issue I had was some stuttering in God of War, so I turned off page file and it fixed it. Smooth as butter now. Like I said though, 95% of games needed no changes at all to run smooth.

So yeah, for Starfield Premium being included and the prices paid for my current rig, I am fairly happy. Radeon drivers have been rock solid for me.

 

[Chrispy_]

It doesn't seem that much of an improvement, in relate to actual number of streaming processors.
RX 6950 XT has 5120, while the RX 7900 XT has 5376 and is around 15% faster.
Same could be said about nVidia, only they were tricky: increased GPU clocks by ~ 40%.
Cheeky bastards...

You can't use streaming processors alone as a metric though. Both the 12-year-old HD7970 and recent RX7600 have 2048SP configurations. Performance of a streaming processor is a combination of architecture, cache size, clock frequencies, Ratio of SPs to TMUs, ROPs, RT-accelerators, How many SIMDs issued per SP, uncore bandwidth & latencies....

The list is huge; It's never as simple as SP*Clocks and that really only holds water when talking about different configurations of the same silicon. Even comparing AD104 to AD103, for example - it isn't really reliable because the ratios of cache and bandwidth change enough that we need independent reviews to confirm - and yes, the 4080 scales better (at 4K where the CPU isn't a bottleneck) than the 4070Ti's theoretical SP*clocks likely because it has 33% more bandwidth and that's the limiting factor.

@Wizzard's GPU estimator used for "Relative performance" database includes cards he hasn't reviewed - the calculation formula he uses is likely a trade secret that he doesn't want to give away but it's also likely to be both far more complicated than SP count multiplied by clockspeeds, and also anchored/keyframed with as much empirical data as possible.

 

[sLowEnd]

The 7000 series hasn’t impressed me so far, be it in features or bang for the buck. AMD is following Nvidia too closely with their pricing, without offering feature or efficiency parity. Raster performance is competitive, but that’s about it.

 

[kapone32]

The 7000 series hasn’t impressed me so far, be it in features or bang for the buck. AMD is following Nvidia too closely with their pricing, without offering feature or efficiency parity. Raster performance is competitive, but that’s about it.

If you want efficiency get a 6700XT. If you want pricing get a 6800XT. If you are going to call Gaming performance moot you miss the point of what a GPU is supposed to do. Pricing is interesting as the 3090 is still much more expensive than the 7900XTX but not better at anything than the 7900XTX. As far as features go I guess if it matters to you as Gaming is my priority 7000 is fine for me but when you actually use it you explore more of your Game library. As I am getting closer to retirement Gaming will be my main hobby so raster trumps everything for me.

 

[Kyan]

If you want efficiency get a 6700XT. If you want pricing get a 6800XT.

The most efficient GPU of the last gen (Nvidia and AMD) was the RX 6800, a good performance uplift from the RX 6700XT. I would have buy one last year if the 6750XT wasn't at 642€ already :')

 

[AusWolf]

It doesn't seem that much of an improvement, in relate to actual number of streaming processors.
RX 6950 XT has 5120, while the RX 7900 XT has 5376 and is around 15% faster.
Same could be said about nVidia, only they were tricky: increased GPU clocks by ~ 40%.
Cheeky bastards...

Yeah, Ada is basically Ampere on a smaller manufacturing node, and RDNA 3 is basically RDNA 2 with a decoupled shader/front-end clock.

 

[AnotherReader]

Yeah, Ada is basically Ampere on a smaller manufacturing node, and RDNA 3 is basically RDNA 2 with a decoupled shader/front-end clock.

RDNA3 has other changes too, but those don't amount to a big lead over RDNA2 in non-optimized titles which happen to be the vast majority of games.

 

[ARF]

It's more like 45% uplift over the 6900XT (its true prior-generation equivalent), and even 36% more than the previous-gen's 6950XT refresh is conderably better than average for a generational uplift.

Err, nope.

GTX 280
+57% performance improvement GTX 480
+52% performance improvement GTX 680
+54% performance improvement GTX 780 Ti
+28% performance improvement GTX 980 Ti
+67% performance improvement GTX 1080 Ti
+31% performance improvement RTX 2080 Ti
+78% performance improvement RTX 3090 Ti
+45% performance improvement RTX 4090

The mean value of these is higher than the number 36% which you consider "higher than average". No, it is not.

AMD's generational improvements are (much) lower:

Radeon HD 4870 (RV770) | 55 nm | 2008 | 956 M tr
+70% performance Radeon HD 5870 (Cypress) | 40 nm | 2009 | 2154 M Tr
+19% performance Radeon HD 6970 (Cayman) | 40 nm | 2010 | 2640 M Tr
+44% performance Radeon HD 7970 (Tahiti) | 28 nm | 2011 | 4313 M Tr
+50% performance Radeon R9 290X (Hawaii) | 28 nm | 2013 | 6200 M Tr
+31% performance Radeon R9 Fury X (Fiji) | 28 nm | 2015 | 8900 M Tr
+32% performance Radeon RX Vega 64 (Vega 10) | 14 nm | 2017 | 12500 M Tr
+22% performance Radeon VII (Vega 20) | 7 nm | 2019 | 13230 M Tr
+95% performance Radeon RX 6900 XT (Navi 21) | 7 nm | 2020 | 26800 M Tr
+47% performance Radeon RX 7900 XTX (Navi 31) | 5 nm - 7+ (6) nm hybrid | 2022 | 57700 M Tr

You can't use streaming processors alone as a metric though.

You can use the number of transitors then. Navi 21 has 26.8 billion, Navi 31 has 115% more, 57.7 billion.
Performance difference is terrible ~36% higher.

 

[JustBenching]

Of course if you care about DLSS and CUDA which are harrdware and software based get yourself an Nvidia card. If you just want to Game and not touch any of those accoutrements you would get the 7900 series. Indeed of the over 40000+ Games less than 1% support those features. The best feature in the last 5 years for Gamers is Freesync anyway so if you want to pay even more for CUDA be my guest but that is why it is called PC and I promise you that the FV43U will bring a GPU to it's knees if it doesn't support it fully and no a 6750 or 6800XT,3070, and 3080 can't do that nor 4070TI. For that you need at least a 7900XT and at $1200 less than a 4090 it is academic if you are looking for High performance using a 4K panel. Unlike most people I actully have one of these cards and use it daily.

That's just next level cope. 40000 games don't support rt and dlss, but you wouldn't buy a card of that caliber to play 99.9% of those games. The majority of games can be played on an igpu. The reason you buy high end dgpus is to play the top echelon of aaa games that do in fact have fg dlss and rt

 

[Kyan]

The majority of games can be played on an igpu. The reason you buy high end dgpus is to play the top echelon of aaa games that do in fact have fg dlss and rt

It's not because you don't play AAA game that you should not buy high end hardware and wanting very good gaming condition for years is not something you will do with an igpu.

 

[kapone32]

That's just next level cope. 40000 games don't support rt and dlss, but you wouldn't buy a card of that caliber to play 99.9% of those games. The majority of games can be played on an igpu. The reason you buy high end dgpus is to play the top echelon of aaa games that do in fact have fg dlss and rt

Yep that's right you can play TWWH3 or Crysis with an IGPU but will you enjoy it? Of course you are quoting the narrative in a thought that I would spend more money to get features that help me and give me the illusion of more frames. What Games exactly do you mean Quake, MInecraft? By the way does TWWH3 have DLSS, FG or RT? If you mean Hogwarts and the like I guess that is why Starfield not supporting DLSS at launch would garner more fire than Ratchet and Clank having issues with AMD features (when it is Game made for AM4 based consoles). It doesn't matter though because my library of Games is quite happy with my PC. Even Vsync works perfectly at 144hz but I love Freesync and turn off Vsync. I am just looking at my recent Gameplay and Remnant is at 131 FPS and Baldurs Gate 3 is at 133. At 4K that is perfect to me. Do I need DLSS to give me a reformed picture or VRAM to push those pixels? I would always go with VRAM so that even Games that are not well optimized play fine. You can ask anybody that owns a 7900 GPU if they think about FSR at all.

 

[JustBenching]

Yep that's right you can play TWWH3 or Crysis with an IGPU but will you enjoy it? Of course you are quoting the narrative in a thought that I would spend more money to get features that help me and give me the illusion of more frames. What Games exactly do you mean Quake, MInecraft? By the way does TWWH3 have DLSS, FG or RT? If you mean Hogwarts and the like I guess that is why Starfield not supporting DLSS at launch would garner more fire than Ratchet and Clank having issues with AMD features (when it is Game made for AM4 based consoles). It doesn't matter though because my library of Games is quite happy with my PC. Even Vsync works perfectly at 144hz but I love Freesync and turn off Vsync. I am just looking at my recent Gameplay and Remnant is at 131 FPS and Baldurs Gate 3 is at 133. At 4K that is perfect to me. Do I need DLSS to give me a reformed picture or VRAM to push those pixels? I would always go with VRAM so that even Games that are not well optimized play fine. You can ask anybody that owns a 7900 GPU if they think about FSR at all.

You quoted 40000+ games. To get to that number you obviously included games from like the last 2 or 3 decades. The vast vast majority of those 40000+ games (like 95% of them) can be played on a 1060 or an igpu. Nobody buys high end hardware to play those games,because your old hardware maxes them just fine.

I play a lot of dota 2, I play Diablo 2 on occasion, I even play some cs go once in a while. You think I bought a 4090 to play those games though? No, I bought it for the latest heavy games, and those include rt and dlss on a much much higher rate than the 0.1% you claimed. I'd argue more than half of the games I "needed" a 4090 for include one or all of those features.