Question 3900X + VR Valve Index with 5700XT or 2070 Super?

[Kedas]

I will probably buy an 3900X and a Valve Index VR set so which of these two GPUs should I choose combined with these components?
An 2070 Super or 5700XT

Do their gaming score translate to VR in the same way for both cards.
Like if one is better for regular gaming it will also be better for VR?
I read Navi had some VR features, I'm also thinking this AMD sharpening is probably going to give me more FPS for the same picture quality.

 

[darkswordsman17]

I haven't seen tests on the new AMD stuff (or Turing even really), but Nvidia has had a pretty healthy advantage when it comes to VR performance for years. Pascal generally outperformed similar level AMD hardware. I'm hoping AMD changes that (I kinda doubt it, since I'd think they would've highlighted that as well as try to include that new VR headset protocol that use the USB-C connector on Navi cards), I'd definitely be interested in finding out, as getting a VR headset would be a big factor for me personally in buying my next GPU.

I'm hoping that maybe Microsoft didn't totally abandon their VR plans (that they apparently ditched for the One/One X) since I think that could help development overall of VR on Windows as a platform.

 

[Stuka87]

For VR, you really need to buy the fastest card you can afford. VR isn't something you can skimp buy with getting lower FPS now and then.

AMD's image sharpening would help, if it works with VR. I have not seen that tested.

 

[swilli89]

2070 Super is 25% more expensive for less than 10% performance increase. I think 5700XT makes the most sense here. Save that hundred dollars and put it towards a new GPU upgrade in two years.

 

[tviceman]

2070 Super is 25% more expensive for less than 10% performance increase. I think 5700XT makes the most sense here. Save that hundred dollars and put it towards a new GPU upgrade in two years.

Nvidia cards extend their lead in VR.

 

[Stuka87]

Nvidia cards extend their lead in VR.

I am not sure what your comment means in relation to the quoted post?

 

[rstrohkirch]

I am not sure what your comment means in relation to the quoted post?

He is implying that there is better than a 10% performance difference in VR.

 

[darkswordsman17]

I am not sure what your comment means in relation to the quoted post?

If it performs say 25% better in VR games that he plays for that extra cost, it'd be more worth it, no need to wait for 2 years to get the extra VR performance (frankly, I'd absolutely spend an extra $100 if it means a significant boost - heck 10% would be worth it for that, that's like 5-10% difference in what he's spending on just the CPU, GPU, and headset - in VR performance, and definitely wouldn't save the $100 to spend 2 years down the line for it; if you're very budget constrained I'd say hold off on VR entirely until you can buy a setup that would do it well).

I really would love to see AMD have made big improvement to their VR performance, but I'm guessing its modest.

I'm a bit disappointed we didn't see more of a push for mGPU doing per eye rendering for VR. Heck, that would actually have been a great case for Nvidia to make for ray-tracing, where each eye would be going with a lower resolution, that'd have made people enthusiastic instead of critical about ray-tracying needing lower resolutions. And I think games could even use the path tracing for gameplay related stuff.

 

[railven]

2070 Super is 25% more expensive for less than 10% performance increase. I think 5700XT makes the most sense here. Save that hundred dollars and put it towards a new GPU upgrade in two years.

I hate to say this like this, but in this regards this is really bad advice, and you owning AMD stock should really be made clear if you're going to suggest AMD in a bad faith example as this.

 

[DeathReborn]

When it comes to VR AMD is missing a key performance differentiator in Variable Rate Shading being MIA on Navi. Also, Navi supports VirtualLink USB-C but no models exist with the port so that's moot (plus lack of HMD support just yet).

https://www.bit-tech.net/reviews/tech/graphics/amd-radeon-rx-5700-xt-review/5/

The only review that featured VR benchmarks I have seen to date. HardOCP used to do good VR benchmarking which clearly highlighterd how badly AMD did in comparison to Nvidia but since they shut down nobody else seems able to do similar testing.

 

[tajoh111]

I hate to say this like this, but in this regards this is really bad advice, and you owning AMD stock should really be made clear if you're going to suggest AMD in a bad faith example as this.

Indeed.

https://hothardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-5700-xt-and-rx-5700-review?page=2

A 30% advantage overall is nothing to scoff at.

 

[tviceman]

I am not sure what your comment means in relation to the quoted post?

Wasn't it obvious? The post immediately above this reply with the VR benches proves my point. Nvidia owns in VR. The irrelevant comparison swilli89 used was agenda-laced and not forthcoming about the subject at hand.

 

[Shmee]

If you are considering a 5700XT, you may want to wait for custom cooled cards. Though I do not know how much better they will be in VR, I expect them to give better boost clocks with less noise than the current blowers.

 

[Stuka87]

Wasn't it obvious? The post immediately above this reply with the VR benches proves my point. Nvidia owns in VR. The irrelevant comparison swilli89 used was agenda-laced and not forthcoming about the subject at hand.

I understand it now, but the sentence wasn't that clear. I did not read it as nVidia cards have better performance in VR. I read it as something related to features or market share.

 

[swilli89]

I hate to say this like this, but in this regards this is really bad advice, and you owning AMD stock should really be made clear if you're going to suggest AMD in a bad faith example as this.

Excuse me? I haven't owned stock in probably two years. Suggesting a 2.5/1 cost to performance increase is a "bad faith" move is funny. I didn't know NV performed that much better in VR. But don't attach my character next time.

 

[railven]

Excuse me? I haven't owned stock in probably two years. Suggesting a 2.5/1 cost to performance increase is a "bad faith" move is funny. I didn't know NV performed that much better in VR. But don't attach my character next time.

My apologies if true, but you didn't deny the accusation just a few weeks ago. Your response to the accusation is why I said what I did.

if Navi 10 is a replacement product stack for Polaris as you said, IT IS Polaris replacement, witch they are overpricing it to Vega levels, there is no room for "buts" here. Semantics is what some people is using to try to justify this.

AMD thinks they can get away with this, if they do, both AMD and Nvidia wins, and we losse, choose your side. Hang on, i belive you said you own AMD stock, well there is nothing more to say if thats the case.

"get away with"?

Look I dislike the pricing as well, but AMD's balance sheet needs help and they need revenue and margins. They are undercutting NVIDIA and that's all they have to do right now. NVIDIA is the one with an old product. Let them discount and force AMD to reduce pricing.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1139607746397888512

Anandtech's own RT said it doesn't even have classification.

Big Navi will probably be 80 CU and by the time it drops will land at $699.

You offered bad advice to the OP, and now you even state you weren't even aware of the metrics for the questions he was asking. That doesn't help your case. I'm not attacking your character, I'm attacking the post and it's content.

Thanks for setting the record straight though.

 

[Guru]

Its moot, because VR games perform very differently to synthetic benchmarks and no tech sites actually review VR GAMES so we don't really know the true performance of Nvidia or AMD in VR games.

Your best bet is to ask this question on Reddit on some of the VR subreddits and have users post their results for you to compare.

 

[Kedas]

Thanks for al the advice but indeed we don't have much real use tests with a 3900X with valve index and GPUs.

But I'm already sure it will be a 2070 Super or 2080 Super
Nvidia also has a good tensorflow support advantage.

I only need to figure out if it will be good enough or that I just buy a 'hold on' GPU card and buy an 3070 Super next year with much lower power for the same speed hence less noise.

Anyway since buying/getting the Vale index kit will take at least until October I have time to decide.

P.S. I still own AMD stock, and I'm planning to use all my profit to buy this Workstation/VR PC 4000 euro (maybe it will even be an 16 core threadripper if the stock is high enough and also good for games)
Not water cooled just a big air cooler.

 

[DeathReborn]

Thanks for al the advice but indeed we don't have much real use tests with a 3900X with valve index and GPUs.

But I'm already sure it will be a 2070 Super or 2080 Super
Nvidia also has a good tensorflow support advantage.

I only need to figure out if it will be good enough or that I just buy a 'hold on' GPU card and buy an 3070 Super next year with much lower power for the same speed hence less noise.

Anyway since buying/getting the Vale index kit will take at least until October I have time to decide.

P.S. I still own AMD stock, and I'm planning to use all my profit to buy this Workstation/VR PC 4000 euro (maybe it will even be an 16 core threadripper if the stock is high enough and also good for games)
Not water cooled just a big air cooler.

A "hold on" card is probably a good bet, you never know, prices might drop a little in 2020...

 

[happy medium]

With VR games Nvidia kicks the snot out of AMD.
https://babeltechreviews.com/vr-wars-the-rtx-2070-vs-the-gtx-1080-vs-the-vega-64/

 

[darkswordsman17]

With VR games Nvidia kicks the snot out of AMD.
https://babeltechreviews.com/vr-wars-the-rtx-2070-vs-the-gtx-1080-vs-the-vega-64/

While I don't expect a dramatic shift, the OP is specifically asking about 5700XT's VR performance.

Also, WTF, somehow Vega performs well in Fallout 4 VR?

 

[happy medium]

While I don't expect a dramatic shift, the OP is specifically asking about 5700XT's VR performance.

Also, WTF, somehow Vega performs well in Fallout 4 VR?

Looking at the synthetic benchmarks and the game benchmarks I posted ,its easy to see the 5700xt is slightly faster than a gtx1080/gtx2060 with VR games. Nvidia cards from the 2060super on up are much faster with VR.

 

[Thala]

Looking at the synthetic benchmarks and the game benchmarks I posted ,its easy to see the 5700xt is slightly faster than a gtx1080/gtx2060 with VR games. Nvidia cards from the 2060super on up are much faster with VR.

Of course NVidia GPUs are faster as they have much more features tailored for VR as for instance Multi-View rendering in a single geometry pass, variable rate shading and lens matched shading.

 

[Kedas]

The dual GPU for VR seems like a good idea but it looks like it isn't really used by anyone.
https://developer.nvidia.com/vrworks/graphics/vrsli

 

[Kedas]

P.S. I still own AMD stock, and I'm planning to use all my profit to buy this Workstation/VR PC 4000 euro (maybe it will even be an 16 core threadripper if the stock is high enough and also good for games)
Not water cooled just a big air cooler.

Sold my AMD stock today for 39 dollar, 5500euro profit so enough for a threadripper but it would need to be an 16core version with lower than 200W TDP it looks like I need patients.

I'm thinking about 2080 Super now (850 Euro) to combine with Valve index.