AMD 6000 reviews thread

[Z15CAM]

AMD trounced Intel and now nVidia within a month - Glad to see AMD back in the game. ATi Rage with a Fury revenge !

Had best to invest in AMD stock - NOW ;o)

 

[Glo.]

AMD trounced Intel and now nVidia within a month - Glad to see AMD back in the game. ATi Rage revenge !

Had best to invest in AMD stock - NOW ;o)

I think people are way to eager to say that anybody trounced or roflstomped over anyone.

Competition is back. And that is the most important thing.

 

[Z15CAM]

One of my favorite platforms was the Intel Z68 Chipset with the I7 2700K Sandy Bridge running at 5G's with CrossFire 290X's (Under H2O) back in the Day - Still have 2 or three of them rigs Rigs with 2300 Mhz Samsung Green DDR3 and love them.

I'm now playing with an ASUS X470 CH7, 32GB CL14 @ 3200Mhz (Can do 16Cl at 3600Mhz' with a little more voltage) and the CPU R7 3700X CPU at 4400Mhz's, NMVe PCIe3 drives - Some what of a Mid range PC by today's standards but would not mind either a RTX 3070 or RX 6800 to replace my Crossfire 290X's (Some what better than a GTX 1080). Monitors are a Korean beauties 27" 96 Hz IPS 1440P QNIX display or a Japanese 165 Hz IPS Pixio Prime 7 27" display. Funny thing is I'm not into gaming - If I was it would be the 165hz 1440P 2K IPS Pixio with either a nVidia RTX 3070 or AMD RX 3800 @ 1440P on this platform.

Really I'm looking at around $800 CDN for a Video card just to upgrade a bit ;o(

Doubt I would get anything for my Crossfire Sapphire XSPC H20 290X's = The R9 295X2. Capable of running a solid 1175 X 1600 Mhz's at under 75C under full load with a spare card - Wattage is horrendous at least 800 Watts on the Intel Z68.

Buildzoid would certiantly be interested. The issue is the cost of shipping 10lbs of cards from Canada to the UK !

To think of it I will notify him ;o)

 

[igor_kavinski]

Funny thing is I'm not into gaming - If I was it would be the 165hz 1440P 2K IPS Pixio with either a nVidia RTX 3070 or AMD RX 3800 @ 1440P on this platform.

Yes, that IS funny. What are you using your Crossfire R9 290X's for? Mining?

 

[Z15CAM]

I did have a Bitcoin Wallet once but lost it through the lack of interest realizing I'm just a PC Geek ;o)

 

[antihelten]

If you look at the footnotes on the website results, SAM and rage mode are on versus off in the presentation.

Aah, you're right, I missed that. Thanks

Judging from AMD presentation (and the message that AMD is trying to pass - that it has a card that can compete with 3090) as far I can tell we would have in 4K:

So AMD just released the full numbers used in the presentation (here).

Someone on reddit collated all of the numbers and calculated the averages:

6900XT is 3.1% faster than 3090 at 4K.
6900XT is 7.3% faster than 3090 at 1440P.
6800XT is 4.8% faster than 3080 at 4K.
6800XT is 9.3% faster than 3080 at 1440P.
6800 is 15.3% faster than 2080 Ti at 4K.
6800 is 19.3% faster than 2080 Ti at 1440P.

Now all of these numbers are with SAM and possibly also Rage on (the page only mentions SAM), so without those the numbers would probably look something like this (assuming 5% average boost from SAM and Rage):

6900XT is 1.9% slower than 3090 at 4K.
6900XT is 2.2% faster than 3090 at 1440P.
6800XT is 0.2% slower than 3080 at 4K.
6800XT is 4.1% faster than 3080 at 1440P.
6800 is 9.8% faster than 2080 Ti at 4K.
6800 is 13.6% faster than 2080 Ti at 1440P.

If we furthermore apply the suggested 2.5% to the Nvidia results to account for cherrypicked benches, then we get the following:

6900XT is 4.2% slower than 3090 at 4K.
6900XT is 0.3% slower than 3090 at 1440P.
6800XT is 2.7% slower than 3080 at 4K.
6800XT is 1.6% faster than 3080 at 1440P.
6800 is 7.1% faster than 2080 Ti at 4K.
6800 is 10.8% faster than 2080 Ti at 1440P.

 

[Shmee]

Interesting, all very close actually. Makes the 6800XT definitely seem like the card to get for me @1440p

 

[Sonikku]

Well, mr. 1080ti FTW3, you've had a good run...

 

[amrnuke]

Aah, you're right, I missed that. Thanks



So AMD just released the full numbers used in the presentation (here).

Someone on reddit collated all of the numbers and calculated the averages:

6900XT is 3.1% faster than 3090 at 4K.
6900XT is 7.3% faster than 3090 at 1440P.
6800XT is 4.8% faster than 3080 at 4K.
6800XT is 9.3% faster than 3080 at 1440P.
6800 is 15.3% faster than 2080 Ti at 4K.
6800 is 19.3% faster than 2080 Ti at 1440P.

Now all of these numbers are with SAM and possibly also Rage on (the page only mentions SAM), so without those the numbers would probably look something like this (assuming 5% average boost from SAM and Rage):

6900XT is 1.9% slower than 3090 at 4K.
6900XT is 2.2% faster than 3090 at 1440P.
6800XT is 0.2% slower than 3080 at 4K.
6800XT is 4.1% faster than 3080 at 1440P.
6800 is 9.8% faster than 2080 Ti at 4K.
6800 is 13.6% faster than 2080 Ti at 1440P.

If we furthermore apply the suggested 2.5% to the Nvidia results to account for cherrypicked benches, then we get the following:

6900XT is 4.2% slower than 3090 at 4K.
6900XT is 0.3% slower than 3090 at 1440P.
6800XT is 2.7% slower than 3080 at 4K.
6800XT is 1.6% faster than 3080 at 1440P.
6800 is 7.1% faster than 2080 Ti at 4K.
6800 is 10.8% faster than 2080 Ti at 1440P.

If you can run your 6900XT with SAM and RAGE on and it doesn't void the warranty, and it's just a setting to flip, why should we exclude those results from testing?

I wonder what testing policies will be. I know many review sites like TPU test overclocking, for 3090 it gains 4.8%, but the overclock voids the warranty.

Odd situation to be in.

 

[GodisanAtheist]

If you can run your 6900XT with SAM and RAGE on and it doesn't void the warranty, and it's just a setting to flip, why should we exclude those results from testing?

I wonder what testing policies will be. I know many review sites like TPU test overclocking, for 3090 it gains 4.8%, but the overclock voids the warranty.

Odd situation to be in.

-When cards have a dual bios, testing is generally done with both the bioses, so I can see testers doing a "stock", "SAM" and "SAM+RAGE" test for these cards.

However, since it sounds like Rage mode is going to be silicon dependent, reviewers might not want to include it as part of their basic test suite.

However, the argument against that, is that all card boost clocks are silicon, power, program dependent so what gives about Rage Mode.

 

[linkgoron]

If you can run your 6900XT with SAM and RAGE on and it doesn't void the warranty, and it's just a setting to flip, why should we exclude those results from testing?

I wonder what testing policies will be. I know many review sites like TPU test overclocking, for 3090 it gains 4.8%, but the overclock voids the warranty.

Odd situation to be in.

Yep, that's why I'm not a huge fan of "modes". It makes it difficult to benchmark, and also difficult to show an "unbiased" opinion. AMD fans will say "yeah, do it in Rage mode and SAM" and Nvidia fans will say that it's "cheating" or something. However, if you really do buy a Ryzen 5 CPU - SAM is a minor performance uplift that is expected, not theoretical. Clearly, in the Navi 20 tests, everything should be tested.

The bigger issue is in follow-up reviews of other cards. Places like TPU have these huge percentage based charts at the end of every review. What should they do? Show two results for the AMD cards in every review in the comparison bar chart? three? four? Obviously, they will only one show one. Since Ampere launched a lot of Nvidia fans have been pushing the idea that only perf matters, and perf/watt is less of an issue - so IMO Rage mode should be OK, as AMD have already stated that Rage mode does not void the warranty. SAM is more of an issue, because it only works with Ryzen 5 (I'm not sure reviewers will change their systems that quickly, as they'd have to re-benchmark everything to have a common baseline).

However, the argument against that, is that all card boost clocks are silicon, power, program dependent so what gives about Rage Mode.

Yep, this has been true since the introduction of boost clocks and things like PBO.

 

[tviceman]

If you can run your 6900XT with SAM and RAGE on and it doesn't void the warranty, and it's just a setting to flip, why should we exclude those results from testing?

I wonder what testing policies will be. I know many review sites like TPU test overclocking, for 3090 it gains 4.8%, but the overclock voids the warranty.

Odd situation to be in.

Rage mode is oveclocking whether it's a switch flip or not. It's also not guaranteed across all cards nor will it provide the same results. Stock settings, however, guarantee a certain minimum performance threshold. Out-of-the-box stock for stock should be the focus of the tests.

And SAM is entirely hardware dependent. MOST people in the market do not have the required hardware to take advantage of it. So while I think it should be included in results, it should be separate results to give readers / users as much valid information as possible.

 

[Hitman928]

Rage mode is oveclocking whether it's a switch flip or not. It's also not guaranteed across all cards nor will it provide the same results. Stock settings, however, guarantee a certain minimum performance threshold. Out-of-the-box stock for stock should be the focus of the tests.

And SAM is entirely hardware dependent. MOST people in the market do not have the required hardware to take advantage of it. So while I think it should be included in results, it should be separate results to give readers / users as much valid information as possible.

From what I understand, Rage mode just ups the power limit slightly to allow for higher sustained boost, it doesn't overclock the card beyond max boost spec (hence not overclocking). This would apply to all cards and wouldn't be any different than how the current boosting works, better silicon cards will have higher performance with Rage mode off and with Rage mode on. I agree every review should have stock results as the primary result, always. If they have time and want to include Rage mode and/or manual overclocking, then all the better, but it shouldn't be done in lieu of stock benchmarks.

As far as SAM goes, I think it would be a great thing to include as an appendage to the review or a quick follow up after the main review is published. It would be nice to see from a technical interest perspective, but shouldn't be used for comparison purposes in the main review and should be considered as basically a perk if you have the necessarily hardware for it to work. Of course, every reviewer will have their own take on how to handle all of this, but that's just my personal feelings on the different modes.

 

[Elfear]

From what I understand, Rage mode just ups the power limit slightly to allow for higher sustained boost, it doesn't overclock the card beyond max boost spec (hence not overclocking). This would apply to all cards and wouldn't be any different than how the current boosting works, better silicon cards will have higher performance with Rage mode off and with Rage mode on. I agree every review should have stock results as the primary result, always. If they have time and want to include Rage mode and/or manual overclocking, then all the better, but it shouldn't be done in lieu of stock benchmarks.

As far as SAM goes, I think it would be a great thing to include as an appendage to the review or a quick follow up after the main review is published. It would be nice to see from a technical interest perspective, but shouldn't be used for comparison purposes in the main review and should be considered as basically a perk if you have the necessarily hardware for it to work. Of course, every reviewer will have their own take on how to handle all of this, but that's just my personal feelings on the different modes.

I agree. You can tell from just perusing the CPU forum here that there is a LOT of excitement around Ryzen 3 and a lot of systems in the future will be able to take advantage of SAMS.

 

[CastleBravo]

I bet the AIB factory OC models will beat AMD's "rage mode" with their "stock" performance anyway.

 

[Hitman928]

I bet the AIB factory OC models will beat AMD's "rage mode" with their "stock" performance anyway.

Most likely.

 

[Makaveli]

Anyone see this yet.

RX 6800, 6800 XT und 6900 XT: AMD veröffentlicht weitere Benchmarks in 4K und WQHD

Nach der Präsentation der Radeon RX 6800, 6800 XT und 6900 XT hat AMD nun weitere Benchmarks der Grafikkarten in 4K und WQHD veröffentlicht.

www.computerbase.de

 

[Mopetar]

Rage mode is oveclocking whether it's a switch flip or not. It's also not guaranteed across all cards nor will it provide the same results. Stock settings, however, guarantee a certain minimum performance threshold. Out-of-the-box stock for stock should be the focus of the tests.

And SAM is entirely hardware dependent. MOST people in the market do not have the required hardware to take advantage of it. So while I think it should be included in results, it should be separate results to give readers / users as much valid information as possible.

From what I've found from interview questions, etc. the RAGE mode setting barely does anything. It was 2% more performance. SAM apparently made a much bigger impact in the results where it was used.

While it's true that not everyone has a CPU that will enable SAM all of the reviewers will since Zen 3 is almost assuredly the new top gaming CPU. I'm going to snag one for my new PC regardless of whether I get an AMD or NVidia card.

I do think that reviews should be done at stock without assuming the extras, just like there's a separate OC results page for most reviews. I'm also thinking that AMD will end up looking pretty good here. The AIB leaks suggest there will be some decent third party OC cards released.

Also there's some weirdness. The 6800 has a TBP if 250W but it has only 8 more CUs than the new XBox and about the same clock speed, and we know that thing doesn't even come close to 250W total system power. Either the 6800 includes some really bottom of the barrel silicon that's pure awful, or there's some headroom for a good OC in there.

AMD clearly held back with their RDNA2 tease during the Zen presentation. It's possible they've done that again in some regard. Reviewers who see an unexpected or unanticipated result will naturally get excited about it which creates a little bit of additional buzz. AMD marketing has to have seen this with Zen.

 

[gk1951]

Thank you Makaveli.
Competion is back.
Glo is correct!

 

[Aikouka]

I would lean toward leaving SAM and RAGE disabled during testing. Of course, that might be required for SAM due to its hardware requirements and how benchmarks are typically done on a static hardware instance. However, I would expect it to be prudent to have some tests done to see differences between SAM and RAGE being on or off. If the reviewer wishes, they could create "extrapolated scores" based upon their numbers. For example, if the card gets 100 FPS in Assassin's Creed Valhalla and they saw a 5% increase on their Zen 3 test bench using RAGE + SAM, then they could create an extrapolation of 105 FPS. Just don't forget the footnotes.

 

[swilli89]

Anyone see this yet.

RX 6800, 6800 XT und 6900 XT: AMD veröffentlicht weitere Benchmarks in 4K und WQHD

Nach der Präsentation der Radeon RX 6800, 6800 XT und 6900 XT hat AMD nun weitere Benchmarks der Grafikkarten in 4K und WQHD veröffentlicht.

www.computerbase.de

Yes!

Here is consolidated graphs:

4K

https://i.redd.it/9wz7mkptf9w51.jpg

1440P

https://i.redd.it/yjtf49wjg9w51.jpg

Credit to reddit user u/Chalupos

 

[Makaveli]

Found the source for what I posted above.

https://www.amd.com/en/gaming/graphics-gaming-benchmarks

 

[Head1985]

Results with SAM enabled...lets say SAM icrease performance by 8%.
Without SAM in 1440p:
Rx6800 vs 2080TI/3070+9-10%
Rx6800XT vs 3080+1%
RX6900XT vs 3090=same
Best perf/price will be 6800XT by far.Again rx6800 looks bad with 580USD price tag.Should be 530 or 499.

 

[Makaveli]

Results with SAM enabled...lets say SAM icrease performance by 8%.
Without SAM in 1440p:
Rx6800 vs 2080TI/3070+9-10%
Rx6800XT vs 3080+1%
RX6900XT vs 3090=same
Best perf/price will be 6800XT by far.Again rx6800 looks bad with 580USD price tag.Should be 530 or 499.

I agree with the 6800XT being the better buy.

However if my eyes were set on the 6800 a $80 or $50 price different would not stop me. That is one night of not going out for drinks. And due to covid and no one going out that money is already saved and waiting to be used

 

[CastleBravo]

I agree with the 6800XT being the better buy.

However if my eyes were set on the 6800 a $80 or $50 price different would not stop me. That is one night of not going out for drinks. And due to covid and no one going out that money is already saved and waiting to be used

Also, that 6800 performance is at a lower frequency than the XT cards despite it being cut down massively. Unless AMD locks the power limit or something, it will likely get a higher % gain from overclocking and close the performance gap with the 6800 XT somewhat.