• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Question Speculation: RDNA2 + CDNA Architectures thread

Page 186 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Glo. said:
www.techpowerup.com

AMD Radeon RX 6800 Review

The Radeon RX 6800 is the world's most power-efficient graphics card, better than anything NVIDIA Ampere has to offer. The smaller brother to the RX 6800 XT comes with a smaller heatsink, at more affordable pricing, but retains the lavish 16 GB VRAM memory buffer.
www.techpowerup.com www.techpowerup.com
power-gaming-average.png


This is absolutely mental efficiency.
Click to expand...
Actually, reviews on TPUs site show way lower performance and power draw numbers compared to other sites.

They must have made some errors in testing.
 
exquisitechar said:
RT performance is all over the place. Good in Dirt 5 and Watch Dogs, behind in everything else (sometimes horribly so).
Click to expand...

I guess there's some optimization to be done in this case, as all current games have their RT implemented and optimized against nV's way of doing things. A patch or two later could improve that.


Rasterization performance is awesome.
 
exquisitechar said:
RT performance is all over the place. Good in Dirt 5 and Watch Dogs, behind in everything else (sometimes horribly so).
Click to expand...

AMD and Nvidia implementations differ quite a bit, so if someone was expecting RTX optimized games (or tech demos) to run well on 6800 series they are seriously naive. Not saying that Dirt5 is representative of what we can expect, but as in all things thuth is in the middle. And btw, expect ray tracing being the "next optimization war".
 
Shivansps said:
You are saying that costing $80 more and having no performance to back it up has nothing to do with it?

But keep it up, i love these kind of hate driven comments, it means im asking the right questions.
Click to expand...

A silly post calls for a silly answer. What performance do you seek? Rasterization performance of the XT is way above 3070 and Ray tracing is similar in Nvidia optimized titles. 6800 is confortably above 3070 in rasterization, not so behind in RT NV optimized titles and it will likely perform good in new titles, and it has future proof amount of VRAM. So I wonder who is hating who in your comments.
 
I just looked the TPU review and what is happening at 1080p?!
The Non-XT is faster than the XT card is some games.
And looks like the Infinite Cache helps nothing at 4K.
 
exquisitechar said:
Frankly, the 6800 is a disappointment. I was expecting it to have a larger lead over the 3070, and the rumors of a sizable OC headroom didn't pan out. Not that I would buy a 3070 either.
Click to expand...

It was not the better choice in the line, as I said in another post it had to cost less, a 40 bucks more than the 3070 would have been good. Another thing is that many (most) reviews did not use an AMD platform and the results are quite all over the place. it depends a lot on the title choice. Computebase showed that using the most recent titles is better for the 6800 line.
 
leoneazzurro said:
A silly post calls for a silly answer. What performance do you seek? Rasterization performance of the XT is way above 3070 and Ray tracing is similar in Nvidia optimized titles. 6800 is confortably above 3070 in rasterization, not so behind in RT NV optimized titles and it will likely perform good in new titles, and it has future proof amount of VRAM. So I wonder who is hating who in your comments.
Click to expand...

I said 6800 not the 6800XT, i never considered buying the 6800XT or the 3080 so im looking at the 6800 vs 3070 for 1440p, even at rasterization only the 6800 is not really better than the 3070, they are trading blows. Why I should (or anyone) spend $80 more?

I expected more out of the 6800, there is really no reason other than the vram to pay the extra.

The 6800 should be $500 and perf numbers are showing that.
 
Last edited:
Shivansps said:
I said 6800 not the 6800XT, i never considered buying the 6800XT or the 3080 so im looking at the 6800 vs 3070 for 1440p, even at rasterization only the 6800 is not really better than the 3070, they are trading blows. Why should me or anyone spend $80 more?

I expected more out of the 6800, there is really no reason other than the vram to pay the extra.
Click to expand...

7-10% advantage, 16 Gb of VRAM vs 8, better behavior in newer titles. Then, as said, It should be at least 40$ less, as the 6800XT is the most bang of the buck in the line. And don't undervalue the VRAM amount: 6 Gbytes cards are starting to get VRAM limited already now, 8Gbyte cards will be in a couple of years in several titles.
 
CastleBravo said:
Tom's is showing a noticeable difference in DXR image quality between the 3080 and the 6800 XT in Watch Dogs.

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/the-amd-radeon-rx-6800-xt-and-rx-6800-review
Click to expand...

Yep, I just saw that as well. Could very well explain why the AMD cards perform so well there compared to earlier titles, they aren't calculating as much ray tracing. So that just leaves Dirt 5 (at least until watch dogs gets sorted out for sure) which I believe is not doing a lot of ray tracing. It could come down to how heavily ray traced the game is and the heavier it is, the worse AMD cards will perform comparatively. We'll have to wait to see how more DXR1.1 titles run on AMD cards, but so far it looks like if DXR is an important part of your buying decision, you should probably go Nvidia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top