What would you buy?

[LabRat 891]

I so much wanted a 1080Ti back in 2017 when TW Warhammer II came out. I will someday buy one, just to put it on a shelve if nothing else

I am doing this w/ Vega.
I pined after a Vega 64 since they first came out; I even was there for the reddit AMD AMAs.

'While-back, I got a decent deal on a Vega 64 8GB from a friend, to upgrade away from my Polaris card(s).
Soon-after, I ended up stumbling upon the Radeon Instinct MI25->Radeon Pro WX 9100 cross-flashing, and now I have 2x, w/ more on the way.
Why? 16GB of Samsung HBM2 and full-fat Vega 10.

Tweaked w/ 3rd Party Drivers and OverDriveNtool,
they're basically $50-70 DIY Vega FEs (w/ a single mDP-out)

As you can see,
I kinda have an unhealthy adoration for Vega (and HBM) GPUs

 

[b1k3rdude]

I so much wanted a 1080Ti back in 2017 when TW Warhammer II came out. I will someday buy one, just to put it on a shelve if nothing else

I can dig that that. The 1080Ti is getting long in the tooth now, but its still a legendary card.

Even thorugh its a 2.5 slot card, it looks small compared to the 4080 (and this is one of the smaller variants)

On the subject of the 4060 16gb, at the current price in the UK atm (£430) a garbage product when you can get a 3080 for that.

 

[Nhonho]

Next year, I'm going to buy a 4090 or a 5090 to play some games in 4k resolution on a 50" 120 Hz TV.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Intel has released Arc A580 recently, targeting a sub-$200 price point for Full HD gaming

RX 5700 XT @ $150
RX 6600 @ $170
GTX 1080 Ti @ $170
Arc A580 @ $180
RX 6600 XT @ $200
RTX 3060 @ $240
RTX 4060 @ $280

Which card would you buy?

Given this list, the 4060 is the clear choice. It might be the most expensive, but's still sub $300 and has the most capabilities.

However, the best bang-for-buck value might just be the Intel A580.

 

[Chrispy_]

6600XT definitely the winner here;

• Paying more than $200 is stupid for anything with only 8GB. We've been fighting the 8GB limit at 1440p for at least 18 months now and AAA games that actually need new GPUs aren't getting any lighter. If you don't want to play AAA games, you can make do with your old graphics card, or something like an RX 570/GTX 1060 for $75 on ebay.
  
  
• 5700XT is better performance/$ than the 6600XT but gobbles down way too much power for a cost-sensitive GPU in an era where ~100W more could mean €4-5/month to run in most of Europe. That's the entire cost of the card in under 3 years, and vastly more than the difference between the 6600XT and the 5700XT. Whilst you can undervolt the 5700XT a lot, it will never reach the efficiency of the newer 6600XT and even though it doesn't undervolt as well, the 6600XT can also be undervolted for some decent efficiency gains.
  
  
• Nvidia doesn't compete on value, and this is a value discussion. Not even the 3060 is worth considering at current prices when it's been abandoned by Nvidia for things like DLSS3, Frame-gen, AI features in CUDA applications etc. If you want to be abandoned by Nvidia, you don't need to pay the Nvidia tax.

 

[Luke357]

Not having the A770 @ $250/$280 or the A750 @ $230 is lame. Of these I would probably pick the A580 because I've seen the 750 and 770 do well in lots of games that I play. But otherwise it would be the 3060 simply because of DLSS and the 12 gigs of VRAM. The 4060 is crap and the AMD options are decent but the 8X lanes might cause issues in my PCIe Gen3 system.

 

[Apocalypsee]

My 3080 died recently so those listed there are my target cards to buy. I would buy 4060 but since I have a backup 1070 that still work I use that instead. Or I will buy 2080 Ti if I can find one

 

[Outback Bronze]

Voted 4060.

 

[Brendan9140]

we already have reviews from FSR 3 Frame Gen from several sites, the hardware unboxed video on it was pretty damning. it just doesn't meet the quality that DLSS3 frame gen provides.

hopefully it gets better though, but I am not optimistic, AMD has always been behind on software features... I still remember back in the day getting excited over AMD Mantle, it was overhyped and didn't last long at all

Farewell Mantle… AMD has ended all support for DirectX 12’s API inspiration

Starting with version 19.5.1, Radeon Software Adrenalin 2019 Edition drivers will no longer support AMD’s rendering API

www.pcgamesn.com

Well at least what Mantle was later became Vulkan, which I definitely appreciated. Hopefully FSR 3 does get better so we don’t have another Mantle happen

On another word, I voted 1080 Ti as I bought one from a friend for $190 back in March and I’ve been very happy with it since. Sure RT and DLSS would be nice to have, but I’m not very bothered missing out on them. Also the 11gb VRAM is nice to have

 

[Avro Arrow]

If I had no other GPU, the 6600XT at those prices. But in addition to what I already have? I'd like to play around with the Arc card, tbh. Enthusiast's curiosity.

That's fair, as long as it doesn't become "Enthusiast's Regret".

Most people only buy from the same brand, that being Nvidia. Why? No clue, most complaints about the other manufacturers are rooted in things that were true at one point but no longer hold any ground (well, at least AMD, I have no knowledge about intel GPUs), and because they've turned loyal to the brand (for whatever reason), they won't consider any alternative.

The funny thing is that I only ever buy Radeons (the last GeForce card I owned was back in 2007) but it's mostly because, since I'm a mere mortal and don't buy halo-level cards, Radeons always performed better at whatever price point I was willing to pay. The other funny thing is that I never had all of these "driver problems" that so many people griped about so I often wonder if it wasn't just ID10.T errors on the part of the users themselves. I went from 2 HD 4870s to 2 HD 7970s to 2 R9 Furies to an RX 5700 XT to an RX 6800 XT to my current RX 7900 XTX. If I had any of the problems that "people" (I'm thinking that they were nVidia plants) complained about, I wouldn't have kept buying them, especially not high-end models like I normally do.

 

[BigBonedCartman]

is the amount of VRAM as important at 1080P and 1440P as it is at 4k resolution?

 

[theouto]

More than you might think actually, if you play at high texture settings and such then 8GB of VRAM will end up being a drawback (at 1440p anyway), not because they actually need more than 8GB of VRAM, but because bad optimization will lead to high VRAM consumption, and have you been looking at the games releasing lately? They're anything but well optimized, so unless you are fine with giving up texture detail, yes, it matters more than you might realize

 

[Sarajiel]

Since I'm not in the U.S., it's a fairly simple decision in case I need another GPU in the next couple of months: RTX 4060.

It's the most energy-efficient card of the lot, and until we see some current benchmarks for professional video editing applications for Intel Arc, I'd rather stick to Nvidia for AV1/h.264 encoding.

 

[kapone32]

is the amount of VRAM as important at 1080P and 1440P as it is at 4k resolution?

No

Since I'm not in the U.S., it's a fairly simple decision in case I need another GPU in the next couple of months: RTX 4060.

It's the most energy-efficient card of the lot, and until we see some current benchmarks for professional video editing applications for Intel Arc, I'd rather stick to Nvidia for AV1/h.264 encoding.

I like the fact that you have defined your use case.

 

[Random_User]

They all don't even recognize Intel for their Value/Perfomance-Ratio. Thats astonishing. They would prefer a slower card for the same or more Money.

Why? The drivers who where real bad at the beginning or its that most people only buy always from the same Brand?

Drivers might be really better now. There's no question. Quite the reverse, as this can be even pointed to some companies, as an example.

However there are other factors, that should be mentioned:

1. It might not be available at all. Even considering there were other intel products available for ages, and considering their strong lobby. The competition is very strong in US, because each major rival is present, and all three are US companies. But there are places, where's no challenge. Therefore, minor brands like Intel Arc are not presented at all. Be it due not being familiar, or bad supply.

For example, here, after AMD disappeared as participant during their late GCN/Polaris times, nVidia usurped the whole local GPU market. But this is another topic.

And since intel had only integrated graphics, they were not even a choice for buyers who seek for discrete VGA. Thus, here the public image now is that there can be no any other graphics cards but nV ones.

So considering this all, it's not hard to see, that while AMD was being kicked for "bad drivers" for ages, intel with it's "hard start"and completely garbage drivers at the beginning, the DG1 disaster, simply had no chance to stand. Only now Arc 770 and 750 appear in the online stores.

2. The other problem with intel cards is the bad performance with old games, especially DX9 ones. And the main reason to buy such low profile, somehow weak but "cheap"card, is that it can be used for "retro" gaming. But alas, Intel Arc doesn't have native DX9 support. Though, it can have some workarounds, e.g. for games that can be played with DXVK, dgvodoo, some older games might have a problem.

3. There's another strong concern, which is power consumption. It isn't for many, but for countries with exorbitant electricity prices, it is.

Though, no brand loyalty here. Just the product not being the best choice. Since people have not much money, and the card should meet all criteria. Current Arc, unfortunately does not.

As you can see,
I kinda have an unhealthy adoration for Vega (and HBM) GPUs

I still consider Radeon VII (Vega II), is amazing with UV.

Would be amazing to see RX 7000 with HBM3 though. Just for fun. Don't think it's impossible as MCDs can theoretically be swapped to the ones that are used by MI300.
Of course that would be very expensive and pointless, but definitely the "halo" product.

• Nvidia doesn't compete on value, and this is a value discussion. Not even the 3060 is worth considering at current prices when it's been abandoned by Nvidia for things like DLSS3, Frame-gen, AI features in CUDA applications etc. If you want to be abandoned by Nvidia, you don't need to pay the Nvidia tax.

Not to mention, that paying for RT space allocation inside such level/class chip is just silly. No matter what the brand is. It should be suspicious when seeing advertisement of such feature for such low end.

 

[Post Nut Clairvoyance]

I would buy:
NASDAQ:AMD and NVDA if you guys keep buying LOL

special shoutout to people who want AMD to be competitive only so they can buy NVidia GPU at lower prices, I think Jensen wants to have a word with you:

 

[maximoor]

However, the best bang-for-buck value might just be the Intel A580.

In fact, I think the best bang-for-buck is the RX5700 XT for 150$ or the 1080 Ti for 170$. The 5700 XT is faster than the 6600 and at higher resolutions it's even close to the 6600XT because it has more bandwidth (256 Bit vs 128). The ARC580 is equivalent to or slower than the 6600 for 10$ more. I have a MSI 6600 and it's perfectly adequate for me (1080p), but here in Portugal if I had the 5700 XT for the same price or less, it would have been my choice, even though the 6600 is much more efficient. But I think that in terms of performance/price, without taking into account technological issues such as DLSS or efficiency, the 5700XT / 1080ti are the best options.

 

[dWARf666]

I tabulated the data for US and China (three years usage) ...In every scenario the RTX 3060 is the worst option...

 

[HD64G]

For the prices shown in the voting panel, easy choice the 6600XT.

 

[Beermotor]

If I found myself needing to stretch my hardware's useful lifespan and my budget limited me to these cards I'd be running Linux, so any AMD card.

 

[Space Lynx]

Well at least what Mantle was later became Vulkan, which I definitely appreciated. Hopefully FSR 3 does get better so we don’t have another Mantle happen

On another word, I voted 1080 Ti as I bought one from a friend for $190 back in March and I’ve been very happy with it since. Sure RT and DLSS would be nice to have, but I’m not very bothered missing out on them. Also the 11gb VRAM is nice to have

I never thought of this, Mantle helped Vulkan become a thing then, I didn't realize this... if that is true then that is actually pretty cool and well done AMD.

 

[friocasa]

Without looking numbers, 7600 and 4060 might look nice but the relative performance shows how bad they are, the 4060 costs almost double of 5700 XT while performing just 15-22% extra

So 5700 XT for me, or a second hand 3090(this ain't much more expensive than a new 4060/Ti)

 

[azrael]

I'm currently locked in to nVidia graphics cards due to my monitor using GSync (the original variant), so the RTX 4060 is my best bet from the available choices. In reality I'm looking at a 4070 Ti (or Super, if it materializes and seems worth it).

 

[dampflokfreund]

Without looking numbers, 7600 and 4060 might look nice but the relative performance shows how bad they are, the 4060 costs almost double of 5700 XT while performing just 15-22% extra

So 5700 XT for me, or a second hand 3090(this ain't much more expensive than a new 4060/Ti)

Terrible choice. More and more games will use advanced DX12U features like Mesh Shading, which the 5700XT does not support. You're better off buying a RX 6600 for 20 dollars more.

 

[Space Lynx]

I'm currently locked in to nVidia graphics cards due to my monitor using GSync (the original variant), so the RTX 4060 is my best bet from the available choices. In reality I'm looking at a 4070 Ti (or Super, if it materializes and seems worth it).

yes I agree with you, if you have an original gsync module monitor you should 100% rock nvidia.