AMD GPU selection

[damric]

XT is faster regardless.

Slightly faster, yes. 30% faster costing 30% more, not by a long shot.

 

[Deleted member 230939]

Slightly faster, yes. 30% faster costing 30% more, not by a long shot.

Value was not part of my argument as that is subjective, XT.. simple it's faster and is one of the options.

I would see if the OP can find a close 6800 for the money.

Example.

PowerColor Red Dragon AMD Radeon RX 6800 3DHR OC 16GB GDDR6 Graphic Card for sale online | eBay

Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for PowerColor Red Dragon AMD Radeon RX 6800 3DHR OC 16GB GDDR6 Graphic Card at the best online prices at eBay! Free shipping for many products!

www.ebay.com

PowerColor Red Dragon AMD Radeon RX 6800 3DHR OC 16GB GDDR6 Graphic Card for sale online | eBay

Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for PowerColor Red Dragon AMD Radeon RX 6800 3DHR OC 16GB GDDR6 Graphic Card at the best online prices at eBay! Free shipping for many products!

www.ebay.com

 

[Draginsmith28]

Value was not part of my argument as that is subjective, XT.. simple it's faster and is one of the options.

I would see if the OP can find a close 6800 for the money.

Example.

PowerColor Red Dragon AMD Radeon RX 6800 3DHR OC 16GB GDDR6 Graphic Card for sale online | eBay

Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for PowerColor Red Dragon AMD Radeon RX 6800 3DHR OC 16GB GDDR6 Graphic Card at the best online prices at eBay! Free shipping for many products!

www.ebay.com

PowerColor Red Dragon AMD Radeon RX 6800 3DHR OC 16GB GDDR6 Graphic Card for sale online | eBay

Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for PowerColor Red Dragon AMD Radeon RX 6800 3DHR OC 16GB GDDR6 Graphic Card at the best online prices at eBay! Free shipping for many products!

www.ebay.com

6800 is 200$ more expensive than the 6700xt so again, not great in terms of price to performance
And he's refusing used gpus

 

[Deleted member 230939]

6800 is 200$ more more expensive than the 6700xt so again, not great in terms of price to performance
And he's refusing used gpus

Well 6700 XT then.

 

[mbeeston]

i thnk the problem he wants " untra" if he's gonna keep the card, then xt it is... 10 gb is running short

 

[Lost_Troll]

I just upgraded to a 6750 XT OC Asrock card, and it rocks at 1080 gamming, and they are under 400$ us.

 

[eidairaman1]

6800 is 200$ more expensive than the 6700xt so again, not great in terms of price to performance
And he's refusing used gpus

Well he is a fool then

 

[Dr. Dro]

3050 is crap :l
3060 tho it's 325
While the 3060ti is 400 (according to him)

I see. You should tell your friend to purchase the 6700 XT then. It's not going to be performing at the level you described, ultra quality 1080p at 165 Hz smooth in every game, but it will be the closest you can get to it. The 3060 Ti's also an option, but with 8 GB, it may be a tradeoff - better encoder, better feature set, about the same performance, but may not run games as well in the future due to smaller VRAM.

Guys the 5600X will struggle in some games but on lowered settings I don't see why a 6700 XT won't fulfill 165hz at 1080p. Fast memory will definiely help and enabling SAM.

Resizable BAR is not a one-stop-shop fix for anything, so enabling "SAM" is not going to make a card that can't run things at 165 fps magically do so. Both it and HAGS were hyped to an extreme and neither are in the least bit important. AMD still doesn't support HAGS, so you have an idea.

We're talking price here, the 250USD RTX 3050 was the lowest I could find, a single fan PNY model:

Amazon.com

Do you wanna compare that 250USD PNY RTX 3050 against, say, a single fan iTX PowerColor RX 6500 XT at 150USD, really? The RX 6500 XT more like a GTX 1650 Super competitor both in terms of price and performance.

Pricing in the real world hasn't had any connection with a product's placement for some time now. The 3050 experiences high demand from a certain segment because the RX 6500 XT has shortcomings that make it a terrible HTPC/streamer build card, such as the complete lack of hardware encoding capabilities and the two display limitation. The poor default 4 GB memory configuration seals its fate. That's the reason you will find that the 3050 is more expensive.

 

[Deleted member 230939]

@Dr. Dro

Hmmm

AMD Smart Access Memory (SAM) ON vs OFF | 1080P, 1440P and 4K Benchmarks

 

[Space Lynx]

Not gonna happen on any of that hardware.

View attachment 295497

if he turns down settings some on certain games, i think a 6700 xt can get him where he wants to be, especially with freesync turned on.

 

[Dr. Dro]

@Dr. Dro

Hmmm

AMD Smart Access Memory (SAM) ON vs OFF | 1080P, 1440P and 4K Benchmarks

It's a marketing name for a PCIe standard feature. NVIDIA and Intel GPUs support it all the same. And it's not every game that benefits from resizable BAR support, many have actual regressions: drivers actually use blacklists and whitelists to disable/enable it on a per-game basis. Some improve, some regress, some show no improvements whatsoever.

 

[Deleted member 230939]

It's a marketing name for a PCIe standard feature. NVIDIA and Intel GPUs support it all the same. And it's not every game that benefits from resizable BAR support, many have actual regressions: drivers actually use blacklists and whitelists to disable/enable it on a per-game basis. Some improve, some regress, some show no improvements whatsoever.

Very denial based but ok, you are not wrong, but I was proving your claims wrong, you minimize, sounds like brand loyalty.

 

[Dr. Dro]

Very denial based but ok, you are not wrong, but I was proving your claims wrong, you minimize, sounds like brand loyalty.

Why would I be in denial if I literally have a ReBAR capable system? and I'm telling you, this is something that's gonna make no one upgrade

If anyone showed any signs of brand loyalty here it's you referring to it specifically by AMD's marketing name

 

[Deleted member 230939]

Why would I be in denial if I literally have a ReBAR capable system? and I'm telling you, this is something that's gonna make no one upgrade

If anyone showed any signs of brand loyalty here it's you referring to it specifically by AMD's marketing name

Because Nvidia RTX 3090 is not RX 6700 XT or Radeon.

You are very unaware as there are big gains to be had by using SAM vs Nvidia's REBAR, I know as I had an RTX 3070 and 2060 before my more powerful Radeon cards.

Maybe I was wrong you are just ignorant.

 

[siluro818]

Why would I be in denial if I literally have a ReBAR capable system? and I'm telling you, this is something that's gonna make no one upgrade

If anyone showed any signs of brand loyalty here it's you referring to it specifically by AMD's marketing name

Let's take Forza Horizon 5 for example. An Nvidia GPU will show little to no improvement with ReBAR on, but on my 6700XT enabling SAM boosted the framerates by sth like 20%.
I have no idea why Nvidia doesn't care for optimizing their ReBAR support.
It could very well be that their GPU architecture is such that it doesn't benefit much from the feature, plus their RTX series have plenty of other bells and whistles.
But one thing is for sure - it is not an apples to apples comparison with AMD when discussing ReBAR and whatever your impressions of it they don't translate to Radeon cards.

 

[Dr. Dro]

Let's take Forza Horizon 5 for example. An Nvidia GPU will show little to no improvement with ReBAR on, but on my 6700XT enabling SAM boosted the framerates by sth like 20%.
I have no idea why Nvidia doesn't care for optimizing their ReBAR support.
It could very well be that their GPU architecture is such that it doesn't benefit much from the feature, plus their RTX series have plenty of other bells and whistles.
But one thing is for sure - it is not an apples to apples comparison with AMD when discussing ReBAR and whatever your impressions of it they don't translate to Radeon cards.

Have you considered the remote possibility that it's not NVIDIA that hasn't optimized their driver, but rather it's AMD that may have a problem here? 20% performance uplift from BAR alone is not normal. Some minor improvements in lows is more like it should behave.

Functionally, it's the exact same thing. SAM is just a marketing name and I'm perfectly willing to die on this hill, it's a feature which isn't going to bring groundbreaking performance improvements: or at least shouldn't. Unless you're Intel and never had a driver code base that took traditional BAR segmentation into account.

 

[Deleted member 230939]

Have you considered the remote possibility that it's not NVIDIA that hasn't optimized their driver, but rather it's AMD that may have a problem here? 20% performance uplift from BAR alone is not normal. Some minor improvements in lows is more like it should behave.

Functionally, it's the exact same thing. SAM is just a marketing name and I'm perfectly willing to die on this hill, it's a feature which isn't going to bring groundbreaking performance improvements: or at least shouldn't. Unless you're Intel and never had a driver code base that took traditional BAR segmentation into account.

Which negates your point, SAM makes quite a difference don't it?

Want to admit it yet or keep going in circles?

I notice you don't want to admit it, it definitely seems you are biased regardless.

 

[Dr. Dro]

Which negates your point, SAM makes quite a difference don't it?

Want to admit it yet or keep going in circles?

I notice you don't want to admit it, it definitely seems you are biased regardless.

I think I'll keep going in circles because you're visibly angry and it entertains me. Do you like that answer?

I'll maintain that resizable BAR will not make unplayable games playable, and it will not make a GPU that cannot run something at 165 fps do so.

Touting a driver optimization problem as a selling point is simply baffling. Wow.

 

[Deleted member 230939]

I think I'll keep going in circles because you're visibly angry and it entertains me. Do you like that answer?

I'll maintain that resizable BAR will not make unplayable games playable, and it will not make a GPU that cannot run something at 165 fps do so.

There is no game that is unplayable on the 6700 XT at 1080P, so bad basis to begin with.
Lowered settings and SAM enabled can absolutely bring the card much closer to 165hz average as demonstrated in videos which objectively show big improvements using SAM.

I am not angry just passionate, correct, more logical and have first hand experience.

 

[Dr. Dro]

There is no game that is unplayable on the 6700 XT at 1080P, so bad basis to begin with.
Lowered settings and SAM enabled can absolutely bring the card much closer to 165hz average as demonstrated in videos which objectively show big improvements using SAM.

I am not angry just passionate, correct, more logical and have first hand experience.

Agreed with that but the detail is they specifically stated they want 165 Hz ultra quality, and barely the 6900 XT is going to do that unless you're going to play CS:GO all day.

If you're passionate then you're going to look it up and find that BAR is just a way to map memory and that an optimized graphics driver shouldn't require it to provide stable performance. 20% averages is something that should not be ever happening. Fortunately we are on a reputable tech forum where members look beyond brand (or should), and W1zzard has written a review:

AMD Radeon Resizable BAR / Smart Access Memory Review - 22 Games Tested

AMD's Smart Access Memory feature is highly interesting. It promises a performance boost when the new Radeon RX 6800 Series cards are paired with an AMD Ryzen Zen 3 processor. We extensively test this in a whole article with 22 games at three resolutions, at up to 4K Ultra HD.

www.techpowerup.com

It's never 20%.

 

[Deleted member 230939]

Agreed with that but the detail is they specifically stated they want 165 Hz ultra quality, and barely the 6900 XT is going to do that unless you're going to play CS:GO all day.

If you're passionate then you're going to look it up and find that BAR is just a way to map memory and that an optimized graphics driver shouldn't require it to provide stable performance. 20% averages is something that should not be ever happening. Fortunately we are on a reputable tech forum where members look beyond brand (or should), and W1zzard has written a review:

AMD Radeon Resizable BAR / Smart Access Memory Review - 22 Games Tested

AMD's Smart Access Memory feature is highly interesting. It promises a performance boost when the new Radeon RX 6800 Series cards are paired with an AMD Ryzen Zen 3 processor. We extensively test this in a whole article with 22 games at three resolutions, at up to 4K Ultra HD.

www.techpowerup.com

It's never 20%.

We are in 2023 not 2020, we have an ever growing catalogue of games, the review is objective but subject to the time it was done.

The video I linked was just a response to you thinking SAM does basically nothing... you missed the boat...


I already know what it does, that's not the argument and you know it is not too.

Also the 6900 XT was delivering 100 FPS or more in every game I played almost at 1440P with my system and just a 5800X non 3D, only Hogwarts Legacy on ultra at 1440P was doing 80-90 FPS no RT.

Last game I played on 6900 XT held 165hz no matter what but this is on the 3D cache version.

Though to be fair this is at 120hz this is due to me not wanting the 6900 XT maxed out, the whole reason I replaced the card was due to how loud it was.

 

[Dr. Dro]

Yes but we're talking about a 6700 XT at specifically the 160 fps range.

Not that the year matters, mind you, the contested game (FH5) was released in 2021, it is not a brand new piece of software nor has it received special driver developer attention in the recent past.

You speak as if that corner case is the absolute truth, but all I'm seeing is a potential unsolved driver bug that was introduced sometime recently.

I'm not finding any information on the internet regarding extreme performance improvements by enabling it, everything points out to what I've mentioned from the beginning: it improves performance consistency in the low end and thus mildly improves the averages, unless it's a very buggy game (AC Valhalla) or there's a driver optimization problem.

 

[Deleted member 230939]

Yes but we're talking about a 6700 XT at specifically the 160 fps range.

Not that the year matters, mind you, the contested game (FH5) was released in 2021, it is not a brand new piece of software nor has it received special driver developer attention in the recent past.

You speak as if that corner case is the absolute truth, but all I'm seeing is a potential unsolved driver bug that was introduced sometime recently.

I'm not finding any information on the internet regarding extreme performance improvements by enabling it, everything points out to what I've mentioned from the beginning: it improves performance consistency in the low end and thus mildly improves the averages, unless it's a very buggy game (AC Valhalla) or there's a driver optimization problem.

So if a game proves better with SAM, the game is buggy?

Sounds like a similar argument made for 8GB VRAM users.

Anyway I won't be replying any more, you are a waste of my time.

Thank you.

 

[Draginsmith28]

Looks like he's gonna go with the 6700xt, thanks to everyone who helped.

 

[Kyan]

Apparently the choice is made, I would have recommended it too at first sight, but why almost nobody asked what kind of game was targeted? Because 165 fps is easily manageable by a 6700 and 5600X if not the latest AAA game from 2023.
My 3600 and 6700XT handle any game I want at least 100fps at 1440p, because I limit fps depending on the game especially in single player AAA games where 165Hz is usually a waste of power and heat. With the 6700XT being the bottleneck at that resolution if I want to push fps and settings to the max.
I understand that some people want a "plug and play" experience but adjusting the fps and a few settings takes 1 minute and can improve the experience indirectly by making the pc quieter and the room cooler, if the pc is in a small room.