What are you talking about? The 4080/4080 Super is the most efficient GPU on the market right now in frames/watt on average, closely followed by the 4070 Super and 4090. AMD's most efficient card this generation is the 7900 XTX which comes in just behind those 4.
So there you go, you are using drivers that are not made for your hardware configuration...you can't complain about them not working right.
Back then, we were educated consumers.
A moment ago you said the problem is the oem drivers. Now the problem is not the oem drivers. Rofl.
Personally I don't give a damn about brands. I have my preferences but whoever makes the better product wins my $$. Amd makes better laptop cpus so I have 4 of them. Intel makes better desktop cpus, so my desktop is Intel.
Of course it isnt, but what it IS is as fast as an RTX 4080 and 4080 Super in standard rasterization, which is the most important things for the vast majority of games ever produced, and that will be produced within the next 4 or 5 years. While also being cheaper than them, and giving you 50% more memory while being within 20% of an RTX 4090 in standard rasterization, for close to half the price. Don't get me wrong if you care about ray tracing, need CUDA, or if you have an application that requires an Nvidia GPU, then definitely, they are your only choice, of course that last part is on purpose given their love or proprietary standards. But for the vast majority of gamers out there, there really arent a ton of good reasons for why you shouldnt consider purchasing an RX 7900 XTX instead of an RTX 4080 (super). Of course if you just want that extra 20% or so of performance, and if the money doesn't matter to you, the RTX 4090 is still there at the top in all of its 4 expansion slot, power cable burning, and PCB cracking glory (to be fair thats not necessarily the GPU's fault, its more of an issue with bad packaging while shipping, and any similarly sized GPU will face the same issues).
No, not really.
You are in agreement with AMD that raster is the most important thing, that's why they hit rock bottom at 12% market share. Cause people think otherwise.
Huh, but nothing about the faulty cooler on the 7900xtx. Who would have guessed. You definitely don't sound biased
Honestly, i would think Helldivers would be too much for a 4060. I know it's enough according to recommended requirements but still...
Yes, it was parroted in tech articles for years and years. AMD drivers bad.
I somewhat agree. Perception is key here. Intel had a lot of issues with drivers for their Arc series, and the GPUs were not good enough for demanding gaming. And yet there is still a LOT of goodwill towards Intel (of all corps) and they are praised for improving drivers relatively quickly.
Disagree. Again it's the perception that ray tracing and DLSS3 is the hot new thing right now. Not rasterisation. Defending AMD performance in rasterisation is defending outdated technology.
Fair enough, I'll edit that, they're all statistically tied, i mean its a four frame difference from the "slowest" to the "fastest". But I'm going to die on that rasterization hill for the time being. Ray tracing, especially full path ray tracing is most definitely the future, but there isn't a card around RIGHT NOW that will give you performance worth a darn when it actually becomes something that is more commonly used. I'll definitely change my tune in a few years when its something that will be a must have feature for new games, but for this generation and the next, its a nice to have, not a need to have. By the point it is a need to have, most people will be upgrading from all of these cards anyway.No, not really.
You are in agreement with AMD that raster is the most important thing, that's why they hit rock bottom at 12% market share. Cause people think otherwise.
Honestly i missed that one, ill do some research and post a link on it because its definitely worth mentioning, it wasn't skipped on purpose. From what I'm reading it was mainly due to some faults in the manufacturing process, it only effected some of the reference cooler launch cards, and it has since been resolved 🤷♂️.
Oh I agree there, while influencers do have more influence than the rest of us, they don't have THAT much influence over an entire market. I flop back and forth between the two myself, mostly depending on what i can get a good deal on. My previous card was an RX 6900 XT, but before that i was using an RTX 3080, i decided i wanted more than 10GB of VRAM, and i found someone that would do a straight swap with me for it. While i definitely agree there can be some good reasons to pick Nvidia over AMD, i do think that for many people they've had a fear put into them about going with another option. This also is an issue for Intel for that matter, now that they've gotten their driver issues somewhat sorted they're still having an issue penetrating the market even though they have some decent options available. Maybe they'll have better luck with Battlemage, but really i just see them fighting with AMD on a race to the bottom where the only real winner will be Nvidia. The GPU market does not seem like its in for a good time in the near future.
Keep in mind that back in those days, AMD was also dealing with a lot of reputational damage that they needed to establish a track record to fix.
While I understand the sentiment, and if this were in a world without the highest inflation that we have seen since the 1970's I would agree. Unfortunately that isn't the case, just about everything has gotten more expensive since mid 2016. I went ahead and used the Bureau of labor statistics inflation calculator and plugged in the $379.99 price you quoted for Mid 2016 (i used July, but it shouldn't make much of a difference if you picked any other month in 2016), that $379.99 is now the equivalent of $495.14 today, or roughly the price that you are paying for a current RX 7800 XT. No one tries to give their stuff away without making much of a profit, and honestly everything is just more expensive, so here we are, and here we will be. We just haven't caught up to the new reality yet because it was thrown at us too quickly. That is unless they find some amazing way to super cut production costs across the board. Thats not even getting into the fact that current cards are MUCH more complex and difficult to manufacturer than cards from 8 years ago. Also this just reminded me that 2016 was a weird year for AMD, similar to this next upcoming generation actually. R9 Fury X had come out the year before and it was a hot, power hungry, expensive flop with less VRAM than the GTX 980 TI that it under performed against. So they went back to the mainstream segment and released the RX 480 (4GB was $199 and 8GB was $239) based on the Polaris architecture which would become AMD's longest lasting GPU architecture, and AMD released the AM4 socket but only for OEM's and it was meant for use with Bristol Ridge Excavator based CPU's. The next year the released RX VEGA 56 and 64, which while it was a definite improvement over Fury, and performed well against the vanilla 1070 and 1080, had its launch spoiled immediately by the launch of the 1070 ti, and the fact that it couldn't catch the 1080 ti. It wouldn't be until RDNA and the launch of the RX 5700 series that AMD regained some market share that was lost during those 2016 - 2019 years. Granted they were just fighting to stay alive from 2016 - 2018, it was still a mess all over.
Yeah but on the other hand the ps5 has rdna 2 so all the games are coded directly for their GPUs...
While inflation is an issue, many other aspects of the tech industry didn't scale in pricing in those ways for example, CPU prices. For example, the Core i7 6700K had an MSRP of $350, a 14700K had an MSRP of $420, but within a month, dropped to $395.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram